BBC.co.uk

Talk about Newsnight

Latest programme

Tuesday, 11 September, 2007

  • Newsnight
  • 11 Sep 07, 04:40 PM

HIZB-UT-TAHRIR
maajid_100.gifMaajid Nawaz, one of the most senior members of the radical Islamist party Hizb-ut-Tahrir talks exclusively to Newsnight tonight. Nawaz reveals how Hizb-ut-Tahrir advocate the killing of millions of people to unite and expand an Islamic super-state and why he resigned from the party.

For 12 years Maajid Nawaz was inside Hizb-ut-Tahrir, not only propagating their views in Britain, but exporting them to Pakistan and Denmark. He was imprisoned in Egypt for four years for being a member of the party. Up until May this year he was on their leadership committee.

We hope to be getting Hizb-ut-Tahrir to respond to his allegations on the programme tonight.

PETRAEUS
US presidential contenders Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama are among the senators cross examining America’s top commander in Iraq, General Petraeus, about the surge strategy today. Will we get a fresh insight into the possible US troop exit strategy post-Bush? Mark Urban will be in Washington as this story unfolds. And we're expecting an interview with a leading Republican senator.

BIN LADEN
Al-Qaeda has released a new video praising the September 11th attacks. The tape features a still image of Osama Bin Laden - who can be heard praising one of the 19 men who hijacked planes and flew them into targets across the eastern United States. But is this the real Bin Laden? Richard Watson analyses the latest statement.

MADELEINE McCANN
We'll have the latest on the Madeleine McCann case.

WEIGHTS AND MEASURES
And a European threat to pints and miles will finally be lifted today. Jackie Long has been quizzing people on the streets and finds them confused about our use of both imperial and metric measures.


Comments  Post your comment

I am surprised that yet again Newsnight devotes so much airtime to Islamic "defectors" - especially on a day when I expected you to cover the evolving Petraeus/Iraq issue.

The overall narrative of all of these defectors is a deeply flawed account of their lives from men who were unable to accept that the core of their problems were themselves, and the poor choices that they have made. They now present themselves as another of Islam's self-styled liberal reformers. Although the product has changed, their earnestness and enthusiasm for their newfound ideology (much like that of the nighttime TV shopping channel spruiker) has not. I doubt my view will change by seeing Nawaz on Newsnight.

I know that several ex-HuT wallas have come out of the woodwork to denounce Islam recently, when really they should be denouncing themselves. Whilst they seem to offer the truth of the ex disciple turned whistle-blower, I have not seen or read anything that encourages me to believe that their personal megalomania and narcissism has in any way diminished.

Whilst all of these authors may offer some insights, with varying degrees of faithfulness, the uselessness of this genre in literature is equivalent to the "I was ravished by an Arab, ravish me again" school of writing. They offer the easy conformation of our pre-existing beliefs, but as an instrument to navigating the wider encounter with the Muslim world, they are as irrelevant.

Ali Eteraz has written an excellent piece on the media reliance on former terrorists and radicals:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ali-eteraz/media-reliance-on-former-_b_54842.html

  • 2.
  • At 06:29 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Mohammed Youssef wrote:

And there I was thinking "how come there haven't been any reports about the apocalyptic threats posed by political Islam in the UK for a few days now.....?" and then we get this report on HT. Hooray!

Why is Newsnight so obsessed with HT specifically and political Islamic movements in general??

I really don't know what to say anymore about Newsnight....have the BBC gone completely insane?! Why are we getting these complete non-stories at a rate of at least once a week now? Why are you launching this crusade against all forms of political islam and specifically Hizb-u-Tahrir? Doesn't Richard Watson have anything better to do? Why all this scare-mongering and demonising of Islam?

This used to be so silly that it was just laughable but now this inciteful propaganda is getting quite serious - there is obviously some kind of crusade being waged by some people at the BBC with a very strong anti-Islamic agenda!

Newsnight, do your viewers and your credibility a favour and try going back to REAL journalism rather than the trashy propaganda you have been spewing out for some time now.

  • 3.
  • At 07:56 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Joseph wrote:

In response to post no2, if you think thay the BBC has a anti Muslim agenda you are obviously not watching the same BBC that I and 70,000,000 million other UK citizens watch.

Hizb u Tahrir is a banned organisation in Germany and many other countries, it's mandate on it's own proves why it should be banned, so do not tell me that the BBC is demonising Islam, I would suggest that it is the extremists preachers in some mosques who manage to demonise Islam all on thier own.

