Wednesday, 7 March 2018

Hizb ut Tahrir equate nationalism with evil and then refuse to answer my questions - because I am neither a man nor a Muslim?


Taji Mustafa says:

Can you guess the answer to this question?


Can you guess the answer to this question?


Can you guess the answer to this question?

But how will they spread the message of Islam by arrogantly refusing to engage in any discussion?

These unfortunate Muslims who want a Caliphate seem to be as lost as everyone else talking to each other in their own echo chambers disdaining to discuss anything with outsiders.

www.hizb.org.uk/media/press-releases/lost-khilafah-nationalism-must-reject-get-khilafah-back/

http://www.hizb.org.uk/viewpoint/disease-nationalism-continues-tear-world-apart/

From the 19th minute
Abdul Wahid talks about the degeneracy of the Ottoman Empire. He claims the success of the military invasion of Turkey would not have been successful but for "the evil of nationalism affecting the Arab world". He calls Mustafa Kemal "the ugly face of Turkish nationalism".

He mentions the Treaty of Sevres and Lausanne, but does not mention that Turkey supported the wrong losing side in WW1 ie Germany.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottoman%E2%80%93German_alliance
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Sèvres
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_of_Lausanne

He does not mention the Eastern Question.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Question

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sick_man_of_Europe

Can Muslims Reopen the Gates of Ijtihad?

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2017-09-26/study-finds-saudi-government-still-tolerates-hate-speech

37:37
Abdul Wahid:

Bernard Lewis is the Islamic scholar beloved by neocons.

Taji Mustafa wants Assad destroyed and says an Islamic financial system would be fairer for the poor and poor nations. He has not heard of adverse possession in English law, clearly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession

http://quillette.com/2018/02/19/one-state-delusion/ makes a lot of things on Western foreign policy and

Yahya Nisbet denounces nationalism and peppers his speech with so many Arabisms in an ostentatious Arabic accent that he must think his Arabisms will get him to Janah more quickly. It is just annoying for non-Muslims who want them to understand whatever they are saying quickly, but what the hell do they care as long as they can wear their piety ostentatiously on their sleeve?

QUESTIONS I HAVE EMAILED TO HIZB UT TAHRIR TODAY

1.  Does Hizb ut Tahrir believe it can just abolish the nation state and live in a global Muslim village without engaging in debate with non-Muslims?

2.  Is HT confusing nationalism with Western imperialism?

3.  Is it impossible in your minds to separate nationalism from Western imperialism?

4.  First, tribes must be able to form a city-state before it can form a nation. Do you disagree?

5.  Secondly, a city-state must control its surrounding territory before it can become a nation. Do you disagree?

6.  Thirdly, a nation must be able to successfully conquer territories outside its own borders to become an empire. Do you disagree?

7.  Jews were a tribe of wandering former slaves who through following Judaism conquered enough territory to become a kingdom. Do you disagree?

8.  Islam was what first united the Arab tribes which then enabled Islamic imperialism. Do you disagree?
   
9.  Ummah also means nation in Arabic. Would you agree? http://www1.cbn.com/onlinediscipleship/what-is-the-muslim-understanding-of-%22ummah%22%3F
   
10.  Nationhood is a natural aspiration for all those who live in a defined piece of territory.  Would you agree?

11.  Apparently, HT are Muslims who want to abolish nation states and borders who cannot understand that uncontrolled immigration upsets the locals. Such denial and naivete is not a secure basis upon which to embark on a global Caliphate. Would you agree?

12.  HT seem to think nationalism is some wicked modern Western imperialist invention, apparently ignorant of the fact that the Jewish revolts against the Romans of the second century was also a form of nationalism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism#History Would you confirm that this is indeed the position of HT on nationalism?

13.  We all have to start somewhere. Individuals exist in bodies, and countries as nation states. To call nationalism evil is to call the nation state evil, which makes about as much sense as denouncing individuals for necessarily existing as a physical being inhabiting a human body. Would you agree? https://www.facebook.com/claire.khaw.92/posts/1845229085551716?comment_id=1846060515468573&reply_comment_id=1846861275388497&notif_id=1520365865757713&notif_t=feed_comment&ref=notif
   
14.  The Ottoman Empire ended because it could not reform itself before it was dominated then divided by the European powers. Was this because the Gate of Interpretation was closed?  https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3114/muslims-ijtihad

15.  God if He exists is a nationalist. http://Quran.com/3/104  is conclusive evidence that God approves of nations who promote their national interest by following His laws. Would you agree?

16.  It is surely possible to defend the national interest without descending to xenophobia. Why do Muslims, like liberals and the left, assume nationalism is synonymous with evil? We all live in nation states, so why should we as loyal citizens not defend the national interest or expect our political leaders to do so?
   
17.  en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectification_of_names is a philosophy of calling things by their proper names or things will go awry. If you mean the policies of divide and rule used by Western imperialism, call it that and don't confuse it with nationalism. Is this a subject you are prepared to discuss?
   
19.  Do you really think a transnational Caliphate can spontaneously come into being without first establishing an imperialistic Islamic State? If so, please explain your reasoning.

20.  Will you be ignoring my questions because I am neither male nor Muslim?
at

No comments:

Post a Comment