Hizb ut-Tahrir

Switch to desktop

Hizb ut-Tahrir - Home

Those 'engaging' with the government on the 'anti-terror' proposals seem to do so on the assumption that the government is sincere in wanting to listen to Muslim concerns and take them on board in its 'war on terror'.

Some of our most basic creedal fundamentals tell us otherwise. The leaders of kufr take and treat Muslims as enemies. They will never be pleased with you until you leave your deen, a matter they ardently desire. They are 'awliya of one another - they enjoin evil and forbid the good and they spend their wealth to divert people from the path of Allah.

But even apart from this, the reality of what we have witnessed points to the same conclusion.

Just considering the way in which western states have carried themselves in the 'war on terror' clearly reveals their insincerity – which here means that their intent is not to limit or end unjust violence against innocent people or ‘radicalisation’ or ‘terrorism’ but to control the reaction to their aggressive policies and thereby maintain and further their economic and political interests.

The clearest indication of this insincerity is the absolute and complete ignoring of the primary root cause of 'terrorism': western aggression on the Muslim world, more euphemistically known as ‘foreign policy’. From 2001 till now, this factor has not even been acknowledged as a cause let alone treated as one. It is not even on the table of discussion. In fact, those who raise it consistently are labelled 'extremists' and apologists of terrorism.

Is this point alone not enough to show that the government is not sincere?

It should be, for sincerity dictates dealing with root causes.

But for those for whom it is not sufficient, we can go further...

Look at the way the 'war on terror' has been waged: from military invasions based on complete lies to legislative changes that significantly alter legal norms and undercut people's rights rammed through parliament (as Howard did in 2005, with the rubber stamp of 'Muslim leaders' 'engaging' him at the time).

Is this alone not enough to show that the government is not sincere?

It should be, for anyone who is willing to lie to the world to proceed and lay to waste an entire country cannot be sincere.

But for those for whom it is not, we can go further...

Consider the fact that for the last decade in which the government has been claiming to 'engage' the Muslim community the people they sent to 'engage' us were the police (AFP) and bureaucrats (CRC), indicating i) that we were been treated as a question of national security and ii) that the policies were not up for negotiation, for had they been policymakers would come to engage, instead of sending those whose role is but to implement policy (and control dissent/police response). The policymakers only came with there was a PR need to show community engagement and support.

Is this alone not enough to show that the government is not sincere?

It should be. But for those for whom it is not, we can go further...

Consider the current 'anti-terror' proposals and how the government went about them.

The process in which the ‘anti-terror’ laws were reviewed, debated, discussed and recommendations tabled, within government and parliamentary processes, took about two years, starting May 2012 with then (Labor) Attorney-General Nicola Rixon asking the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security to review the National Security Legislation. The committee's report was tabled a year later in June 2013. Once the new measures were all but determined over this two year period, the government went public in mid-July (Attorney-General press release) and then again more formally in early August (Prime Minister press conference). Throughout this public selling of the policy, the government used divisive and insulting rhetoric basically just lecturing the community to step in line.

Two weeks after this - a full month after going public! - Tony Abbott decides to ‘consult’ Muslim leaders.

Is this alone not enough to show that the government is not sincere?

It should be, for sincere consultation of stakeholders comes in the planning stage not in marketing phase!

But for those for whom it is not, we can go further...

Consider how the PM went about ‘consulting’ the community.

He invited hand-picked individuals to a one-hour meeting that had no agenda, without giving them any details about the proposed measures. Those who attended expressed their concerns and then issued a statement re-iterating these concerns. So what does the PM do? He fully ignored these concerns, continued with the same rhetoric, and, most importantly, lied about the meeting in trying to milk it by claiming community support for the laws.

A meeting in which concerns were raised became symbolised by one imam allegedly groveling to the PM about being on Team Australia with him as captain! George Brandis and David Irvine did the same thing.

Is this alone not enough to show that the government is not sincere?

It should be. But for those for whom it is not, we can go further...