So I suggest that you do yourself the favour and accept that not everyone has your worldview, and that REAL Journalism means exposing the problems with Islam the same as the BBC does with ALL other religions.

And I give you the benefit of the doubt by not discussing how a relgion can be political, as that would be an oxymoron.

"...I am a little tired of these "kiss and tell" Islamists."

Is it only me....?

  • 5.
  • At 09:09 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Stranded in Babylon wrote:

70,000,000 million other UK citizens!

Call Sir Andrew Green! Immigration into the country has now reached such an horrendous level the UK population alone is 11 times that of the entire planet!

  • 6.
  • At 09:11 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Abdullah ibn Adam wrote:

Richard Watson must be loving it! Another “exclusive” from a HTB “insider” to prove Watson’s theory that HTB is deserving of a ban.

But one fact is unchallengeable: the message of HTB is widely welcomed in the Muslim world. So HTB is no “fringe group” as its message is at the core of global political debates. It is one of the credible groups that can show the corridor to change in the Muslim world where tyranny and dictatorial monarchies prevail with Anglo-American colonial tutelage.

HTB is makes no secret about its views and its opposition to Western interference in the Muslim world. However unpalatable that may be to neocons, it does not merit a call for silencing opposing voices. That would indeed be a defeat for secular-liberalism!

The supporters of neocolonialism and the likes of Richard Watson will not accept HTB’s message. It is not surprising at all! But at least have the courage to debate with honesty and integrity. Don’t hide behind slogans and lies.

  • 7.
  • At 09:19 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Stranded in Babylon wrote:

Egg on my own face: 11,000 times the population of the entire planet!

  • 8.
  • At 10:12 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Joseph wrote:

In response to post 8: Ditto for me, I seem to have got all muddled up with the ongoing Metric v Imperia debate, however, with such a poor grasp of factual statistics perhaps I could get get a job at the Daily Mail?.

I hold my head in shame and accept the abuse that will no doubt be coming my way!.

  • 9.
  • At 10:34 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Khalid wrote:

Newsnite done another "good" and "accurate" report.

Majid Nawaz left Hizb ut-Tahrir in April 2007.

But these facts can be ignored so sonly as they get a "good" story!!!

  • 10.
  • At 10:47 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Khalid wrote:

Newsnite done another "good" and "accurate" report.

Majid Nawaz left Hizb ut-Tahrir in April 2007.

But these facts can be ignored so sonly as they get a "good" story!!!

  • 11.
  • At 10:50 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • LBW wrote:

I wonder why Majid delibrately lies knowing what he says about HT is nothing but allegations.

It also makes many in Britian wonder why he gets so much media limelight?

The Muslims are know the truth about his lies, the non muslim intellectuals have also come to understand his contradictions..........

I am really appalled by Newsnight tonight - 25 minutes of that ridiculous ex-Islamist with the scary background music - what a confused interview - students of theology will surely recognise the doctrine of the caliphate and the whole argument about the legimacy of non-Islamic governments in the Muslim world.

I was losing patience with it all and it took Patrick Mercer of all people to speak some sense (how unbelievable is that). NO EVIDENCE.

Was there anything new that we learnt from Nawaz? I don't think so. Newsnight - bring us real news - no Ed, Majed - but real news. Surely your editorial team should revisit this shockingly bad interview.

On another note, it seems like Mercer is now towing the government line - there is no evidence to ban this organisation - if Mercer says this, then there really must be a dearth of evidence.

So what is they advocate some state that will "kill millions". Hasn't global capitalism claimed the lives of millions over this last century and don't other non-Islamic governments kill in the name of ideology?

I am more worried about those who currently have the reins of power.

  • 13.
  • At 11:00 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Arnold wrote:

What was that report about!
Seems like Mercer is towing the party line - but not his own!

What an amazing report - scary music!
Come on - where are the standards!

  • 14.
  • At 11:15 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • AIdan Cairns wrote:

This islamic so called political group should be banned immediately, after all thre Kilafa says that when islamic law is in place it is ok to kill millions of non believers.

Just like the Nazi's were laughed at during the 1930's so to are the politicians in their ivory towers not doing anything to clamp down on this party that radicalises young muslims, I am British and catholic and I do not want to see more and more muslim mosques being built in our cities where the mullahs can allow people from these groups in to preach hate filled rhetoric

  • 15.
  • At 11:17 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Barney wrote:

"1.069" as the conversion factor from miles to kilometres? Oh dear, Newsnight. You'll get lost like that. Not impressive when you can't get it right yourselves (hint: it's 1.609 - 1.069 would mean they're almost exactly the same).

