This is part I in a series of comments on how Christmas goes in a country in decline politically, financially and morally. This part is by way of a background report:

The oldest political correctness ruse on the books: Christmas must join other religious celebrations held at this time to collectively be referred to as “the holidays.” Why?  Because mention of it or focus on it harms other belief systems whose holidays are being held at the same time.  Ah, but it is OK to harm Christmas.

The ACLU has single-handedly reduced this country to a collection of jumbled, meaningless cultures with stifled beliefs. When beliefs go underground, isn’t that the light of freedom of speech being snuffed out?

There is always a historical disconnect when the ACLU gets involved. The country was first settled by Pilgrims fleeing religious persecution in England. Now even if, as our Latino brothers and sisters say, the Spanish were here first, still that would be Christians – native populations and their spiritual devotions notwithstanding.

So according to PC, rather than allow all religions to display their wares and to participate in school programs, no religions are allowed near schools or public buildings, etc.or to call themselves by their proper names.

The result of all of this is that we citizens will get to know less and less about one another and religion may die further than it has already. Only the Muslims remain fervent in their practices. What if the US becomes part of a Global Caliphate. Then religion will be back in the schools.

So think of the above as you put up your tree or menorah or other religions emblem this holiday season and Christians, don’t be afraid to wish someone a Merry Christmas. That will let them know who and what you are. They, not the ACLU, will let you know if it is offensive. Followed by “I am sorry and tell me a bit about yourself,” this approach may just take us further toward understanding.

And about Santa?  Just try to bring that old boy down!  May age and religions discrimination charges be loosed upon those who dare.

_________________________________

VotingFemale Speaks! – Climategate bigger than Watergate; Al Gore’s Credibility is Permanently Destroyed

hotAir – Video: Frosty the Inappropriate Snowman

Frugal-Cafe – Frugal Japanese-Inspired, Eco-Friendly Christmas Gift Wrap & More “Cheap but Chic” Christmas Ideas (video)

Sistertoldjah – Weekend open thread

A recent article in the Financial Times reported the efforts of the Swiss  to protect the architectural history of the country by voting “yes” in a national referendum to a ban against the construction of minarets. But an editorial in the Wall Street Journal reprinted in an excellent blog, Cervantes, clarifies the situation:

The construction of new minarets is banned, but the building of mosques is unaffected, and the vote does not affect the four existing minarets in the country. Nobody’s freedom of worship is threatened, but a symbolic message has been sent.

…………………………..

The ban, in other words, does too much and too little at once. Too much because it becomes a very visible and easily exploited symbol of supposed European intolerance. But it accomplishes too little because it seeks merely to hide from view the problems that gave rise to the fear of the minaret in the first place.

The most famous structure with minarets is the Taj Mahal – one of the 7 “new” wonders of the world.

Taj Mahal Tomb, India

The four detached minarets springing from the plinth of the Taj Mahal measure 138 feet high and stand like sentries nobly keeping guard. They were built out of plumb, slanting so that if they were to topple, they would fall not towards the Taj, but away from the building, protecting the tomb from harm. They also form a visual framework to the Taj proper and enhance the symmetry of the building.

The classic minaret developed into a cylinder shape capped with a miniature dome, but they can be continuously cylindrical from a square base, or multifaceted shafts. Minarets can also be attached to the main structure, like these at Akbar’s tomb in Sikandra which was built between 1604 and 1614.

Originating from the Arabic term ‘manar‘ which means ‘beacon’ or ‘lighthouse’, a minaret is the epitome of Islamic architecture. It is the place from where the ‘muezzin’ or crier chants the call to prayer five times a day. Early Mosques were often without minarets and the muezzin would stand on a raised point, or even a ladder. [The Minaret and the Muezzin]

Here, in part, is the article from the Financial Times that reports on Swiss referendum that is seen as a means to fight against the  Islamization of the country:

Switzerland on Sunday voted to ban the construction of minarets, potentially exposing the small alpine country to a backlash from the Muslim world.

