Hizb ut Tahir and 1924 Radical Islamists in UK claim Muslims are the real victims of terrorism
Was Hizb ut Tahrir involved in London attacks
MIM:One of the groups which could be connected to the terrorist attacks in London yesterday may be Hizb ut Tahrir. The group is regarded as being responsible for , terrorism attacks and and all out assaults in Central Asia, and maintains a presence in the UK and Germany (where it appealed a ban which was imposed due to to anti semitism). One of the 9/11 hijackers, Mohammed Atta was reported to have had contact with Hizb ut Tahrir in Germany. Hizb ut Tahrir was the precursor of Al Muhajiroun, and was alternately led by Abu Hamza Al Masri and Omar Bakri Mohammed, who broke away in 1996 to start Al Muhajiroun because it was not radical enough for him.
Both Al Masri and Mohammed founded the Finsbury Park Mosque which was home to the terrorists such as Richard Reid (the shoe bomber), Zacharias Mossaoui, (known as the 20th hijacker) James Ujaama, an Al Qaeda supporter now jailed in Seattle, and the Courtellier brothers.
The basic difference between Hizb ut Tahrir and Al Muhajiroun is that HT is more politically oriented and it's membership consists of 'young urban professionals' many with Phd's. HT are not lead by an Imam and advocate education as a means of infiltrating and undermining Western society by working from within. HT was banned from college campuses in the UK because of their incitement to kill Jews, and would resurface using different names and has a following among Muslim Students, at universites such as Oxford and the London School of Economics.
Al Muhajiroun attracts many poor, uneducated Muslims, who live on welfare as part of a stategy to both draining Western society of resources and use those resources to promote Islam, the overthrow of the British goverment and the destruction of the West.
Both Al Muhajiroun and Hizb ut Tahrir aspire to the same goals of implementing shari'a law in the West. The main difference is that Al Muhajiroun sees the religion and Jihad as the ways to acheive this goal, while Hizb ut Tahrir sees itself as both a political and ideological movement. Another key difference between the groups is that Hizb ut Tahrir has a large following in Central Asia and has been responsible for suicide bombing attacks and recent riots in Uzbekistan.
Al Muhajiroun is largely confined to Europe and North America and sends their members to the Middle East for religious and Jihad training. Last year two AM members used their UK passports to enter Israel and perpetrated a sucide attacks at a pub in Tel Aviv. The leader of Al Muhajiroun -Syrian born Omar Bakri Mohammed "... was expelled from Saudi Arabia in 1986 for his inflammatory preaching and involvement in the extremist group Hizb ut-Tahrir. He eventually settled in London... in 1996 he resigned and formed Al-Muhajiroun . http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20050709-093125-8755r
Hizb ut Tahrir advocates the destruction of the West and the implementation of an Islamist state . They could be discribed as Islamofacists yuppies. There members are well educated and well to do Muslim British professionals who profess to eschew violence . In reality HT members were behind several suicide bombings in Central Asia and were blamed for the recent attempt to overthrow the president of Uzbekistan.
The suicidally tolerant attitude towards groups like Hizb Ut Tahrir was epitomised during an internationally publicised court case last year when a student at a public and predominently Muslim school insisted on her right to wear a stricter form of Islamic clothing (a Jilbab which is similiar hoodless burqa) then the school permitted. Part of the argument which the school used was that the garment posed a significant safety hazard when going down steps etc).
The lawyer for the student was Cherie Blair, the wife of the prime minister. The student won the suit against the school, and it was revealed that the lawsuit had been instigated by her brother was a member of Hizb ut Tahrir and that the media attention had been orchestrated by the group in an attempt to force a Taliban form of shari'a law into the public school system.
In the belligerent message which they issued to British Muslims after the terror attacks HT stated that; "Muslims need to be ambassadors of Islam and speak the truth"..."Muslims rightfully feel that they have greater experience of being the victims rather then the perpetrators of terror "..
London, UK, July 7 – In the wake of today's attacks in London, Hizb ut-Tahrir Britain, the well known global Islamic political party, has issued a message to the Muslim community in Britain. Tens of thousands of copies of the message will be distributed at all major mosques across the UK after Friday prayers tomorrow and via the Internet.
MIM: Analysts views of Hizb Ut Tahrir vary and the assessment of the threat they pose and discussed the group at a conference in Istanbul in 2004. This is a review of a compilation of papers which were published put by the Nixon Center which organised the event.
Hizb ut Tahrir mission statement:
Our vision is to cultivate a Muslim community that lives by Islam in thought and deed, adhering to the Shari'ah rules and nurturing a strong identity as Muslims. Our vision is this community stands as a model and an example to the wider society, making the basis of this relationship the carrying of the Islamic da'wa. Furthermore, our community needs to be aware of her destiny as an integral part of the global ummah, taking up the call for the return of the Khilafah and the unification of this ummah internationally.
The Challenge of Hizb ut Tahrir: Deciphering and Combating Radical Islamist Ideology. Edited by Zeyno Baran. Washington, D.C.: The Nixon Center, 2004. 119 pp. $6.95, paper.
The Nixon Center's February 2004 Istanbul workshop on Hizb ut-Tahrir was intended both to "decipher and combat radical Islamist ideology" in general and to assess the specific terrorist threat posed by the group Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT). The meeting was off the record and not all participants permitted their work to be published. The proceedings consist of a short paperback book of twenty brief and informative papers. They provide diverse portrayals of Hizb ut-Tahrir but offer no operational or strategic consensus.
Five papers are of special note because they highlight the academic, law enforcement, political, religious, and social perspectives—those of Rohan Gunaratna (Institute for Defense and Strategic Studies in Singapore), Madeline Gruen (New York City police department counterterrorism research analyst), Rusen Cakir (writer on Turkish Islamist movements), Mateen Siddiqui (vice president of the Supreme Islamic Council of America), and Michael Whine (counterterrorism expert for the Jewish community of the United Kingdom).
Their assessments of Hizb ut-Tahrir diverge as much as their backgrounds. Gunaratna identifies members of the Al-Qaeda organization connected with the group (such as Pakistani Khalid Sheik Mohammed, Jordanian Abu Musah al-Zawaqawi, and Indonesian Hambali) and concludes that this proves "adherents of HT are actively engaging in global terrorism." In contrast, Cakir finds it unlikely that Hizb ut-Tahrir would use terrorism in Turkey. Gruen finds that "in the United States, HT was following the patterns of white ethno-nationalist groups, who are exploiting interests in the Internet, computer games, and music," and predicts that HT will continue to make da'wa (propaganda) efforts in the United States. Siddiqui emphasizes the virulently anti-Semitic, totalitarian nature of the group and its close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood with its objective to establish an Islamic "world dominance through Islamic rule." Whine reports that "there is no evidence that HT is involved in or engages in terrorism in Europe" but holds that it "represents a long-term threat of subversion."
Challenge of Hizb ut-Tahrir informs but does not draw conclusions, leaving the reader wondering whether Hizb ut-Tahrir is a group linked to Al-Qaeda that must be eradicated, or an elitist club to be scrutinized but tolerated.