Did anyone understand what Patrick Mercer was saying? Was he pro-ban or not? He seemed to contradict himself in every sentence. Even Paxman was a bit taken back by his stance.

Looks like Newsnight's campaign to ban the Hizb has failed again. Its just given more publicity to them and the Caliphate (Khilafah).

Whether you like it or not the Muslim world wants to live in a Khilafah.

As Pat Buchanan said: "If Islamic rule is an idea taking hold among the Islamic masses, how does even the best army on earth stop it?"

  • 17.
  • At 11:20 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Sean Robinson wrote:

Conversion from miles to kilometres: "multiply by 1.069". I don't think so. Try 1.609!

  • 18.
  • At 11:23 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • jhill wrote:

Is it possible for newsnight in general, and the BBC in particular to begin talking every other week to people who do not subscribe to ANY religion?
It would be a real change to be able to listen to someone with no "faith agenda", and have reason debated, not superstition.
Could they perhaps ignore religion, particularly Islam, for the same length of time they have been devoting to it since 9/11??
Perhaps interviews with, say, Richard Dawkins, could be aired.
Perhaps we should be denying religions their "get out of jail free" card.
The people who seek to appease religions cannot realise that, going off the report aired tonight, that positive proof of the danger of religion was put on the BBC airwaves tonight!Free publicity, and promotion of a religion that few support in England.
This organisation that: Ignores the rule of law: Hands power to partisan fanatics:Gives the power to condemn others without proof or trial:Believes that accusation is equal to condemnation: Has no place being given publicity by a publicly funded organisation. People just have to NOT believe their particular bit of superstition to be condemned out of hand.
Perhaps..forlorn hope probably..the BBC could shine the spotlight on more rational debate for a change, at least for a time?
A change from the agenda the BBC seems to be following would be appreciated, probably by a significant number of people, who have looked at these so called religions and turned away in disgust. Come on newsnight, change the record, as you are in danger of losing those with a rational outlook.

  • 19.
  • At 11:23 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Andy wrote:

I find it quite amusing that Newsnight goes around tongue-in-cheek castigating members of the public for their poor unit conversion knowledge, and then goes and says 1 mile = 1.069km. Shocking!

(It's 1.609km, in case you were interested.)

Metric and Imperial Units

You made a mistake. Miles into kilometres is not 1.06.. it is 1.60.. Come on get it right where did you get this information, Wikipedia.

  • 21.
  • At 11:24 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Chris Hills wrote:

At the end of tonight's programme you told us "To convert from miles to kilometres multiply by 1.069". I don't think so! You mean multiply by 1.609. Good grief! If you can't get it right who can?

  • 22.
  • At 11:25 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Ian Reed wrote:

Get a life BBC!!! Aniversary of the tragic 9/11 and this is the only thing on your mind. How about a session on the ruthless iraq invasion? Please, give us a break. We're getting bored of the same thing being shown in repetition over anfd over. Exactly what is your agenda?

Did anyone understand what Patrick Mercer was saying? Was he pro-ban or not? He seemed to contradict himself in every sentence. Even Paxman was a bit taken back by his stance.

Looks like Newsnight's campaign to ban the Hizb has failed again. Its just given more publicity to them and the Caliphate (Khilafah).

Whether you like it or not the Muslim world wants to live in a Khilafah.

As Pat Buchanan said: "If Islamic rule is an idea taking hold among the Islamic masses, how does even the best army on earth stop it?"

  • 24.
  • At 11:27 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Andy wrote:

"Miles to kilometres, multiply by 1.069"
No wonder those journeys abroad seem to pass so quickly!
1.666666666666...

  • 25.
  • At 11:27 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Tom Hardyment wrote:

Confused with metric? Are the BBC cutbacks so bad that Newsnight can't employ researchers or reporters that can spot the obvious error of one mile being about 1.6 kilometres not the 1.06 your story just put out?

  • 26.
  • At 11:30 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • John D wrote:

Jackie Long may take delight in showing how an 81 year old lady in the street is confused by metrication. Unfortunately when clarifying conversion rates she then tells us there are 1.069 kilometers in a mile!