In a national referendum, more than 59 per cent of voters supported the call for a constitutional amendment to ban minarets, based on early projections. Support exceeded 65 per cent in many cantons, with only four of the country’s 26 cantons rejecting the move. Leaders of the ultra conservative Swiss People’s Party (SVP), the country’s biggest political grouping and initiator of the move, reacted with surprise, but jubilation. Pollsters had expected the referendum to be rejected, although many noted the margin had been narrowing in recent days.

Opponents of the initiative reacted with dismay, but tried to play down the potential political and economic repercussions, amid fears Switzerland could face the same sort of backlash experienced by Denmark after the publication of cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammed.

……………………………………

Switzerland’s big multinational companies had warned of the dangers of a “yes” vote, amid fears that it could prompt actions against Swiss interests in Muslim countries or calls for a boycott of Swiss products.

“There is certainly a danger that some groups in certain countries might call for a boycott” , said Gerold Bührer, chairman of the Economiesuisse business federation.

SVP leaders remained unabashed. The party, which has come to dominate Swiss politics over the past 15 years through strident populist campaigns, has made an issue of the “Islamization” of Swiss society.

……………………………………………

However, other SVP politicians took pains to distinguish between political Islam – the target of their campaign – and the Muslim faith.

…………………………………………….

Claude Lonchamp, a leading political commentator, said the strength of the “yes” vote, which went well beyond the SVP’s traditional base, showed the party had capitalised on widespread, if ill-defined, fears of Islam as a political, and potentially violent, force. [Financial Times]

In the article quoted above, it was noted that passage of the measure largely depended on  stoking fears of Islam and Muslims.  As a countermeasure to the anti- Islamization movement, an organization, the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), has been an outspoken critic of anti-Islamic actions and measures:

[Its] aim is to punish and suppress any alleged Islamophobia, around the world but particularly in Europe…[.]

The OIC is one of the largest intergovernmental organizations in the world. It encompasses 56 Muslim states plus the Palestinian Authority. Spread over four continents, it claims to speak in the name of the ummah (the universal Muslim community), which numbers about 1.3 billion. The OIC’s mission is to unite all Muslims worldwide by rooting them in the Koran and the Sunnah — the core of traditional Islamic civilization and values. It aims at strengthening solidarity and cooperation among all its members, in order to protect the interests of Muslims everywhere and to galvanize the ummah into a unified body. [National Review Online]

In Europe today, Islamic architecture is just part of the problem but it is a highly visible symbol of radical change, as are burkas. The proposed establishment of Sharia law in European countries by Muslim radicals and their efforts to resurrect the Caliphate and take it global are clearly alarming. Radical Muslims have utilized freedoms found in democratic states to aid in their move to establish Islamic theocracies in the west that would, ironically deprive the average citizen of the freedoms they now enjoy in the west.

Because there is a worldwide movement to establish a global Caliphate [Caliphate Totally Defined], the study of these issues is critical to the survival of western culture.  In the United States, while most of our Muslim fellow citizens are moderate, more radical Muslims are living among them. As a result, these issues are becoming increasingly discussed here.

Here is a partial explanation of the more radical movement to establish a global Caliphate:

According to author [of Caliphate Totally Explained], Lawrence Wright, Ayman al-Zawahiri, an active member of the Muslim Brotherhood, “sought to restore the caliphate, the rule of Islamic clerics, which had formally ended in 1924 following the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire but which hadn’t exercised real power since the thirteenth century. Once caliphate was established, Zawahiri believed, Egypt would become a rallying point for the rest of the Islamic world, leading the jihad against the West. “Then history would make a new turn, God willing,” Zawahiri later wrote, “in the opposite direction against the empire of the United States and the world’s Jewish government.”
One transnational group whose ideology is based specifically on restoring the caliphate as a pan-Islamic state, is Hizb ut-Tahrir (literally: “party of liberation”). It’s particularly strong in Central Asia, Europe and growing in strength in the Arab world and is based on the claim that Muslim can prove that God exists and that the Qur’an is the word of God. Search Results for ” harunyaya.com “ Hizb-Ut-Tahrir stated strategy is a non-violent political and intellectual struggle.

