Ed Husain - Chilling similarities

July 10, 2007 12:30 PM

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ed_husain/2007/07/chilling_similarities.html

Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer
One Nation, One State, One Caliph

Sound familiar? Hizb ut-Tahrir's slogans, reiterated by members during the 1990s - and continued today throughout the Middle East - bear a chilling resemblance to that of the German Nazi party. The similarities don't end there: ideological totalitarianism, expansionist foreign policy, the designation of women to the private realm, the rejection of democracy, concepts of relationship between party and state, notions of the master race, education system as indoctrination and anti-semitism are all features they both share.

The Nazis realised their aims, while Islamists from Hizb ut-Tahrir remain desperate to bring about their state. Yes, I call them Islamists and I make no apology for doing so. Islamism is not Islam, as Zionism is not Judaism. Hizb ut-Tahrir and others in Britain may wish to continue to blur the lines between Islam and Islamism, but their Jordan-based global leader, Ata bin Khalil Abu Rishta, freely deploys "Islamism" and "Islamists" in his Arabic writings. The Arab press is full of references to this political ideology: so why can we not use Islamism to refer to them in Britain? We should and we must if we are to separate ordinary Muslims from political ideologues.

Abu Rishta's candour does not stop there. He relishes the use of language such as "the cursed Jews" and "occupying kuffar". Under the threat of a ban, Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain may wish to claim that they are not anti-semitic. That the leaflets which contain calls for killing Jews are for Palestine (so that makes it acceptable?), but I ask why Hizb ut-Tahrir gave me and hundreds of other young British Muslims leaflets in throughout the 1990s to distribute in Britain which were entitled: "The only meeting place between a Muslim and a Jew is in the battlefield."

Richard Littlejohn's excellent television documentary, in most parts, last night exposed the results of that discourse: a British Jewish community under siege and living in fear, compelled to hire security guards to attend synagogues; al-Muhajiroun Islamists at demonstrations openly speaking against Jews.

In my secret cell meetings, the weekly halaqah, Hizb ut-Tahrir taught us to deny the Holocaust: it was a Zionist conspiracy to help create the "bastard state of Israel". In Ilford, as well as other parts of London, the Hizb organised activists to attend Jewish public meetings and intimidate Jews. On university campuses across Britain, Hizb ut-Tahrir deliberately sought confrontation with Jewish and Israeli student societies.

The well-rehearsed media representatives of Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain today may claim that they are not anti-Jewish, but let's hear that from the rank-and-file activists of the Hizb. Why is there a gag on ordinary shabab, party activists, from speaking to the media or other public bodies? More importantly, will their leader Abu Rishta from Jordan stop attacking Jews? Will he stop promising annihilation of the state of Israel? Unless Hizb ut-Tahrir in Britain apologise for their horrendous conduct in the 1990s, their creation of an evil al-Muhajiroun, and publicly distance themselves from their current Arab leadership, then we must consider Hizb ut-Tahrir a subversive fifth column in our midst, awaiting instructions from a coming caliph before they turn to mass suicide bombings.

Hizb ut-Tahrir are not a "non-violent political party". The discourse of peaceful political change comes from great people like Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and Aung Sun Su Chi. Violence is not an option in their methods. The Hizb constitution describes France, Britain, US and Russia as "potentially belligerent states" and a "state of war" would be assumed in the case of Israel on day one of their Islamist State.

Remember, the only difference between Islamists from Hizb ut-Tahrir and jihadists is that the former are waiting for their state and caliph before they commence jihad, while the latter believes the time for jihad is now, vigilante action, without state-driven leadership. We ignore Hizb ut-Tahrir at our peril.

We can wait for their state to come about and then confront them as we did the Nazis, at a very late stage and at a high human cost, or we can stop appeasing Hizb ut-Tahrir and its offshoots and demand: either change, or perish. We cannot continue to turn a blind eye.