  • 27.
  • At 11:30 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Reimer wrote:

Interesting how this piece allowed this sophisticated, thoughtful, articulate chap to glibly attribute his de-HTB-isation to a spell in clink with 'proper' Islamic texts. Time for a change of tactics what with the natives' now-open hostility to ROP? (even 'newsnight' is keeping an eye on its multi-faith prayer-room nowadays).

"False flag" defection anyone?

R

  • 28.
  • At 11:32 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • David Jones wrote:

A pity that after all those snide comments about the punters your reporter got the conversion from miles to kilometers so very wrong. It certainly is not multiply by 1.069. If anyone from newsnight understood maths they would realise that makes a mile very nearly the same a kilometer - the correct number is about 1.61.

  • 29.
  • At 11:33 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Amin Farjudian wrote:

Are US and it's allies not ready to kill masses of people to preserve their interests under the mask of spreading their corrupt version of democracy? I cannot see how they are preferable to Hezb-o-Tahrir. There is as much merit in corrupt global democratization as to unifying Muslims.

  • 30.
  • At 11:36 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • David Sherman wrote:

Ho hum - another amusing demonstration by Newnight of a complete lack of journalistic and editorial standards.

Having fronted an item about metric vs imperial and (seemingly) taken great delight in berating and belittleling the genral public for their lack of knowledge / accuracy when it comes to converting from Metric to Imperial (and vice versa) we are then told, school-teacher like, how to convert from one set of units to the other. One example given was "how to convert miles to kilometers" - we were told to multiply the miles by 1.069.

WHAT!!! I should think everybody is aware that, even if they do not know how to do this, that miles and kilometers are not approximately equal!

Try 1.6 - it's a lot closer.

Maybe someday Newnight will check their facts and stories BEFORE transmission. I can offer the services of my four-year-old - he's almost certainly more accurate ....

  • 31.
  • At 11:38 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Amin Farjudian wrote:

1 mile = 1.609344 kilometers
not 1.0693 Sorry Newsnight, it was not that difficult to double check and prevent the error...

  • 32.
  • At 11:47 PM on 11 Sep 2007,
  • Martin Hazel wrote:

Well Jeremy's clearly correct about the effects of budget cuts on the quality of the newsnight program. After doing a voxpop mocking members of the public for being poor at metric conversions. (re EU ruling allowing pints and miles) reporter Jackie Long reads her notes to tell us that "to convert... miles into kilometres multiply your miles by 1.069". (sic)
err,--- not on this planet Jackie,
try 1 miles = 1.609344 kilometres.
Work experience youths preparing the scripts now is it???

  • 33.
  • At 12:31 AM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • Stephen Franklin wrote:

Jeremy Paxman said that HT was not advocating terrorism, but Maajid Nawaz said specifically that HT does advocate terrorism in Israel, and therefore the evidence does exist to ban them.

  • 34.
  • At 12:31 AM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • Usman wrote:

Hizb-ut-Tahrir is a political organisation that has been around for over 50 years. Not once have they been proven to any acts of violence.

Time and Time again, people have called for it's ban, on what basis? Offering alternative politics to democracy? If these ideas are flawed and contradictory, then why is nobody challenging them in a debate and destroying the ideas?

Hizb-ut-Tahrir does not use methods of violence but calls for political change throught intellectual thought. I personally challenge anybody to discuss ideas with senior members of the political party, so may the strongest idea win!

  • 35.
  • At 12:34 AM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • Usman wrote:

Hizb-ut-Tahrir is a political organisation that has been around for over 50 years. Not once have they been proven to any acts of violence.

Time and Time again, people have called for it's ban, on what basis? Offering alternative politics to democracy? If these ideas are flawed and contradictory, then why is nobody challenging them in a debate and destroying the ideas?

Hizb-ut-Tahrir does not use methods of violence but calls for political change throught intellectual thought. I personally challenge anybody to discuss ideas with senior members of the political party, so may the strongest idea win!

  • 36.
  • At 12:39 AM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • Mohammad wrote:

Hizb-ut-Tahrir is a political organisation that has been around for over 50 years. Not once have they been proven to any acts of violence.

Time and Time again, people have called for it's ban, on what basis? Offering alternative politics to democracy? If these ideas are flawed and contradictory, then why is nobody challenging them in a debate and destroying the ideas?

Hizb-ut-Tahrir does not use methods of violence but calls for political change throught intellectual thought. I personally challenge anybody to discuss ideas with senior members of the political party, so may the strongest idea win!