As mentioned above, the “weakness of democracies”  -  their freedoms, are being used against them as is the pressure of “political correctness.”  Beyond that it is the specter of economic “punishments” that countries who take measures against Islamization will encounter.

But by far the most egregious example of both the power of political correctness and democratic governments curtailing free speech when anti-Islamists speak out has been the ban against the outspoken Dutch filmmaker Geert Wilders from entering Britain.  Here is an excerpt from his acceptance speech for the Freedom Award he was given by the Florida Security Council in Miami April 27, 2009:

“The take-over of Europe is part of the global fight of Islam for world domination”

The free world is now facing a ‘stealth Jihad’, the Islamic’ attempt to introduce Sharia law bit by bit. Allow me to give you a few examples of Islamization in the United States: Muslim taxi drivers at Minneapolis airport have refused over 5,000 passengers because they were carrying alcohol; Muslim students are demanding separate campus housing; Muslim women are demanding separate hours in gyms and swimming pools; schools are banning Halloween and Christmas celebrations – indeed, schools are taking pork off their cafeteria menus to avoid offending Muslim students. Ladies and gentlemen, be aware that this is only the beginning. If things continue like this, you will have the same problems as we are currently faced with in Europe. [Jihad Watch]

In all the above, what stands out is the confusion caused by many angry voices raised in support of many interpretations of events as they unfold and against the ideological and religions values held by individuals and groups.  Some important questions rise from the dust:

1. What does the Koran really say about allowing believers to live peacefully along side their secular and/or non-believing fellow citizens?

2. Why are Britain and the EU suppressing the free speech of those who speak out against what they see as the Islamization of their cultural heritage?

3. Why may Muslims shout “racism” against those who would limit immigration so that one culture does not destroy another that has been long-established?

4. Is it really phobia against Muslim culture and Muslims themselves that makes Europeans react strongly against radical Islamists calling for the establishment of Sharia law and a global Caliphate?

5. How long can moderate Muslims remain moderate in the face of anti-Muslim behaviors?

6. How long can Europeans and other westerners refrain from speaking out and/or taking action on their views and values because of “fatwas” issued in all seriousness by radical Muslim clerics who approve the killing of unbelievers?

Surely there is little tolerance that would allow a rational discussion of the above issues. To date, answers have not been forthcoming and there have been few effective forums for discussion. There are those who believe that Europe has effectively been lost to Islam. The question there is no longer one of “will this happen?” but “how did this happen?” and of course “should it have happened ?”

_______________________________________________________________

HotAir – Jesse Ventura: MS-NBC took me off the air for opposing Iraq war

Patterico’s Pontifications - Military Tribunals Then and Now

VotingFemale Speaks! – Fact Checking the WhiteHouse.Gov Blog’s propaganda

TheOther McCain – LEAVE ALLAHPUNDIT ALONE!

FireAndreaMitchell – Muslim Wife Beheader: I’m not guilty!

Frugal-Cafe – Its “Happy Eid al-Adha,” Bans “Merry Christmas” in After-Thanksgiving Christmas Ads

وَمَن يَهْدِ اللَّهُ فَهُوَ الْمُهْتَدِ ۖ وَمَن يُضْلِلْ فَلَن تَجِدَ لَهُمْ أَوْلِيَاءَ مِن دُونِهِ ۖ وَنَحْشُرُهُمْ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ عَلَىٰ وُجُوهِهِمْ عُمْيًا وَبُكْمًا وَصُمًّا ۖ مَّأْوَاهُمْ جَهَنَّمُ ۖ كُلَّمَا خَبَتْ زِدْنَاهُمْ سَعِيرًا

And he whom Allah guides, he is led aright; but he whom He sends astray, for such you will find no Auliya’ (helpers and protectors), besides Him, and We shall gather them together on the Day of Resurrection on their faces, blind, dumb and deaf; their abode will be Hell; whenever it abates, We shall increase for them the fierceness of the Fire.