Consider how the government trivalised the community’s sincere expression of its opinion on these proposed measures. Moves likes the ICV boycotting a meeting with the PM and more than 90 community imams, organisations and activists coming out with a firm stance to denounce the proposed measures was roundly dismissed by the government and characteristed with terms such as “petty”, “foolish” and “noise”.

Yet apparently, they are interested in listening to us and hearing what we have to say!

Is this alone not enough to show that the government is not sincere?

It should be. But for those for whom it is not, we can go further...

Consider the latest meeting which the AG called. Again, hand-picked invitees called for ‘consultation’. They asked for the draft legislation and for sufficient time to review. Refused. AG gives them 30 mins to review the legislation, turns up one-hour late, tells them the proposals are not up for negotiation, and gives them 30 minutes for “feedback”!

Naturally, those who attended take him up on this, they again express the concerns, sternly in cases, voices are raised. On the whole the attendees are “disappointed”. So what the AG’s spokesperson say? “It was a friendly and constructive meeting”!

More spin to again milk the meeting, which the AG did himself even before it happened in claiming that Muslim leaders are on-board and “collaborating” with the government.

Is this alone not enough to show that the government is not sincere?

Indeed, any one of the above should be sufficient on its own. What can we say, then, about all of them together?

No sane person can reach any other conclusion than that the government is not sincere about this ‘war on terror’, let alone about its ‘engagement’ with the community. It’s time we acted on this reality, as a community.

Continued ‘engagement’ only benefits the government and its targeting of Islam and Muslims.


A comment that Anas Alwahwah wrote in response to an article that appeared on the news.com.au website, on Monday the 24th of August 2014, entitled: "Baghdad was beautiful once, and peaceful and prosperous too":


As I sometimes do to keep myself informed of the latest news (read: Hollywood style sensationalism) clouded nowadays by terms such as ‘terrorism’, ‘Islam’, ‘threat’, ‘Syria’, ‘Iraq’, ‘beheading’, ‘extremists’ and other welcoming terms, I visited the news.com.au website on my iPhone. I stumbled across a title that read ‘Baghdad was beautiful once, and peaceful and prosperous too’.


I blinked, read the title again, blinked again, then once again re-read the title and I thought could there finally be a piece that reflects another view of that region?


With that title, I thought to myself that perhaps the article will highlight a historical fact or two about Baghdad. Maybe it’ll mention how it was a hub of knowledge and the centre of civilisation under the Islamic Abbasid rule in the in the 8th century - a time when Europe was still debating whether women can be considered human beings or not! Maybe the piece will mirror what the Middle East Eye stated:


“Up to the ninth century, Abbasid rule is widely recognised as a golden era for the growth of Islamic, even world civilisation. For example, Baghdad became the world’s central hub of learning, witnessing many of the greatest Jewish, Christian and Muslim minds congregate to devise ground-breaking scientific and intellectual discoveries.”


Or perhaps it will mention how Baghdad was renowned for its role in shaping some of the things we take for granted today, like hospitals and universities. It was in the year 931 CE that the headcount of doctors in Baghdad alone was 860. At this same time, there was not even a single hospital in Europe. It was in Baghdad, in the year 809 CE, that the first ever university was opened by the Caliph Harun Al-Rashid - the University of hikmah (Also known as the house of wisdom). It became so renowned that some European royalty would send their sons and daughters to study there!


Or perhaps it will at least allude to the fact that Muslims of different sects – Sunnis and Shias, as well as non-Muslims like Christians, and also different ethnicities like Arabs and Kurds, all lived together in peaceful coexistence? Maybe it would even remind us that this was long before “enlightened” Western democracy decided that Iraq needs the freedom of tanks and F16s, of Abu Ghraib and the white phosphorus in Fallujah and the freedom of half a million dead children as a result of US-led policy. Would it mention that this price for “freedom” was “worth it” according to former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright?