  • 37.
  • At 12:59 AM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • Miche wrote:

it wont be long before many other former HT members 'break the silence' on the secret party. The portrayal of HT in this light may be largely true, but is it right to let one disgruntled former member speak about certain aspects of islam without inviting non-HT organisations to debate the more important issue of where political islam in Britain is heading. Shame on those who allow one person to blacken what is essentially a peaceful movement in the UK - a movement, above all, designed to raise awareness of the injustices against Muslims in the Middle East and elsewhere. I met this member at SOAS recently - hes off to that great bastion of capitalism and modernity, LSE, and for what, but to earn back those lost years spent fighting for a lost party. This doesnt give him a right however to use the BBC for his own personal glory.

  • 38.
  • At 01:08 AM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • Abdullah wrote:

Patrick Mercer should do comic relief!

  • 39.
  • At 01:38 AM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • aziz wrote:

Maajid Nawaz' critique of HT's ideology
shows that he has been carefully groomed to throw his weight behind the conveyor belt to terrorism theory aimed at demonising the organisation. Indeed, his blog articulates an entirely different approach aimed at engaging with HT members themselves. This shows that he is a tool of the Home Office who are orchestrating the smear campaign against HT. Can a person who is used in this way have any credibility?

  • 40.
  • At 06:19 AM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • an agnostic bint wrote:

There does seem to be some orchestration of "ex-Islamists" and their media appearances going on in which the BBC and especially Newsnight is playing a role by granting so much privileged air time. From what I can see, from a bit of Googling just now, Maajid Nawaz has been described on Muslim chat boards etc since at least June as an "ex-member" of Hizb ut-Tahrir. So why has Newsnight only just now latched on to him; were they waiting until Sep 11, so as to heighten the drama? Has he been receiving media coaching in these past weeks? Further, his account of college days and Ed Husain's don't quite tally. We have been told by Ed in his book and in media appearances that he, Ed, was responsible for radicalising the college. The death of a black student was because of Hizb "creating a climate". Now we find that Maajid, according to his own account, was president of the Students' union there, and that it was he who was responsible for the radicalisation. No mention of Ed. So was Ed in fact as important as we have been led to think? Maajid used exactly the same language about the killing of the black student as Ed does (same hymn sheet?). Also, did Maajid not appear in the Newsnight studio some months back, and some time after his release from prison, as a representative of Hizb ut-T leadership? I was waiting for Newsnight to replay just a bit of this interview, as a "before" and "after" of Maajid on Newsnight. There was absolutely no grilling of the guy after his, admittedly gripping, voice to camera story. EG why did he wait so long after coming back from prison before "coming out" as an ex-Islamist. He was continuing to speak at demos etc. well after comimg back from Egypt. Ed recently complained in an edition of Radio 4's The Message that the British media interviews the same old Muslims again and again. He meant those Muslims whom he would define as being Islamists. Another studio guest gently pointed out that it is the [handful of] ex-Islamists who are nowadays getting interviewed again and again. Ed is in the papers and on the broadcast media constantly. Each ex-Islamist has his own drum to beat in the media. Ed constantly warns of radicalisation on campuses, especially through Hizb ut-T. Shiraz Maher warns of radicalisation around mosques, again with Hizb ut-T playing a role. Hassan Butt (who belonged to a different group) argues "it's the religion itself, stoopid" but in a street-level way. Now Maajid's function is to tackle the actual religion-based ideology in a more sophisticated manner, including on his beautifully-written and well-argued website. This is in line with government vows to challenge the ideology, in the "battle of ideas". Is the Newsnight and wider BBC audience being manipulated in some way? Would love to know what's really going on behind the scenes. Not that I hold any brief at all for Hizb ut-Tahrir.

  • 41.
  • At 06:21 AM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • wappaho wrote:

I agree with post 15
- I switched over to NN when Frost finished and saw osama's face for the billionth time that day and said to myself 'do i really want to be bothered with this?'

we may be at war in the middle east and we may be a multicultural country but do we have to have islam shoved down our throats 24/7?

until all muslims accept the principle of 'each to their own god' islamic ideology will be fundamentally detrimental to the west.

we should stop allowing islam to conflate OUR politics and religion - deal with the war strictly on a political basis and stop giving any airtime whatsoever to islamic ideology - please


Many viewers spotted that the figure we gave for the conversion from miles to kilometres was wrong. It should of course be 1.609 not 1.069.