[Al Isra : 97]

A rare and most comprehensive documentary on Abdul Rasheed Ghazi and massacre in Lal [Red] Masjid including all relevant events.

Part 1 of 7

Part 2 of 7

Part 3 of 7

Part 4 of 7

Part 5 of 7

Part 6 of 7

Part 7 of 7

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

Farhan Bokhari, Islamabad

China has agreed to sell Pakistan at least 36 advanced fighter jets in a deal worth as much as $1.4bn, according to Pakistani and western officials.

Beijing will supply two squadrons of the J-10 fighter jet in a preliminary agreement that could lead to more sales, said a Pakistani official. The official said Pakistan might buy “larger numbers” of the multi-role aircraft in the future, but dismissed reports that Islamabad had signed a deal to purchase as many as 150 of the fighter jets.

Defence experts described the agreement with China as a landmark event in Pakistan’s defence relationship with the military power. China’s transition from a manufacturer of low-fighters to more advanced jets comparable to some western models is seen as evidence of Beijing’s increasing strategic clout in Asia.

“China is developing a real capacity to produce and export its arms. At one point, the Chinese were dependent on imported Russian technology, but obviously China has advanced significantly beyond those days,” said Marika Vicziany, Professor of Asian studies at Monash University in Melbourne.

“This agreement should not simply be seen in the narrow context of Pakistan’s relations with China,” said Abdul Qayyum, a retired Pakistani general.

“There is a wider dimension. By sharing its advanced technology with Pakistan, China is … also saying to the world that its defence capability is growing rapidly.”

China has supplied Pakistan with fighter jets for more than three decades. But Beijing has seldom supplied Pakistan’s air force with advanced fighter aircraft. Islamabad turned to France for Mirage fighter jets in the 1970s and to the US for F-16s in the 1980s.

Pakistan has a fleet of 45 F-16s built by Lockheed Martin. The Pakistani air force is using the fighter jet in its campaign against militants in South Waziristan.

The US has agreed to sell Islamabad another 18 new F-16s and Pakistani officials also expected the US to supply about a dozen older versions of the aircraft.

Over the past decade, China and Pakistan have collaborated on building their first jointly produced advanced fighter jet, known as the JF-17, or “Thunder”. Pakistan is expected to roll out the first domestically built version of the Thunder within weeks.

Pakistan’s air force plans to purchase at least 250 of the Thunder fighters over the next four to five years.

Experts see the new Pakistani focus on China as evidence that Beijing is trying to expand its military power.

“Countries like Iran and possibly some of the Middle Eastern countries would be keen to deal with China if they can find technology which is comparable to the west,” said one western official in Islamabad.

“Pakistan will work as the laboratory to try out Chinese aircraft. If they work well with the Pakistani air force, others will follow.”

Source: http://pakistankakhudahafiz.wordpress.com/2009/11/11/pakistan-in-chinese-fighter-jet-deal/

A classic animated film released in 1989 called “Balance” shows how personal greed destroys everything using example of a floating floor. In case of Muslims, it is a good example to demonstrate that how greedy and power hungry corrupt leaders in Muslim world are helping Kuffar to destroy other Muslims. The video can also be used to demonstrate spread of disunity [aka. Nationalism] and lust for power amongst Muslim leaders of today.

The short movie of 9 minutes (approx.) is a must watch that how these fools and puppet leaders are destroying each other slowly and one by one.