Apparently Baghdad “was very flourishing, very clean, and had all the western standard amenities”. To ensure that the superior Western-ness of Baghdad at that time came across I was reminded that “you had bars” and that “women didn’t wear veils” at that time. What a great time Baghdad experienced in the late 1980s “when the Islamic trend was very minimal.” That trend “only started in the early ‘90s” and from then onwards, till today, we’ve seen the West, led by the US, attempt to bomb and destroy Baghdad back to its fleeting yet apparently inspired Western hiccup.


Of course, the article failed to surprise me. Rather, it has further reaffirmed the nature of tabloid journalism. It is a poor man’s journalism – a mash of selective information, a chest pumping Western superiority complex, Orientalist daydreams and a fair dose of arrogance and distortion.


The question then begs itself - which Baghdad was that “beautiful place”? The Baghdad of the Abbasaid Caliph Harun al-Rashid (786-809 CE) under which the city became the world’s central hub of knowledge, learning and progress? Or the modern Baghdad crafted by the bomb at the hands of the Bushs and Blairs, the Camerons and the Obamas? We have a Baghdad of the past, one of progress and prosperity under the Islamic civilisation, and we have the Baghdad of today, one of ruin and destruction under the watch and dominance of the West. We can only hope that the Baghdad of the future once again becomes a beautiful place – just as it was long before the West knew the meaning of civilisation.


Anas Alwahwah – 28 August 2014



ASIO boss David Irvine sought to deflect criticism of and bolster support for the Abbott Government’s proposed ‘anti-terror’ measures in an address to the National Press Club in Canberra today.

In a predictable speech, David Irvine sought more powers for ASIO, with no corresponding increase in oversight, on the claim that the threat from ‘terrorism’ is real.

Uthman Badar, media representative of Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia, said in this regard,

“David Irvine speaks of the “great evil of terrorism”, the “doctrine of hate, brutality and inhumanity”, linking these disingenuously to Islam. In reality, the world has not seen greater terror in the last decade than that unleashed by western states, including Australia, on Iraq and Afghanistan. This terror and the likes of what we saw recently from ‘Israel’ in Gaza is justified and supported by western leaders like Mr. Irvine who at the same time want us to believe that they are working to save the world from terrorism.”

“David Irvine is rather predictably seeking further powers for ASIO, more draconian laws and more of the same using ‘moderate’ Muslims against the ‘extremists’. This is the same strategy we have seen since 2001. The same failed strategy, despite which, it is universally palpable that the world is not a safer place after more than a decade of the so-called war on terror.”

“This is classical fearmongering, which Irvine and Abbott are taking turns at employing. Any threat can be trumped up by consistent focus and hyperbolic commentary. We keep hearing about 150 Muslims who've gone to Syria and what might happen when they might come back. We haven't heard anything about the numerous Jews who travel to train and fight with the IDF annually and the threat they pose on return. Indeed, where is the debate about returning IDF trainees potentially killing little boys as they play on the beaches of Sydney and Melbourne?”

“David Irvine and Tony Abbott can repeat that “our fight is against terrorism, not Islam” as much as they like, but actions speak louder than words. The Muslim community, which has witnessed over a decade of action, is well aware that the target is Islam and Muslims. It is no longer a community that will simply roll over and provide the rubber-stamp sought by the government for its unjust policies.”

Media Office
Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia
27 August 2014

Contact: Uthman Badar, Media Representative, on This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. or 0438 000 465.


Statement From Muslimah Hizb ut Tahrir Indonesia: Shariah-Khilafah Creates Protection and Prosperity for Children in Indonesia

Although every year we celebrate National Children Day (HAN), so many children's problems in this country happen at all times. Ironically, the numbers keep increased significantly and it is getting harder to be solved by the available system tool. Soon after the case of sexual abuse towards children declared as national disaster, Indonesian children face real threat of pedophilia in their neighborhood. This reality obviously makes the society where the children grow worse than before. The society has been ruined by the spread of alcohol drinks, drugs and harassment practice, the booming of pornography and spreading of adultery because the difficulty to close prostitution localisation.


Official statements issued by Hizb ut-Tahrir are only those that are found on its official websites. Any statement not found on one of these websites is not a statement from Hizb ut-Tahrir.

Top Desktop version