Excruciating - many apologies

  • 43.
  • At 10:43 AM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • sayeda bibi wrote:

What I want to know that who in the government or the police is supporting Hizbut Tahrir because it seems clear that someone somewhere does not want all the beans to spilled about radical groups in UK

  • 44.
  • At 12:27 PM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • Joao Fonseca wrote:

The miles to kilometres number was wrong but so were many of the other conversions suggested at the end of the program. In fact, I think Newsnight only got the temperature one right.
Jackie Long also tells us to multiply your pints by 0.56 to get litres and your pounds by 0.45 to get kg. At first I thought this was really clever: how better to represent the difficulties everyone has with conversions by doing it wrongly ourselves! But then she goes and does the temperature conversion correctly and blows that theory out of the water. So I just ended up disappointed. This was typical "for effect" TV, complete with the condescending attitude. Everyone switches off when numbers come on screen, don't they?
And to think that I usually trust other numbers (economic figures, survey results) Newsnight puts up...

  • 45.
  • At 01:09 PM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • Freddy wrote:

to quote MCenroe, you cannot be serious, was this another piece of journalistic excellence from the Beeb regarding the Nawa story? I think not...
loaded scenes of quietly walking along the sea, images of people mourning 9/11 and 7/7 intersperced with Islamist scenes and sombre music...what standards have the Beeb got anymore?
I could do a better job reprting, instead of some emotional guilt trip through someones family history...
Come on Whitehall, I mean BBC, the games up, what's your agenda?
This is like the third or fourth expose.
It got the first 25 minutes. Even Gordon Brown don't get that.
And so what if they want a state and want to spread it, and some people die, every nation wants to spread its ways of life...lets give them a go, its got to be better than Bush/Blair/Brown.
Where's Points of view' when you need it?

  • 46.
  • At 04:45 PM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • RB wrote:

Another Newsnight, another profile of an Islamist-turned-pacifist. Do you have the monopoly on these guys? Lots of great points on this thread - item length, scary music, mood shots of beaches/funfairs/shouty men and a near reverential treatment of the individual concerned. If HT members are breaking the law then throw the book at them. To date - and feel free to prove me wrong - there is no evidence linking HT to the 7/7 bombers and/or subsequent terror plots in this country. The organisation has not been implicated in any trial and, if I remember correctly, MSK et al didn't talk about establishing a caliphate. I don't like HT ideology, I think the vision is ludicrous and unattainable. This vision is shared by other British Muslims - calling for a caliphate and advocating Islamic supremacy - but they do not identify themselves as HT members, card carrying or otherwise. So, er, this focus on HT is slightly misguided albeit well intentioned. Never mind NN, you'll get there in the end won't you?

  • 47.
  • At 05:38 PM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • Shaz wrote:
  • 48.
  • At 08:25 PM on 12 Sep 2007,
  • mohammed wrote:

The great drama. I watch newsnight to get insight in to current affairs. Not to watch soap opera. Please can we start to cover serious issues rather hizb tahrir bashing.
thank you

  • 49.
  • At 07:15 AM on 13 Sep 2007,
  • Yıldız Appes wrote:

Two factors are worth noting in the latest report by Mr.Watson:

The timıng. Two reports just fıve days apart in a run-up to September 11.

The rhyming. Note how Majid Nawaz was deliverıng his lines looking at the camera. It smacks of an orchestrated exercise to reinforce
negatıve stereotypes towards representatıves of certain ideas and beliefs. Yesterday's showered with lavish lımelıght to tell some facts but mostly fiction. Not an ideal use of BBC's airtime!

  • 50.
  • At 02:02 PM on 13 Sep 2007,
  • Adrienne wrote:

#4 "Hizb u Tahrir is a banned organisation in Germany.."

But, holocaust denial is banned in Germany too. Is Hizb u Tahrir banned in other countries which also ban holocaust-denial? Hizb u Tahrir is
clearly anti-capitalist and therefore 'free-market averse', but that's classic for Islam is it not?

This article below from their website makes it clear which 'table' they have a problem with. Is this 'anti-semitic' or is it just anti-anarcho-capitalist (a subtle one)? I suggest 'anti-semitic' is a red-herring, as it's too inclusive a class (even if they are anti-Israel as not all Jews support what Israel does, not even all Israelis).

How much of this vilification is at root, therefore, just Friedmanite (Chicago School economic/neocon) propaganda?