Ibn-e-Pakistan | Pillars of Khilafah

Allah says in Quran,

“And hold fast, all of you together, to the Rope of Allah (i.e. this Qur’an), and be not divided among yourselves , and remember Allah’s Favour on you, for you were enemies one to another but He joined your hearts together, so that, by His Grace, you became brethren (in Islamic Faith), and you were on the brink of a pit of Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus Allah makes His Ayat (proofs, evidence, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.,) clear to you, that you may be guided.” [Aal-e-Imraan, verse 103]

Unfortunately, big majority of Muslims have become religiously and morally corrupt, even the ones who appear to be religious, sport beards on their faces and speak of Deen – they are also found promoting nationalism. Those who dare to speak truth are either hunt down by Government armies or are rejected by ignorant / secular masses as “extremists”. Today we see Muslims of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait welcome American soldiers when they plan and attack neighboring Iraq, today we see Muslims of Jordan and Egypt turn their backs and close their borders when Yahood (Zionist Jews) of Israel charge on unarmed Muslims civilians of Gazza (Palestine), today we see that Muslims of Pakistan provide air bases, refueling facilities and supply of arms and ammunition to united Kuffar armies of NATO and ISAF so they could commit massacre of Muslims of Afghanistan and fight against Mujahideen, today we see that nationalist government armies of Afghanistan and Iraq walk shoulder to shoulder with Kafir soldiers when they raid areas to search and capture Mujahideen or to destroy houses of Mujahideen – such are those munafiqun who believe in man-made laws of their countries called “constitutions” rather than Quran and their Qibla is White House rather than Ka’aba tullah, the House of Almighty.

No matter how much we be humble or welcoming to aggression of Kuffar upon Muslim countries, no matter how much modern we try portray ourselves, these Kuffar will not spare Muslims at any cost, one by one all will fall – this munafiqat [hypocrisy] can only delay the destruction but will never guarantee safety forever until and unless Muslims stand together as one unit Ummah to stare Kuffar eye to an eye and be ready to defend any Muslim country through physical Jihad or by our wealth or the least by our tongue or pen against any aggression by Kuffar.

Ibn-e-Pakistan | Pillars of Khilafah

Allah says in Quran,

“And hold fast, all of you together, to the Rope of Allah (i.e. this Qur’an), and be not divided among yourselves , and remember Allah’s Favour on you, for you were enemies one to another but He joined your hearts together, so that, by His Grace, you became brethren (in Islamic Faith), and you were on the brink of a pit of Fire, and He saved you from it. Thus Allah makes His Ayat (proofs, evidence, verses, lessons, signs, revelations, etc.,) clear to you, that you may be guided.” [Aal-e-Imraan, verse 103]

Unfortunately, big majority of Muslims have become religiously and morally corrupt, even the ones who appear to be religious, sport beards on their faces and speak of Deen – they are also found promoting nationalism. Those who dare to speak truth are either hunt down by Government armies or are rejected by ignorant / secular masses as “extremists”. Today we see Muslims of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait welcome American soldiers when they plan and attack neighboring Iraq, today we see Muslims of Jordan and Egypt turn their backs and close their borders when Yahood (Zionist Jews) of Israel charge on unarmed Muslims civilians of Gazza (Palestine), today we see that Muslims of Pakistan provide air bases, refueling facilities and supply of arms and ammunition to united Kuffar armies of NATO and ISAF so they could commit massacre of Muslims of Afghanistan and fight against Mujahideen, today we see that nationalist government armies of Afghanistan and Iraq walk shoulder to shoulder with Kafir soldiers when they raid areas to search and capture Mujahideen or to destroy houses of Mujahideen – such are those munafiqun who believe in man-made laws of their countries called “constitutions” rather than Quran and their Qibla is White House rather than Ka’aba tullah, the House of Almighty.

No matter how much we be humble or welcoming to aggression of Kuffar upon Muslim countries, no matter how much modern we try portray ourselves, these Kuffar will not spare Muslims at any cost, one by one all will fall – this munafiqat [hypocrisy] can only delay the destruction but will never guarantee safety forever until and unless Muslims stand together as one unit Ummah to stare Kuffar eye to an eye and be ready to defend any Muslim country through physical Jihad or by our wealth or the least by our tongue or pen against any aggression by Kuffar.

US secretary of state Hillary Clinton has embarked on a three day tour of Pakistan that includes a town hall meeting which is claimed to be a “no holds” barred question and answer session at a university in Lahore. The aim of the trip is reported to be amongst other issues to address popular concerns and suspicions about America. Hillary Clinton’s attempt to win over the Pakistani public sentiment- should not be seen as just another way to add American insult to Pakistani injury. It has more meaning than this.

“And whoever seeks a deen other than Islam, never will it be accepted of him and in the hereafter he will be one of the losers.” (Al-Imraan, 3:85) وَمَن يَبْتَغِ غَيْرَ الإِسْلاَمِ دِينًا فَلَن يُقْبَلَ مِنْهُ وَهُوَ فِي الآخِرَةِ مِنَ الْخَاسِرِينَ

Hizb ut-Tahrir (HuT) are seldom out of the news these days.  Like other organisations that peddle extremism in the UK, HuT have a tiny membership (3-4000), yet punch far above their weight through the use of the new media, by employing various front organisations and recruiting amongst the most politically active and technologically savvy.

HuT’s raison d’être is thus:

[...] to resume the Islamic way of life by establishing an Islamic State that executes the systems of Islam and carries its call to the world.

The organisation’s ideology rejects secular democracy and hence procedural secularism:

Hizb-ut-Tahrir…struggles against colonialism in all its forms and attributes in order to liberate the Ummah from its intellectual leadership and to deracinate its cultural, political, military and economic roots from the soil of the Islamic lands. Hizb-ut-Tahrir endeavors to change the erroneous thoughts which colonialism has propagated, such as confining Islam to rituals and morals.

Furthermore, as if this weren’t enough to set alarm bells ringing, HuT’s strategy is revolutionary in scope:

The party proceeds in the three periods which the Messenger of Allah (saw) proceeded in order to achieve his objective:

1- The period of study and culture in order to generate the party culture and incorporate the ideology in a group of individuals, i.e. in order to form the bloc.

2- The period of interaction with the Ummah and the struggle for the sake of making her adopt the ideology of the party as her own, make it her raison d’être and work towards establishing it.

3- The period of attaining and seizing the reins of power through the Ummah in order to implement the ideology in a comprehensive manner, because it is forbidden to seize partial power. Hence, the arrival at the ruling must be total and the implementation of Islam must be comprehensive.

Clearly, HuT is incompatible with a liberal democracy such as the UK’s, which makes today’s report in The Daily Telegraph that 3 schools with connections to HuT have received over £100,000 in government funding all the more astounding:

Accounts filed at the Charity Commission show that the Government paid a total of £113,411 last year to a foundation run by senior members and activists of Hizb ut-Tahrir — a notorious Islamic extremist group that ministers promised to ban.

The public money helped run a nursery school and two Islamic primary schools where children are taught key elements of Hizb’s ideology from the age of five.

The name of the ‘foundation’ responsible for the administration of the three schools is enlightening:

The three schools — in Tottenham, north London, and Slough, Berks — are run by the Islamic Shakhsiyah Foundation, a registered charity.

Shakhsiyah (or shakhsiyyah) is a transliteration of the Arabic word for ‘personality’ (شخصية) and the term ‘Islamic personality’ or Islamic Shakhsiyah, coincidentally, happens to be the title of a famous three volume treatise written by the founder of Hizb ut-Tahrir, the Jordanian-Palestinian Taqi ud-Deen an-Nabhani.  You can view the three volume treatise here and here (unfortunately the 3rd volume is not available in English, but each volume is available in Arabic here, here and here).

According to the Charity Commission’s site, the ISF (Islamic Shakhsiyah Foundation) actually run 4 schools (2 primarys each with a nursery):

Islamic Shakhsiyah Foundation runs two independent primary schools and two attached nurseries.  The schools and nurseries run on an alternative ethos as detailed on our website.  We provide other services to the community including various classes and community events.