The EU, under Germany's leader's guidance, is seeking to make holocaust denial an EU wide offence. Why? Is it just to cleverly further
promote/defend free-market Friedmanite economics? Will these neo-con 'think tanks' soon be pressuring for the banning of 'terrorist literature' such as 'The Economic Consequences of the Peace' or 'nazi' economic texts like 'General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money' because Keynes thought that it would be in countries like National Socialist Germany etc that his plans would work best? Which they did.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/nathalie_rothschild/2007/07/a_taboo_of_our_times.html

If this is 'a taboo of our times', one should expect rational discussion in terms of forensic evidence (much like the McCann's possible filicide) to be a struggle as it challenges the status quo and we don't like our comfort zones ruffled. We trust doctors, and we don't want to believe that politicians (and the media) may have conspired to make National Socialism repugnant through black propaganda for purely political reasons. But what does it tell us about 'freedom of thought and speech' in the developed world when researchers (miusguided though they may sometimes be, or not) find themselves locked up for asking questions and offering answers?

Cynically/economically there seems to be a rather simple message here:
either you're for the developed world free-market economy and its debt-slavery, or you're some kind of 'terrorist' hell bent on threatening the developed world's socio-economic system. True, we all depend on it for pensions, mortgages and much else besides, so we expect politicians to protect it for us. Didn't Mr Bush more or less say that after 9/11?

But given recent trends (and credit crises), how long can itr be before we see even more nauseating Orwellian (Trotskyist) ads from a hypothetical 'HyperbolicallyDiscountingRus Plc to the effect':

"Do you want a loan? Not in debt? Why not? Have you been reading
terrorist literature perhaps? Call one of our friendly advisors. You CAN have what you can't afford (terms and conditions apply)."

This clearly *does* prey on the impulsive, making out they have freedom of choice in an equalitarian world (which it just is not genetically and there are more and more of this sort in our society given our differential fertility). Equalitarianism (a statistical myth) just serves as a cynical cover for exploitation surely? Hasn't Islam (and others) at least got that right (even if it has been imbibed, paradoxically from it's Marxist
supporters, Russia and China?).

http://www.hizb.org.uk/hizb/issues-explained/financial-meltdown.html
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/money/article2426736.ece

George Orwell may not have liked 'Stalinist' big government (he was a Trot/Anarchist) but I can't believe that MI5 were foxed for one minute.:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6976576.stm
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5go2zyiuIYltlMmElCOUR_aiCoQbA

Maybe we should listen to radical Islamists rather than just vilify them? Technically, they are biologically fitter.

  • 51.
  • At 04:44 PM on 13 Sep 2007,
  • check the facts wrote:

you seem to all forget that Maajid is not calling to ban HT in this country. Maajid is simply highlighting his seemingly vaild concerns about the group. If you are going to accuse him for being inaccurate, check the facts yourselves

Should have seen this coming...the likes of Ed Hussain, Maajid Nawaz et al.

This is a recommendation from the RAND corporation,in 2004 entitled :

Five Pillars of Democracy
How the West Can Promote an Islamic Reformation


2. Support the traditionalists enough to keep them viable against the fundamentalists (if and wherever those are the only choices). Among the traditionalists, the West should embolden those who are the relatively better match for modern civil society: the reformist traditionalists. The West should support the traditionalists against the fundamentalists in these ways:

Publicize traditionalist criticism of fundamentalist violence and extremism.
Encourage disagreements between traditionalists and fundamentalists.
Discourage alliances between traditionalists and fundamentalists.
Encourage cooperation between modernists and reformist traditionalists.
Where appropriate, educate the traditionalists to debate the fundamentalists. Fundamentalists are often rhetorically superior, while traditionalists practice a politically inarticulate "folk Islam." In places such as Central Asia, traditionalists may need to be trained in orthodox Islam to be able to stand their ground against fundamentalists.
Increase the presence and profile of modernists in traditionalist institutions.
Encourage the traditionalists who support the Hanafi school of Islamic law as a way to counter the conservative Wahhabi-supported Hanbali school of Islamic law.
Encourage the popularity and acceptance of Sufism, a traditionalist form of Islamic mysticism that represents an open, intellectual interpretation of Islam

My GOD, BBC Newsnight have you realized what you are doing?

  • 53.
  • At 11:22 PM on 13 Sep 2007,
  • BHG wrote:

Good for the BBC (Zimbabwe feature)but late in the day!