The article goes on to examine the schools’ management team:

The foundation’s lead trustee is Yusra Hamilton, a leading Hizb activist who is married to Taji Mustafa, the group’s chief spokesman in Britain.

At least three of the four trustees are Hizb members or activists, including Farah Ahmed, the head teacher of the Slough school, who has written in a Hizb journal condemning the “corrupt Western concepts of materialism and freedom”.

A spokesman for the foundation insisted that it was not a Hizb ut-Tahrir operation but involved “Muslim women from a wide variety of backgrounds”.

And we can see what sort of  ’alternative ethos’ guides the ISF’s approach to teaching and learning, their so-called an-Nabhani inspired Shakhsiyah Model:

The Islamic belief of the purpose of life is fundamentally in opposition to the secular belief. The secular education system therefore has fundamentally different goals to the Islamic education system. It is not sufficient to insert some Islamic aspects into secular systems.

The curriculum fits perfectly with HuT’s ‘three steps to Khalifah’ goal:

The schools’ history curriculum states that children are taught that “there must be one ruler of the khilafah [caliphate]”. The schools’ website says that “in the glorious history of Islam… the Sharia was the norm”.

And the ISF, despite clearly being a HuT front organisation, received funds via local government from the Department for Children, Schools and Families:

The Shakhsiyah Foundation spokesman said the government money, from Whitehall’s “Free Entitlement” and “Pathfinder” programmes, had been claimed by parents on behalf of the school.  However, a spokesman for Haringey council, which administered the grant, said this was incorrect and that the foundation had applied for the money.

This means that British taxpayers are helping to fund the ideological indoctrination of children by an extremist Islamist group; a group that former PM Tony Blair claimed he would proscribe in the wake of the 7/7 bombings, but then reneged on his promise; a group which has now been banned in Bangladesh for attempting to foment an Islamic revolution and destabilise the government; a group with nuclear ambitions.  

Chris Grayling, the Shadow Home Secretary, promised to ban HuT if the Tories form the next government: 

The Home Office has another key responsibility.  The security of our people and of our nation.  To take the lead in the battle against terrorism.  And the fight against an ideology of hate and violence.  An ideology that damages the reputation of decent, law abiding British Muslims as well as threatening life and limb.  And let’s be clear. That ideology wants to destroy the civil liberties that make this country what it is. No Government should allow them to do so, and the way this Government has eroded those liberties is shameful and must be reversed.

Our police and security services have done a magnificent job in protecting us against the terrorist threat.  We owe them a huge debt of gratitude.

But we are still not tough enough on those who spread a doctrine of hate in Britain.  So I will immediately ban Hizb ut-Tahrir, and any other group that actively incites hatred and violence.

We also have extremists using video links to hold meetings with banned preachers of hate from overseas who urge violence against our society.  If I am Home Secretary the people who organise those meetings will be arrested and prosecuted.

Under this Government the extremists have been free to protest on our streets and incite violence and hatred in the most blatant ways.  We cannot and we will not allow this to continue.

HuT are unlikely to be banned under the Tories as it would be reasonable to assume that, had it been possible, Blair would have added them to the proscribed list of organisations.  That he didn’t suggests two things:

1 – There is as yet, despite the plethora of anecdotal and documentary evidence (not least here), no hard evidence linking HuT in the UK to violence.

2 – Banning HuT is seen as counter-productive.  When Omar Bakri’s outfit, al-Muhajiroun, and several of its offshoots were outlawed, another organisation, Islam4UK, popped up featuring many of the same individuals involved in the previous incarnations.  Meanwhile, Islam4UK continue to spout extremist rhetoric within the letter of the law,  as it seems do HuT.

A useful discussion on the merits of banning Hizb ut-Tahrir and the likely problems with such a strategy can be found here.