I am Zimbabwe born of UK born post war immigrants and whatever bad is said about the colonisers - British (a fact so conveniently often disregarded in sub Saharan colonisation) , Dutch, French and German - nothing ever comared even remotely to this mass slow murder.
For God's sake wwhen will the West intervene - they all went out there when there when it was convenient and there were few jobs post war now the west turns a blind eye. Mugabe is a far worse version of Hitler!

I know middleclass whites and balcks who are eating only cabbage and Smash posted to them from the UK!!!!

  • 54.
  • At 04:19 AM on 14 Sep 2007,
  • Adrienne wrote:

#52 - in other words, 'subvert Islam'. That's what the fundamentalists say is wrong with the 'traditionalists' is it not, namely that they have become victims of jahiliyyah....?

http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/routledg/mes/2002/00000038/00000003/art00008

RAND's strategy seems to be much the same strategy that was used in the 13th, 14th, 15th (and especially the 16th) centuries to subvert Christian fundamentalism (Catholicism) via protest-antism (early Trotskyism, most obvious in the English Civil war and its Puritans).

No prizes for who were put in the frame as 'terrorists' (aka 'heretics') for that. Funded by the Dutch (once a colony of Spain, and destination for late C15th exiles).

It's just flipped has it not? In recent times, neo-cons have fooled a lot of people in the west (check out the ethnic breakdown of NYC, and be careful to factor in Hispanic white and the other large white group). The critical question we have to ask is how have we embraced a socio-economic system which demonstrably results in below replacement level fertility (in the UK it is under 1.8, elsewhere in Europe it ranges from 1.1-1.7, mainly the low end). It's literally a self-induced genocide, especially of the gifted, and the primary cause is naive pursuit of short term (impulsive) material gain (capital) at the expense of longer term planning (which demands intelligence) and genetic survival (fitness). It's handmaiden is sex-equality/emancipation of women (proscribed by both Orthodox Judaism *and* Islam, and at one time, Christian fundamentalism aka Catholicism) as this lowers the birth-rate (aided by female contraception) through educating females and encouraging them to enter the workforce (able though they are, this is counter-productive).

Most people don't see this, and if they do, they reject it because they don't like it.

Plus ca change........

PS. http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22416714-5005961,00.html

  • 55.
  • At 07:47 PM on 14 Sep 2007,
  • pippop wrote:

Ms. Ayaana Hirsi Ali, dared to advise us Westerners to take pride on our modern liberal democracy and the legacy of John Lock's social contract. However, this very good advice upset even the most Westernised Muslims including Rageh Omaar, darling of the beeb, who was outraged by her and wrote as much his book, "Only half of Me." Who did she think she was, a mere women like that spouting politics? Stone me. I don't understand how she got out of the bedroom and away from the kitchen do you? As one Muslim stated in a docu. on Islam "You [meaning Western men] have lost control of your women."

At what point will Western women wake up to the ethos of this religion and start to speak out against it? Why have we allowed our very necessary worthy anti racist agenda get hi jacked and used to hide and deceive us about systematic gender violence?

  • 56.
  • At 11:02 PM on 14 Sep 2007,
  • Mohammed Youssef wrote:

From post 52:

"Encourage the popularity and acceptance of Sufism, a traditionalist form of Islamic mysticism that represents an open, intellectual interpretation of Islam"

That explains why Newsnight keep bringing on that "Haris Rafiq" guy from the so-called Sufi Council of Britain! He seems to think he represents mainstream Muslim opinion whereas I think his ideas are closer to those of neo-cons...that joker gives me a headache whenever he comes on.

  • 57.
  • At 09:25 AM on 27 Sep 2007,
  • Ali (Islamabad) wrote:

Its a matter of great concern for the party that its memeber like majid nawaz who was detained by egyption authorities and later appeared on the international media defending the hizb is now talking against it. He is known to be a very senior party member and has made many popular public talks on caliphate. His statement " I expressly and explicitly say to the members I want them to leave Hizb ut-Tahrir because I believe Hizb ut-Tahrir is an obstacle to the Muslim community moving forward, not only in this country but in the world in general. And that's why I'm here, because I regret me being a part of that obstacle." Is very surprising and must suggest hizb to stop recruiting members who are so ill minded and confused that are afraid to keep on the right path. Its nothing New that the International media has highliting the people who are astrayed and are speaking the words of capatilists.

This post is closed to new comments.

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites