Forbidden Islam: British courts bans “political” Islam in move to McCarthyism

Wednesday, December 21st, 2011 | Posted by Noor

Sayyid Qutb

The British State has been attempting to develop a version of Islam that is subservient to a secular ideology, ever since the Rushdie affair. This version of Islam has been widely described as “moderate” Islam in the media. The State has also been grooming individuals and organisations whom it would deal with as representatives of “moderate” Islam (moderate Islam for them being Islam without politics and ideas of governance).
This policy of reforming Islam was pursued more aggressively after 911 and the advent of the so-called war on terror. In fact, the War on Terror was little more than a cover for preventing the rise of Islamic self-determination in the Muslim world. The British Home Office began sponsoring new “moderate” Muslim groups to counter the ones they had previously promoted which were now considered too “extremist”. It also started to float the notion that Sufi Islam (the entirely spiritual type) was genuine Islam. The ideas of a reformed or moderate Islam became enshrined in the Governments Prevent Strategy. Prevent was the first policy in recent history that targeted all aspects of the life of an entire community, ostensibly to prevent violence, but the hidden agenda was to outlaw certain beliefs and ideas within Islam. This would allow the State version of Islam to be promoted freely and unchallenged. The Governments recent iteration of the Prevent Strategy published early this year, makes it clear that the policy is about unacceptable ideas, which include talk of implementing Sharia, even in the Muslim world.
Along with Prevent, new terrorism laws were enacted. Their remit was so wide that they incorporated not just acts of violence and their preparation, but also allowed for the prosecution of ideas, beliefs, thoughts and their promotion (Section 5 of the Terrorism Act 2006).
Having prosecuted or marginalised some preachers, created new groups to tow the line, attempted to outlaw some Muslim groups, withdrawn funding for those groups who it was alleged hold the wrong version of Islam; what remained was to outlaw certain ideas and ban the materials in which they were contained. This would then allow for an unchallenged promotion of “moderate “Islam and reduce the space for promotion of what Neo –con writers call “political” Islam. Of course the British State could not pursue a direct ban on books. Instead, in this next phase on the war on Islamic ideas, it has chosen to pursue a back door policy of effectively banning books using terrorism laws and the courts.
In recent cases, British courts have ruled that certain books and videos are terrorist material, effectively banning them and classing the ideas contained within them as not being genuine Islam. On the 13thDecember, a Birmingham bookseller (in Regina vs Faraz ), was sentenced to three years, for publishing and distributing a number of books and DVD’s classed as terrorist material ( using the opinions of an expert Muslim witness whose own ideology was clearly different to that of the authors in question, and hence his opinion was a difference of thought , not expertise ). This trial clearly shows that the next phase of the battle to create a compliant Islam is now being played out in British courts.
The books being judged and sold by Faraz inlcuded Milestones by Sayyid Qutb, and a number of writings by Sheikh Abdullah Azzam , Hassan al Banna and others. These were written in a different era, and for different conflict situations, yet judgements were made on them in Britain 2011. The prosecution case, the “expert” testimony and the Judges summing up, all point to the fact that it was not Faraz who was on trial but Qutb, Abdullah Azzam and the ideas and thoughts in the books; and whether or not they constituted legitimate Islam as defined by the states prosecution and “expert “. Having established that the books on trial represented an erroneous interpretation of Islam, Faraz as was bound to be found guilty. His crime was to be a publisher and bookseller of the books and hence to be associated with them, and by implication an adherent of the “erroneous “ideas and thoughts in the books now defined as “terrorist”. Therefore we have had the ludicrous situation where a British Court has been debating at length the legitimacy of the ideas of Syed Qutb, Abdullah Azzam, Hassan al Banna, Ibn Taymiyyah; and whether they had correctly interpreted verses of the Quran. And we have had the absurdity of a British Jury and Judge passing judgment on what is and isn’t legitimate Islamic thought and ideas.
The underlying conclusion appears to be that certain religious and political ideas are a threat to a secular British State and to be outlawed. It appears that the trial is history repeating itself. In 1964 when the first Arabic edition of Milestones was published in Cairo, its ideas were considered so dangerous that it was treated as a threat to national security. The nationalist and secularist Nasser banned the book, had it confiscated from libraries, bookstores and homes. Owners of the book were jailed, and every book was ordered to be burned by the military. Seyd Qutb himself, paid the ultimate price for publishing the book, he was hanged in 1966.
What made Milestones (Ma’alim fi’l-tareeq ) so “dangerous” was not a threat of violence but the ideas in it. It was a manifesto for Islamic Governance and for the implementation of Sharia in all aspects of life. Qutb had been the key ideologue and editor of the Muslim Brotherhood’s weekly newspaper Al-Ikhwan al-Muslimin. The Muslim Brotherhood, had initially supported Nasser and the Free Officers movement in overthrowing the monarchy, a slave to Britain. In return they mistakenly reached an understanding that Nasser would allow the formation of an Islamic Government. Nasser however, concluded that his secular nationalist ideology was incompatible with Islam and turned on the Brotherhood. So began a repressive campaign by the military against the Brotherhood and the Egyptian people, that was to last until this year. Today, the Muslim Brotherhood has again done a deal with a nationalist and secularist military in return for a promise of power whilst many Egyptians demand a revolution and overthrow of the system. Once again they hope they can introduce Islam via a nationalist /secularist ruling system. Only time will tell if they have made the same miscalculation as they did back then.
In the Arab and Muslim world the “Arab Spring” has bought to the fore discussion of the role of Sharia and the introduction of Islamic ideals of politics and governance. Whilst in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya and elsewhere it is clear that Islamic Governance will be the future, the British State appears to have adopted the role of Nasser and dictatorships in the Muslim world, in using the courts to effectively outlaw Milestones and eliminate “political Islam”. Today its Milestones, tomorrow the British courts could rule on the works of Hassan al Banna, Madudi, Khomeini and anyone else who talks of Islamic Government and Jihad.
What Nasser and those that followed him did not realise is that you can lock someone up or kill the individual, ban their books, but you cannot kill or prevent the rise of ideas. After Qutb’s death his ideas spread like wildfire throughout the Arab and Muslim World, and Islamic Movements. The books classed as tier 3 (terrorist) materials in yesterdays Faraz case have been confiscated by the State and will now be destroyed. The British Government seems also not to realise that you can destroy books but cannot kill ideas. The Islam and ideas that they are trying to de- legitimize are the future of the Muslim world and naturally Muslims in Britain will embrace them too. The Terrorism Laws will one day be history and stand as testimony to Britain’s role in attempting to prevent the rise of Islam in the Muslim world. In the Meantime Muslims in Britain will have to get used to Muslim political prisoners in their midst.
Jahangir Mohammed is the Director Centre for Muslim Affairs and adviser to Cageprisoners, and can be reached at cenmua@gmail.com
source : newcivilisation

US DOUBLE STANDARD: GADDAFI BAD, KARIMOV GOOD

Sunday, December 11th, 2011 | Posted by Admin

Uzbek President I. Karimov. Karimov's people terrorize citizens with random raids, murders and countless checkpoints where motorists are shaken down.
TASHKENT, December 7 — The US shows its hypocrisy by accusing “tyrants” of human rights abuses while not owning up to supporting dictators. “After four decades of brutal dictatorship and eight months of deadly conflict, the Libyan people can now celebrate their freedom and the beginning of a new era of promise,” President Obama said at the end of October.
The capture and death of Muammar Gaddafi prompted him and other US officials to congratulate the Libyan people on their liberation from a despot accused of terrible violations of human rights, including the 1996 massacre of more than 1200 prison inmates.
The kudos was as much for the US itself as Libya’s victorious Transitional National Council. After all, the United States played a decisive role in Gaddafi’s death. First President Obama put together the NATO coalition that served as the Benghazi-based rebels’ loaned air force. When the bombing campaign was announced in February, Gaddafi’s suppression of the human rights of protesting rebels was front and centre: “The United States also strongly supports the universal rights of the Libyan people,” Obama said at that time. “That includes the rights of peaceful assembly, free speech, and the ability of the Libyan people to determine their own destiny. These are human rights. They are not negotiable. They must be respected in every country. And they cannot be denied through violence or suppression.” (No word on how police firing rubber bullets at unarmed, peaceful protesters at the Occupy movement in Oakland, California, fits into that.)

Tortured Uzbek Political Prisoner- Apparently a regular sight in Uzbekistan against political activists for Islam
And in the end, it was reportedly a Hellfire missile fired by a Predator drone plane controlled by the CIA – in conjunction with an attack by a French fighter jet – that destroyed the convoy of cars Gaddafi and his entourage used to try to escape the siege of Sirte, driving him into the famous drainage pipe and into the hands of his tormentors and executioners. US officials and media reports were right about Gaddafi’s human rights record: It was atrocious. They cautioned the incoming TNC to make human rights a priority: “The Libyan authorities should also continue living up to their commitments to respect human rights, begin a national reconciliation process, secure weapons and dangerous materials, and bring together armed groups under a unified civilian leadership,” Obama said. (No word on how Gaddafi’s execution fits in to that.) Hypocrisy reigns Yet, in the very same week, the United States was cozying up to another long-time dictator – one whose style, brutal treatment of prisoners, and notorious massacre of political dissidents is highly reminiscent of the deposed Libyan tyrant.
Like a business that maintains two sets of records, one for the tax inspector and the other containing the truth, the United States has two different foreign policies. Its constitution, laws and treaty obligations prohibit torture, assassinations, and holding prisoners without trial. In reality there are secret prisons such as Guantánamo. Similarly, there are two sets of ethical standards in America’s dealing with other countries. Enemies are held to the strictest standards. Allies get a pass. This double standard is the number-one cause of anti-Americanism in the world.
Hypocrisy reigns
In yet another display that exposes US foreign policy on human rights as hypocritical and self-serving, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton traveled to Uzbekistan to establish closer ties with the Central Asian republic’s president-for-life, Islam Karimov. Even as her State Department was ballyhooing the bloody conclusion of Gaddafi’s 42-year reign as a victory for freedom and decency, the former First Lady was engaged in the cynical Cold War-style of one of the worst human rights abusers in the world.
In the human rights brief on Karimov, one major highlight is Central Asia’s Tiananmen Square, the 2005 massacre of between 750 and 1250 peaceful demonstrators at Andijan, a southern town along the restive border with Kyrgyzstan, near the ancient Ferghana Valley. Karimov personally ordered Uzbek militia, Interior Ministry troops and regular army units to surround a square and gun down the protesters, then travelled to the site in order to witness the carnage. A few dozen people managed to escape, scrambling across a border crossing. Shocked Kyrgyz sentries, who had a view of the killing orgy, admitted the refugees. Uzbek troops chased the escapees into Kyrgyzstan, dragged them back and executed them on the Uzbek side of the bridge.
Prior to Andijan, the Clinton and Bush Administrations had a cozy relationship with Karimov, overlooking such untidy matters as the Uzbek leader’s habit of boiling political dissidents to death (more on that later), in light of the perceived high strategic value of his country. Uzbekistan has huge energy reserves and a unique placement. (Uzbekistan is the only state in Central Asia that borders all the others. It also borders Afghanistan. In 1979, the Soviets invaded Afghanistan via the Uzbek town of Termiz.) Tashkent is the region’s biggest city, complete with its own metro system, European-standard international airport and daily nonstop flights to New York-infrastructure that became invaluable after America’s 2001 invasion of Afghanistan. US and NATO paid Karimov for the right to build airbases.
After Andijan, the US gave into pressure by international human rights organisations to pull back. Covert aid continued, however. The airbases, including one known as Karshi-Khanabad (K2) were technically “closed” (though the personnel and activities continued). In late 2005 the US imposed low-grade trade sanctions.
That’s all in the past now. In September 2011 Secretary Clinton lifted the sanctions, saying that the Karimov regime was “showing signs of improving its human rights record and expanding political freedoms”. As a goodwill gesture in advance of Clinton’s trip last week, Uzbek authorities released Norboi Kholjigitov, a human rights advocate jailed since 2005 on charges widely believed to have been politically motivated. Kholjigitov is said to be near death after years of abuse in prison.
One step forward, two steps back. One week before Clinton’s arrival an Uzbek court found BBC journalist Urunboy Usmonov guilty of conspiring with Hizb ut Tahrir, an Islamist group that serves as an all-purpose national bugaboo (along with the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan, a Tajik-based organisation with alleged links to the Afghan Taliban). The specific charge: “Failing to report on Hizb’s activities.” Usmonov received a three-year suspended sentence. He claimed to have been beaten and tortured in prison. The same day, newspaper reporter Makhmadyusuf Ismoilov, in jail since late last year for “insult and defamation” of Karimov, was subjected to a large fine and banned from journalism. In Tashkent, a US State Department official described Karimov’s most outrageous excesses as “a thing of the past”. In this case, the past isn’t merely prologue – it’s ongoing.
According to a 2010 report by Human Rights Watch:
“New research by Human Rights Watch reveals that the Uzbek government continues to intimidate and harass the families of Andijan survivors who have sought refuge abroad. The police regularly summon them for questioning, subject them to constant surveillance, and threaten to bring criminal charges against them or confiscate their homes. School officials humiliate refugees’ children. Five years after the massacre, on May 13, 2005, people suspected of having participated in or witnessed the massacre are still being detained, beaten, and threatened. The sentencing on April 30 of Diloram Abdukodirova, an Andijan refugee who returned to Uzbekistan in January, to ten years and two months in prison, shows the lengths to which the government will go to persecute anyone it perceives as linked to the Andijan events.” These Soviet-style persections did not prevent President Obama from personally calling Karimov last month on the
occasion of Uzbekistan’s 20th year of independence.
Karimov is one of three Central Asian strongmen (along with Emomali Rahmon of Tajikistan and Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan) who have retained absolute power since independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. He presides over an autocracy whose level of corruption and dysfunction is staggering – even by dismal regional standards. All media is state-controlled. Opposition parties are banned. With substantial reserves from the Caspian Sea oil bonanza and by some measures the world’s largest reserves of natural gas, Uzbekistan has the means to provide a comfortable living for all of its citizens. However, a tiny coterie of businessmen connected to the regime diverts nearly all of the proceeds of the nation’s patrimony to numbered accounts overseas, leaving most of the population unemployed and in abject poverty.
Local militia (military police) are unpaid. So they pay themselves. They terrorize citizens with random raids, murders and countless checkpoints where motorists are shaken down. While arriving to visit a friend in the Uzbek capital of Tashkent a couple of years ago, I observed a dead body on the curb of the road in front of his apartment building. The man had been struck and killed by a hit-and-run driver several days earlier. His body was in a state of advanced decomposition in the 120-degree heat, but no one had called the cops. No one dared.
New strategy
As noted above, there are many reasons for the US to coddle the Uzbek dictator. But President Obama is especially focused on one. “The object of Obama’s interest is the ‘Northern Distribution Network, the Central Asian roads over which diesel and other US military supplies now increasingly travel [into Afghanistan],” writes Russell Zanca in Foreign Policy. “The administration is correct in thinking that NDN, as it is known for short, will run more smoothly through secular Uzbekistan than supplies have moved through Pakistan. But a question for practitioners of realpolitik is why the US considers it necessary to validate the unpopular Uzbek leadership now that it is politically expedient to do so.” It also prompts another question. The US is scheduled to withdraw from Afghanistan by 2014. If they’re really leaving, why do they care so much about the NCN? Is a soon-to-be abandoned supply route worth dealing with a man like Karimov?
The dichotomous US approaches to Gaddafi and Karimov – kill one, pay millions to the other – were pointed out in an eerily-prescient Uznews.net piece published on February 22, 2011, at the commencement of the NATO air campaign in Libya. “The regime of Muammar Gaddafi in Libya is using the whole power of its armed forces, including artillery, air forces and foreign mercenaries, to crush the ongoing protests in the country; Uzbek President Islam Karimov used similar tactics in Andijan in 2005,” reported Uznews. “The developments in Libya are reminiscent of the government crushing of a rally in Andijan on 13 May 2005. Gaddafi, like Islam Karimov, is not allowing foreign journalists into the country, blocking the internet and telecommunications and calling protesters ‘terrorists’. He appeared on national television yesterday and called foreign news channels ‘dogs’. Like Karimov, he is not considering negotiations as an option and is not willing to fulfill even parts of demands of protesters; he is offering a bloodbath instead … Like in Libya now, according to Uzbek opposition leaders, Uzbek authorities also hired foreign mercenaries: one of them was Tajik Colonel Makhmud Khudoyberganov, who was living in Uzbekistan after a failed coup d’état in Tajikistan in 1998.” Surely Secretary Clinton read her own State Department’s recent report on Uzbekistan, which accuses the Karimov regime of “Instances of torture and mistreatment of detainees by security forces; incommunicado and prolonged
detention; arbitrary arrest and detention; denial of due process and fair trial; restrictions on freedom of speech, press, assembly, and association; governmental control of civil society activity; restrictions on religious freedom including harassment and imprisonment of religious minority group members; and government-compelled forced labour in cotton harvesting.”
“Amnesty International and other groups have documented specific cases. In the summer of 2002, Amnesty International reported, Fatima Mukhadirova, a 62-year-old Tashkent shopkeeper, was sentenced to six years of hard labour after denouncing the government for the death of her son, Muzafar Avozov, in a Tashkent prison,” says a May 1, 2005 report in The New York Times. “An independent examination of photographs of the body, conducted by the University of Glasgow, showed that Mr Avozov died after being immersed in boiling water, human rights groups reported. The examination said his head had been beaten and his fingernails removed.” According to Uzbeks, live boiling was a common practice.
Roadblocks ahead
“The relationship between the US and Uzbekistan is problematic,” the 2005 Times article quoted a Human Rights Watch official as saying. “It can be useful that the US is powerful enough to push for certain concessions. That being said, the US should not be saying that Karimov is a partner, is an ally, is a friend. The US should send the message that Uzbekistan won’t be considered to be a good ally of the United States unless it respects human rights at home.” During Clinton’s trip to Tashkent last week, she defended the US policy of engagement. “I can assure you that we have raised all of the human rights issues in Uzbekistan and elsewhere,” she said in Dushanbe, Tajikistan, another country
with a poor human rights record. “But we have also learned over the years that after a while, after you’ve made your strong objections, if you have no contact, you have no influence.” Clinton didn’t say why contact and influence were good for Karimov’s Uzbekistan, but not Gaddafi’s Libya. Ted Rall is an American political cartoonist, columnist and author. His most recent book is The Anti-American Manifesto.

Source: AlJazeera English

Comment on the Egyptian Elections by Hizb ut-Tahrir, Wilayah of Egypt

Friday, December 9th, 2011 | Posted by Noor
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
This is a clear statement to the people
The forthcoming parliamentary elections are not permitted to become an act of devotion for the formation of the civil secular democratic state
This is because the Islamic Khilafah is the method to make Islam firm within a system of ruling and going through or coming out of the system of parliamentary representation is not the method, and because the establishment of this Islamic Khilafah and the work involved to establish it when it is absent are two Islamic obligations which the pure Sharee’ah has commanded of which there is no difference of opinion in this regard, and because this establishment and method have not been left by Islam without a clear and transparent explanation in the Qur’aan and the Sunnah, in addition to the Seerah of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, and also as this is the method that is obligatory to follow as taken from this source and also due to the principle: “Whatever does not fulfil a Waajib except with it is in itself a waajib.”
And this is where this method is based upon an intellectual and political struggle upon the basis of Islam and Islam alone as an Aqeedah, Sharee’ah and methodology, without hesitation, appeasement or adjustment and this is so that Islam appears to the people clearly and in an obvious manner manifesting its ability to regulate their lives and to face their enemies. And that it is Fard upon them to carry the Da’wah, its message, guidance and mercy to the entire world through invitation and jihad. And this is so the Muslims can stand in front of Allah Subhaanahu having fulfilled their covenant and conveyed the message as witnesses to the whole of mankind:
وكَذَلِكَ جَعَلْنَاكُمْ أُمَّةً وَسَطًا لِّتَكُونُواْ شُهَدَاء عَلَى النَّاسِ وَيَكُونَ الرَّسُولُ عَلَيْكُمْ شَهِيدًا
“And in this way we have made you witnesses upon mankind and the Messenger is a witness upon you.”
Despite all of this the disbelieving colonising west has managed to play around with the minds of the Muslims making them forget the main mission and the secret to their strength and they are still continuing their attempt to perfect their political and cultural grip over the Muslim lands after the Islamic Ummah awoke and began working to remove its agents from amongst the traitors and tyrants one after the other. And they are still attempting to spread the idea of its ‘Civil, democratic, liberal and secular’ state and this meaning has even been combined with this strange contradictory statement: ‘Civil state with a reference to Islam’!!! So how is it possible that Liberalism, democracy and secularism can be brought together with the Islamic Aqeedah and its Sharee’ah?! And what is the real reason for this strange mix and ugly concession?! Are we shy from demanding the Islamic State which the Shar’a has defined as the Khilafah State and obliged the work for its establishment?! A state that is unique in manner and system from those of the east and west and neither history nor man has known an equal to it in terms of civilisation and progress.
As a consequence of their determined marketing of the ‘Civil democratic state’ most of those who are working for Islam whether with a good or sinister intention have accepted the ‘civil secular democratic state’ and as such have engaged in the democratic game with its elections and parliaments with a strict compliance to the degree of adapting Islam and its rules and systems so as to comply with democracy and liberalism! We have begun to hear about ‘Supra constitutional principles’ and specific procedures for choosing a committee for the preparation of the constitution, so what is behind this strange determination and who benefits from it?! The justification for these two proposals is so that the constitution is protected from not being decided by a certain group to the exclusion of others in a situation where this group was to win a majority in the upcoming parliament! Is this how the Muslim people of Egypt Al-Kinaanah have become a division or group within Egypt similar to other than them who do not represent the majority of Egypt?
O Muslims, O People of Egypt Al-Kinaanah, O candidates in the elections and voters:
Verily Hizb-ut-Tahrir are sincere in advising you, because the Deen is Naseehah (sincerity and advice).
He صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “The Deen is sincerity.” We asked: “To whom?” He صلى الله عليه وسلم replied: “To Allah, His book, His Messenger, to the leaders of the Muslims and the general masses” related by Muslim.
The foremost actions of the Parliament or Peoples assembly are making legislation, providing confidence and accounting.
As far as making legislation is concerned then this belongs to Allah سبحانه وتعالى and to His Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم as a Wahi (revelation) from Allah Al-’Azeez Al-Hakeem:
إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلَّا لِلَّه
“The Rule is for none but Allah.”

فَلَا وَرَبِّكَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ حَتَّى يُحَكِّمُوكَ فِيمَا شَجَرَ بَيْنَهُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَجِدُوا فِي أَنْفُسِهِمْ حَرَجًا مِمَّا قَضَيْتَ وَيُسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا
“And no by your Lord, they will not believe until they make you judge between them in what they dispute and then find no resistance in themselves (to the command) and submit with complete submission.”
And the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم said in regards to the statement of Allah سبحانه وتعالى:
اتَّخَذُوا أَحْبَارَهُمْ وَرُهْبَانَهُمْ أَرْبَابًا مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ
“They take their priests and Rabbis as idols other than Allah.”
The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “They did not used to worship them but rather they would make Halal what they made Halal and make Haram what they would make Haram” related by At-Tirmidhi .
This highlights the greatness of the sin of legislating, making things Halal and Haram from other than the book of Allah Subhaanahu or the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم.
In relation to the giving of confidence then this relates to supporting and showing contentment to the ruler, and this does not acceptable except with the ruler who rules by what Allah has revealed and does not befriend the enemies of Allah. If he was content with the rule by other than what Allah revealed then he would be sinful and this is due to many ‘Aayaat that prohibit ruling by other than Islam:
وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ
“And whosoever rules by other than what Allah has revealed is an oppressor.”
In addition to the prohibition to incline towards oppressors and those who support their oppression:
وَلَا تَرْكَنُوا إِلَى الَّذِينَ ظَلَمُوا فَتَمَسَّكُمُ النَّارُ وَمَا لَكُمْ مِنْ دُونِ اللَّهِ مِنْ أَوْلِيَاءَ ثُمَّ لَا تُنْصَرُونَ
“And incline not toward those who do wrong, lest the Fire should touch you, and you have no protectors other than Allah, nor you would then be helped.“
Therefore it is prohibited to take part in the acts of making legislation and the giving of confidence unless it is within a state that rules by Islam and where all of its rules are taken from Islam.
As for accounting then this is an obligation from amongst the greatest acts in Islam as commanding the good and forbidding the wrong are of the most noble descriptions which this Ummah has been characterised with:
كُنْتُمْ خَيْرَ أُمَّةٍ أُخْرِجَتْ لِلنَّاسِ تَأْمُرُونَ بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَتَنْهَوْنَ عَنِ الْمُنْكَرِ
“You are the best Ummah raised up from mankind, you command what is good, you forbid what is wrong and you believe in Allah.”
And the true word in the face of the tyrant ruler is the greatest Jihad:
“The best Jihad is the just word to the tyrant ruler” related by Abu Daawood.
Therefore built upon this understanding it is obligatory upon those standing in the elections to declare these points in their electoral campaigns and programmes whilst they are seeking votes, declaring with absolute clarity without equivocation or play of words that they will not participate in the legislative process unless it is extracted from the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Messenger and that they will not give the confidence except to a ruler who rules by Islam. And that they will expend their efforts to account the ruler upon the lack of his ruling by Islam and for their allegiance to the disbelieving colonising west and in particular its leader America.
As for those who are electing then it is not permissible for them to vote for other than the candidates who have conducted their election campaigns upon this basis whoever the candidate may be. This is because the election is an act of delegacy and it is not permitted to delegate unless the subject of delegation is valid according to the Sharee’ah. So whoever’s election programme is in accordance to the Sharee’ah principles described above then is its permitted to elect him and in contrast if it is not in line with these principles then it is not allowed to elect him, and Allah takes care of the righteous.
O Muslims, O people of Egypt:
Hizb-ut-Tahrir whilst it is working to return Islam to the battlefield of life and establish it firmly in existence for the second time, and this is only by working to establish the Khilafah state upon the path of the prophethood and by the methodology of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم through the following of his Sunnah, whilst engaging in this it invites you to work with it so that you are freed from blame and excused in front of Allah سبحانه وتعالى and this is especially after He سبحانه وتعالى granted you by the revolution the removal of the tyrant who oppressed you for so many years and fought your Islam and made you slaves to America and the Zionists.
And Hizb-ut-Tahrir reminds you of the promise of Allah سبحانه وتعالى:
وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مِنكُمْ وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ لَيَسْتَخْلِفَنَّهُم فِي الأَرْضِ كَمَا اسْتَخْلَفَ الَّذِينَ مِن قَبْلِهِمْ وَلَيُمَكِّنَنَّ لَهُمْ دِينَهُمُ الَّذِي ارْتَضَى لَهُمْ وَلَيُبَدِّلَنَّهُم مِّن بَعْدِ خَوْفِهِمْ أَمْنًا يَعْبُدُونَنِي لا يُشْرِكُونَ بِي شَيْئًا وَمَن كَفَرَ بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ
“Allah has promised those among you who believe and do righteous good deeds, that He will certainly grant them succession to (the present rulers) in the land, as He granted it to those before them, and that He will grant them the authority to practise their religion which He has chosen for them (i.e. Islam). And He will surely give them in exchange a safe security after their fear (provided) they (believers) worship Me and do not associate anything (in worship) with Me. But whoever disbelieves after this, they are the Fasiqun (rebellious, disobedient to Allah).”
And we remind you of the glad tidings of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم when he said in the Saheeh Hadeeth:
“And then there will be the Khilafah upon the path of the Prophethood”
Therefore do not place the Dunya over your Deen and do not accept except the complete and comprehensive establishment of Islam which is neither missing anything or glossed over, so take grasp of the book of Allah with power.
يا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ اسْتَجِيبُواْ لِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُولِ إِذَا دَعَاكُم لِمَا يُحْيِيكُمْ وَاعْلَمُواْ أَنَّ اللَّهَ يَحُولُ بَيْنَ الْمَرْءِ وَقَلْبِهِ وَأَنَّهُ إِلَيْهِ تُحْشَرُونَ
“O you who believe! Answer Allah (by obeying Him) and (His) Messenger when he calls you to that which will give you life, and know that Allah comes in between a person and his heart (i.e. He prevents an evil person to decide anything). And verily to Him you shall (all) be gathered.”
Hizb ut-Tahrir, Wilayah of Egypt
1st of Muharram 1433
26/11/2011
The above is a draft translation from Arabic.

Source : hizb-america.org

Refleksi Dunia Islam 2011: Menanti Gelombang ke-5 Dunia Islam, Tegaknya Khilafah

Posted by تان سليمانAnalisis, GM, Internasional 6:26 AM

oleh: Farid Wadjdi Ketua Lajnah Siyasiyah Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia
Penjajahan Barat di Dunia Islam
Tahun 2011 telah berlalu. Secara umum tidak banyak perubahan mendasar yang terjadi di dunia Islam. Negeri-negeri Islam masih menjadi objek imperialisme negara-negara Kapitalisme dunia. Irak, Afghanistan, dan Pakistan masih diduduki. Pangkalan militer Amerika tersebar di antero dunia Islam terutama di Timur Tengah. Cerminan pendudukan Amerika yang disetujui para bonekanya.
Meskipun Amerika menarik pasukannya dari Irak pada Desember ini, negara itu malah memperkuat posisinya di negara-negara Timur Tengah. Ketua Gabungan Kepala Staf mengatakan kepada anggota Kongres bahwa Amerika Serikat harus memperkuat kehadiran militernya di Kuwait untuk melawan pengaruh Iran yang terus tumbuh di Irak dan kawasan Teluk. Amerika Serikat, yang memiliki 29 ribu tentara di Kuwait, 7 ribu di Bahrain dan Qatar, 3 ribu di UAE, dan 258 militer di Arab Saudi, menginginkan Kuwait untuk mengakomodasi tentaranya yang ditarik dari Irak, yang jumlahnya diperkirakan 24 ribu tentara
Sementara itu, Menteri Pertahanan AS, Leon mengatakan Kamis (13/10) kepada para anggota parlemen bahwa sepuluh ribu pasukan AS akan ditarik dari Afghanistan sebelum akhir tahun ini seperti yang direncanakan, namun 23 ribu orang tentara yang dikirim oleh Barack Obama ke Afghanistan akan tetap menduduki wilayah itu sampai musim panas 2012.
Di bidang ekonomi, negeri Islam yang kaya menjadi obyek eksploitasi perusahan-perusahan negara Imperialis dari Maroko hingga Maruke. Sementara rakyat dunia Islam , sebagian besar hidup miskin.
Amerika juga masih menggunakan rezim-rezim represif yang menjadi bonekanya untuk menekan perjuangan syariah dan Khilafah . Seperti yang terjadi di Uzbekista, Tajikistan, Kazhastan, Bangladesh, dan Pakistan.
Situs uznews.net mempublikasikan sebuah laporan dengan judul: “Penyiksaan Terus Menyertai Para Tahanan Yang Dituduh Melakukan Kejahatan Keagamaan“. Para aktivis hak asasi manusia melaporkan kasus-kasus baru, seperti penyiksaan, dan pemalsuan tuduhan-tuduhan baru di penjara-penjara Uzbekistan terhadap orang-orang dipenjara karena alasan keagamaan dan orang-orang yang masa hukumannya hampir habis. Ketua Kelompok Inisiatif Independen Hak Asasi Manusia Uzbekistan (IGNPU), Surat Ikramov mengangkat bahwa kasus baru ini menimpa dua orang bersaudara dituduh menjadi anggota Hizbut Tahrir.
Rezim Kazahstan pada tanggal 22/9/2011 mengeluarkan undang-undang yang berisi larangan melakukan shalat di lembaga-lembaga dan departemen-departemen pemerintah. Termasuk melarang melakukan syiar Islam apapun di tempat-tempat milik pemerintah ini. Berdasarkan undang-undang ini semua masjid dan tempat-tempat pelaksaan shalat di semua tempat milik pemerintah tersebut harus ditutup.
Adapun di Bangladesh, sebagaimana dilaporkan situs islamtoday.net (18/1/2011) dengan mengutip Surat kabar The Guardian terungkap keterlibatan intelijen Inggris pada pusat-pusat penyiksaan di Bangladesh, yang diadopsi oleh pemerintah untuk Partai Buruh Inggris. Menurut laporan yang dibuat oleh Jacqui Smith, mantan Menteri Dalam Negeri Inggris, bahwa ia sangat khawatir tentang penggunaan penyiksaan di Bangladesh oleh badan-badan intelijen Inggris. Yang menjadi objek penyiksaan di Bangladesh disamping lawan politik penguasa , adalah aktifis Islam Hizbut Tahrir yang memperjuangkan tegaknya syariah Islam.
Nasib Muslim Minoritas
Sementara itu monoritas muslim di daerah-daerah yang mayoritas dikuasai oleh orang-orang kafir nasibnya sangat menyedihkan. Pembantaian, diskriminasi, pelecehan, merupakan perkara yang berulang yang dialami kaum muslimin Rusia, muslim Pattani di Thailand (rezim Budha), muslim di India ,Khasmir, dan Srilanka (rezim Hindu), muslim di Moro (Philipina), muslim di Xianjiang (China Selatan).
Menurut Situs islamtoday.net (12/8/2011) berdasarkan laporan Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life mengungkap bahwa kaum Muslim dilecehkan di 117 negara, termasuk negara-negara Eropa yang melarang cadar (niqâb) dan adzan. Cina adalah negara yang paling memaksakan pembatasan kebebasan beragama dan pelaksanaan ritual-ritual keagamaan, dan kemudian disusul Prancis yang menempati urutan ketiga karena melarang cadar (niqâb).
Muslim Uighur dihalangi untuk menunaikan ibadah haji. “Kita tidak bisa mendapatkan paspor,” kata Mehmet Ali, bukan nama sebenarnya, kepada surat kabar The Hindutimes.com, Senin (31/10).Mehmet mengatakan untuk berhaji, Muslim Uighur harus membayar 70 ribu Yuan. Bukan harga yang mereka persoalkan, namun kesulitan permohonan paspor yang menjadi masalah. Pemerintah Cina dengan sengaji mempersulit permohonan paspor untuk bisa menunaikan ibadah haji.
Situs almokhtsar.com,(23/11/2011) memberitakan penghancuran sebuah masjid di distrik Mullaitivu, di Provinsi Utara Sri Lanka oleh kaum ekstrimis Hindu, lalu dibangun sebuah pusat Hindu untuk meditasi dan tempat yoga. Padahal, kaum Muslim sudah tinggal di daerah ini sejak tahun 1965, dan jumlah keluarga Muslim ada 165 keluarga pada saat itu. Masjid Firdaus selama ini menjadi tempat kaum muslim menjalankan shalat lima waktu
Nasib Muslim di Negara Barat
Nasib yang sama dialami kaum muslim di negara-negara yang mengklaim demokratis dan menyunjung HAM. Islamophobia yang bercampur dengan Xenophobia meningkat di Eropa. Dukungan terhadap kelompok ultranasionalis pun meningkat.Mulai dari pelemparan masjid, penghinaan terhadap Rosulullah SAW, tindakan kriminalitas karena agama dan ras, hingga tindakan resmi negara seperti pelarangan menggunakan busana muslimah (niqab), pelarangan pembangunan masjid. Semua dilakukan atas nama keamanan negara dan kewajiban negara mempertahankan sukulerisme.
Menurut FBI bahwa kejahatan dan pelanggaran ringan terhadap umat Islam mengalami peningkatan sebesar 50% antara 2009 dan 2010. Situs berita islamtoday.net (15/11/2011) melaporkan statistik dari FBI jumlah total tindak kekerasan terhadap kaum muslim meningkat dari 107 pada 2009 menjadi 160 pada 2010, yakni naik 49%.
Badan Intelijen Pusat AS (CIA) memberikan bantuan kepada Kepolisian Distrik New York (NYPD) untuk memata-matai warga Amerika, khususnya Muslim. Sejak serangan 11 September, dengan bantuan CIA, NYPD mengirim petugas yang menyamar ke lingkungan minoritas sebagai bagian dari program pemetaan manusia, kantor berita AP melaporkan Rabu (24/8).
Majalah satir Prancis Charlie Hebdo mengangkat Nabi Muhammad sebagai “pemimpin redaksi” untuk terbitan terbaru guna menandai kemenangan Partai Islamis Ennahda di Tunisia. Majalah itu akan diganti nama menjadi Sharia Hebdo. ”Untuk merayakan kemenangan Partai Islamis Ennahda di Tunisia, Charlie Hebdo mengangkat Muhammad sebagai pemimpin redaksi dalam edisi mendatang,” kata majalah itu dalam satu pernyataan
Yang menarik , meskipun terjadi stigmanisasi yang massal dan sistematis terhadap ajaran Islam dan kaum muslimin. Jumlah pendudukan Eropa dan Amerika yang masuk Islam semakin bertambah. Terutama wanita eropa berpendidikan menengah keatas. Berdasarkan hasil penelitian lembaga penelitian Inggris “Faith Matters” menunjukkan bahwa angka warga Inggris yang memeluk sebenarnya mencapai 100 ribu, di mana setiap tahunnya ada 5000 orang baru yang memeluk Islam.
Padahal selama ini yang sering kali menjadi obyek penghinaan adalah syariah Islam yang berkaitan dengan wanita. Ajaran Islam yang bersumber dari Allah SWT, yang sesuai dengan fitrah , dan memuaskan akal manusiak karena dibangun atas dasar prinsip tauhid (keesaan Allah SWT) , mampu mengalahkan sterotif negatif yang berupaya dibangun untuk menjauh masyarakat dari Islam.
Syariah Islam yang komprehensif yang dipraktikkan meskipun secara parsial seperti ajaran kasih sayang dalam keluarga, integritas untuk menjaga kehormatan wanita dan keluarga, menghormati yang tua, hingga pakaian muslimah yang menjauhkan wanita dari sikap ekploitasi keji kapitalisme telah memikat banyak pihak untuk memeluk ajaran Islam.
Arah Perubahan Di Timur Tengah
Yang sangat membedakan dunia Islam adalah perkembangan di Timur Tengah. Berupa kejatuhan rezim-rezim represif. Di awali dari tumbangnya Zainal Abidin bin Ali di Tunisia, mundurnya Mubarak di Mesir, hingga berakhirnya rezim represif Gadzafi secara tragis di Libya. Saat ini beberapa wilayah masih terus bergolak seperti Yaman dan Suriah. Negara-negara yang selama ini dikenal benar-benar ‘under control’ penguasanya pun dipastikan akan turut bergoyang seperti Yordania, Saudi Arabia, Bahraian, dan lain-lain.
Gerakan rakyat yang bergerak penuh dengan keberanian mampu menumbangkan para rezim ini. Meskipun ditengah jalan , arah perubahan di bajak oleh Amerika Serikat dan sekutunya. Perubahan diarahkan ke demokratisasi. Tanpa malu AS pun mengklaim dirinya sebagai pahlawan yang mendorong perubahan di Timteng. Meskipun nyata-nyata , negara bengis ini yang selama ini mendukung rezim represif . Mereka kemudian berubah arah seakan memihak rakyat , setelah melihat para bonekanya tidak lagi bisa dimanfaatkan.
Namun Barat tahu, bahwa perubahan di Timur Tengah, tidak bisa dilepaskan dari faktor Islam yang telah menjadi cultur dan syu’ur kaum muslimin disana. Tidak mengherankan kalau mereka membungkus tawaran ide-ide kapitalisme dengan Islam. Muncullah istilah ad daulah al Madaniah (negara madani/civil society), al islam al mu’tadil ( Islam moderat) yang merupakan istilah racun (poison words). Sebab inti dari semua ide itu adalah penerimaan terhadap sistem sekulerisme ,demokrasi, dan pluralisme yang bertentangan dengan Islam. Yang mereka maksud dengan Islam moderat adalah Islam yang mengakomodasi pemikiran Barat seperti demokrasi , Ham dan Pluralisme. Dan yang menerima kebijakan penjajahan Barat atas nama keterbukaan dan sikap inklusif .
Pertanyaannya berhasilkah Barat dengan strategi ini ? Apakah akan membawa perubahan berarti bagi masyarakat Timur Tengah ? Jawabannya sangat jelas. Barat akankembali gagal. Dan tawaran ide-ide Barat yang berbungkus Islam pun akan gagal. Sebab semuanya tetap melestarikan penjajahan Barat yang menjadi pangkal persoalan utama di Timur Tengah dan negeri Islam. Melestarikan ideologi kapitalisme dan campur tangan asing.
Sayangnya, Partai-partai pemenang pemilu –berbasis Islam- justru terjebak pada tekanan Barat denganmengusung ide-ide Barat seperti demokrasi, liberalisme dan pluralisme. Partai an Nahdha yang menang di Tunisia berjanji tidak akan mengubah sekulerisme yang sudah menjadi asas negara di Tunisia. Sebagaimana dikutip dari situs http://english.alarabiya.net (5/11) Partai an Nahda yang akan memerintah di Tunisia pasca tumbangnya Zainal Abidin bin Ali akan fokus pada demokrasi, hak asasi manusia dan ekonomi pasar bebas dalam rencana perubahan konstitusi. Partai ini tidak akan menggunakan agama sebagai rujukan teks dan rancangan yang konstitusi yang akan disusun dan tetap menjamin Tunisia sebagai negara sekuler .
Beberapa partai yang berbasis Islam pun melakukan kerjasama rahasia dengan negara-negara Barat. Sebuah tindakan bunuh diri secara politis. Secara hukum syara’ juga adalah haram bekerjasama dengan negara-negara muhariban fi’lan yang telah membunuh jutaan kaum muslimin dan merampok kekayaan alam dunia Islam. Sekali lagi, Tanpa syariah dan Khilafah , akan pasti gagal, sekali lagi pasti gagal. Sebab hanya penegakan syariah Islam dan Khilafah yang bersumber dari Allah SWT lah yang akan menyelesaikan persoalan dunia Islam termasuk di Timur Tengah.
Hanya dengan menerapkan syariah Islam-lah secara total yang merupakan bukti keimanan kepada Allah SWT dan ketaqwaan , kemenangan akan diraih. Hal ini ditegaskan Allah SWT.Dalam Al Qur’an QS A'raf 96 Allah SWT berfirman : Seandainya penduduk suatu negeri beriman dan bertaqwa, sungguh kami akan membukakan bagi mereka pintu berkah dari langit dan bumi, tetapi mereka mendustakan(ayat-ayat Kami), maka kami menyiksa mereka karena perbuatan mereka.
Menanti Gelombang ke-5
Insya Allah umat pasti akan memasuki gelombang terakhir dari perjalanan umat Islam pasca runtuhnya Khilafah Islam tahun 1924. Sebutlah gelombang I merupakan era ketika pemerintah kolonial mengokohkan penjajahan negeri-negeri Islam secara langsung.
Mereka mengirim pasukan-pasukan kolonial ke negeri-negeri Islam. Namun mereka menyadari cara seperti ini pasti berujung kegagalan. Kaum muslim akan mudah bergerak, karena musuh mereka jelas di depan mata yaitu tentara-tentara asing. Disamping juga membutuhkan biaya yang mahal.
Gelombang ke-dua, adalah ketika penjajah Barat , memberikan kemerdekaan ‘semu’ kepada negeri-negeri Islam. Semu karena mereka belum benar-bener memberikan kemerdekaan. Pasukan kolonial sebagain besar menarik diri dari negeri Islam. Namun penjajahan tetap berlangsung melalui penguasa-penguasa boneka anak negeri Islam sendiri. Mereka pun memastikan yang berlaku bukanlah syariah Islam tapi sistem Barat.
Kemudian masuklah umat Islam pada gelombang ketiga. Saat, penguasa-penguasa boneka Barat bertindak represif terhadap rakyatnya sendiri. Karena mereka lebih mengutamakan melayani tuan-tuan imperialisme mereka. Untuk mendapat dukungan negara-negara Barat mereka mempersilahkan kekayaan alam negeri Islam dieksploitasi sementara rakyatnya miskin. Sementara setiap upaya perjuangan syariah Islam ditindak secara represif, karena hal ini akan mengancam kepentingan penjajahan.
Mereka menangkapi,menyiksa, membunuh, para pejuangan syariah Islam. Penguasa tipe seperti ini silih berganti di negeri Islam baik berupa raja atau pun presiden atau perdana menteri. Diantaranya adalah Suharto di Indonesia, Saddam Husain di Irak, Husni Mubarak di Mesir , Zainal Abidin bin Ali di Tunisia, termasuk Gadzdzafi di Libya. Rezim inipun tumbang.
Masuklah umat Islam pada gelombang keempat, dimana Barat terpaksa memberikan demokrasi yang mereka bungkus dengan istilah-istilah Islam. Mereka berusaha menyesatkan kaum muslim. Tapi hal ini juga akan gagal. Kondisi kegagalan ini diperkuat dengan semakin melemahnya negara-negara utama kapitalism dunia seperti Amerika Serikat dan Eropa. Krisis di negara Barat akan membuat mereka tidak bisa mendukung sepenuhnya penguasa-penguasa boneka baru yang menjadi andalan mereka.
Insya Allah, umat Islam akan masuk gelombang kelima. Dimana rakyat tidak lagi bisa ditipu. Mereka menyadari bahwa sistem apapun yang berasal dari ideologi Barat penjajah tidak akan memberikan kebaikan. Baik itu dibungkus dengan istilah Islam atau kata-kata penyesatan lain atau tidak. Umat pada gilirannya akan dengan tegas menolak demokrasi,pluralisme, liberalisme , dan ide-ide sesat lainnya.
Saat itulah , umat hanya akan percaya kepada Islam dengan syariah dan Khilafahnya. Umat tidak ada pilihan lain saat itu kecuali mendukung tegaknya syariah dan Khilafah. Umatpun akan memberikan kepercayaan mereka sepenuhnya kepada kelompok dakwah yang dengan serius selama ini memperjuangkan syariah dan Khilafah. Mereka tidak lagi percaya kepada ulama-ulama salatin yang menjadi kaki tangan penjajahan. Saat itulah tegaknya Khilafah sudah di depan. Insyallah!

|
Posted by تان سليمان on 6:26 AM. Filed under Analisis, GM, Internasional . You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0

Al-Shabaab says Kenya trying to ‘destroy Muslim people’

Khamis, 17 November 2011 15:40
2
altMOGADISHU: A spokesman for the Somali militant group Al-Shabaab said Tuesday that Kenya’s prime minister recently visited Israel to seek assistance in “destroying Muslim people and their religion.

”Sheikh Ali Mohammad Rage also warned Kenya that it still has a chance to withdraw its forces from neighboring Somalia because “things have not begun in earnest,” a likely reference to threats to carry out terror attacks in Nairobi, Kenya’s capital.

The office of Kenya’s prime minister said Monday that Kenya received the backing of Israeli leaders to help Kenya fight what it called “fundamentalist elements.” Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga visited Israel Sunday and Monday and sought help building the capacity of his country’s security forces.

Kenyan troops last month moved into Somalia to fight Al-Shabaab militants who in return promised reprisal terror attacks in Nairobi.

“We tell Kenya that things have not began in earnest yet and it is now a month on. You still have a chance to go back to your border,” Rage said.

Kenya said in a statement that Israeli President Shimon Peres and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu promised the East African nation help in securing its borders with Somalia.

A statement from the Odinga’s office said Netanyahu promised to help build “a coalition against fundamentalism,” bringing together the countries Kenya, Ethiopia, South Sudan and Tanzania. Kenya said that Peres said Israel was ready to make “everything available to Kenya” for internal security.

The Israeli government did not confirm any of statements made by Odinga’s office. Israel said the meetings were a continuation of the deepening of Israel’s relations with African countries.

Israeli security forces are among the best in the world in dealing with terror threats. But Al-Shabaab could view Kenya’s request to the Israelis as a provocation.

In 2002 militants bombed an Israeli-owned luxury hotel on Kenya’s coast near the city of Mombasa, killing 13 people. The militants also tried to shoot down an Israeli airliner at the same time.
November 16, By Abdi Guled

Source :  dailystar.com

 
 

Tunisia Islamist causes outcry with "caliphate" talk

Khamis, 17 November 2011 15:35
altTunis (Reuters) - Tunisia's secularists said their fears about an Islamist takeover were being realized on Tuesday after a senior official in the moderate Islamist party which won last month's election invoked the revival of a caliphate, or Islamic state.

Footage posted on the Internet showed Hamadi Jbeli, the secretary-general of the Ennahda party, telling supporters that "We are in the sixth caliphate, God willing."

The caliphate was a system for governing Islamic empires based on sharia law. There were five caliphates under different dynasties until Turkey's founder Mustafa Kemal Ataturk abolished the last of them early last century.

The remarks by Jbeli -- his party's nominee to be the next prime minister -- complicated Ennahda's efforts to form a coalition government, leading one prospective partner to say it was partly suspending negotiations in protest.

Ennahda has reassured Tunisians it will not impose a Muslim moral code on society and will respect women's equality, but the comments by Jbeli were interpreted by secularists as evidence the party has a hidden agenda.

Khemais Ksila, a member of the executive committee of the Ettakatol party, which is in coalition talks with Ennahda, said the party was suspending its participation in two of the three committees which were working on a coalition deal.

"We do not accept this statement," he said. "We thought we were going to build a second republic with our partner, not a sixth caliphate."

Ennahda won Tunisia's first democratic election after a revolution in January which ousted autocratic leader Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali and inspired the "Arab Spring" uprisings.

The party's actions are being scrutinized closely in Egypt and Libya, where Islamists who until now have been banned from political life are also gaining in influence after revolutions forced out entrenched rulers.

The Internet footage showed Jbeli, a political prisoner under Ben Ali, telling supporters: "My brothers, you are at a historic moment ... in a new cycle of civilization, God willing ... We are in sixth caliphate, God willing."

The use of the term caliphate in Arab politics is highly sensitive because it is a concept promoted by groups at the radical end of the Islamist spectrum, such as Hizb-ut-Tahrir, which is banned in many countries.

Moderate Islamist movements such as Ennahda or Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood generally steer clear of the term because of these associations.

"DELIBERATE DISTRACTION"

An Ennahda official said that the party's opponents were deliberately misreading what Jbeli had said.

"Jbeli was intending to speak about good governance and a break with corruption ... not the establishment of an Islamic regime," Faouzi Kamoun, the director of Jbeli's office, told Reuters.

"We are a civil party ... This is indisputable. But a section of the elite is seeking to distract people from the main issues," he said.

That did not reassure secularists, who have traditionally dominated Tunisia's ruling classes and now think their freedoms will be eroded by the Islamists.

Ennahda is the first Islamist party to win power in the Arab world since Hamas won an election in the Palestinian Territories in 2006.

"This speech is very dangerous," Said Issam Chebbi, a leading member of the secularist PDP party, told Reuters. "This is what we feared."

The secularist Maghreb newspaper mocked Jbeli with a photo montage on its front page of the Ennahda official dressed as a traditional Arab emir, or leader, and the headline: "Sixth Caliph Hamadi Jbeli."

An Internet user called Imen Kaouel posted a comment underneath an online video of Jbeli's speech saying: "We are starting to discover the true face of Ennahda."

Ennahda is led by Rachid Ghannouchi, an Islamic scholar who spent 22 years in exile in London. Western diplomats say his moderate approach is sincere, but that some in the party's rank and file may want to take it down a more hardline path.

In last month's election, Ennahda emerged the biggest party in an assembly which will choose a new caretaker government, rewrite the constitution and schedule fresh elections.

It did not have a majority, forcing it into coalition talks with two smaller, secularist parties, Ettakatol and the Congress for the Republic (CPR).

Ettakatol official Ksila said the suspension was in protest at Jbeli's comments, and also because the CPR was trying to railroad through the selection of its leader, Moncef Marzouki, as Tunisia's new president, a largely ceremonial post.

Ettakatol had indicated it wanted its leader, Mustafa Ben Jaafar, to get the job.

The row was the first public sign of friction between the would-be coalition partners.
By Tarek Amara (Editing by Christian Lowe and Diana Abdallah)

Source : reuters.com
 

Kemenangan An-Nahdha, Kebangkitan Politik Islam ?

Isnin, 21 November 2011 09:29

Sejak tumbangnya rejim Zainal Abidin bin Ali, parti an-Nahdha kini telah muncul sebagai pemenang dalam pilihanraya demokrasi yang pertama di negara Tunisia. Tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa kemenangan parti An-Nahdha ini menunjukkan bahawa betapa kuatnya arus pengaruh Islam dalam pergolakan kebangkitan di Timur Tengah (Arab Spring). Walaupun mereka tidak mengisytiharkan diri mereka sebagai parti agama, tetapi parti ini ditubuhkan oleh aktivis-aktivis Islam yang mengambil pemikiran gerakan Ikhwanul Muslimin. Kebangkitan politik Islam dalam 'Arab Spring'  ini juga dapat dilihat daripada keinginan Majlis Peralihan Kebangsaan (National Transitional Council) di Libya untuk menjadikan syariah Islam sebagai sumber hukum selepas kejatuhan rejim Ghadafi.

Kemunculan fenomena ini adalah disebabkan oleh kegagalan parti-parti nasional-sekuler yang selama ini berkuasa di sebahagian besar Timur Tengah. Di samping penindasan yang dikenakan, parti-parti sekular ini juga gagal dalam menyelesaikan masalah-masalah dasar masyarakat seperti kemiskinan dan juga buruknya perkhidmatan kesihatan dan pendidikan. Golongan elit ahli politik nasionalis sekular juga dianggap telah memberikan jalan dan ruang bagi pengukuhan campur tangan pihak asing terutamanya dalam bidang ekonomi di Timur Tengah. Hal ini diburukkan lagi dengan dukungan rejim terhadap penjajahan zionis Israel di Palestin, baik secara terbuka mahupun tertutup.

Para pemimpin Barat juga sedang berusaha keras bagi membendung arus politik Islam yang merugikan mereka. Pelbagai usaha dilakukan oleh Barat untuk membendung daripada munculnya negara Islam yang ingin menerapkan syariah Islam secara total di Timur Tengah. Adalah sesuatu yang tidak menghairankan jika Barat berupaya mengarahkan dan mengawal angin perubahan di Timur Tengah agar ia tetap dalam kerangka negara sekular yang demokratik. Beberapa istilah baru diwujudkan seperti Negara Madani, Islam Moderat dan lain-lain yang bertujuan untuk mengaburi niat Barat dalam memastikan agar sistem demokrasi-sekular terus diterapkan dalam negara.

Melalui pemerintahan sementara yang masih berada di bawah telunjuk dan kawalan Barat, pelbagai usaha pencegahan terhadap apa yang disebut sebagai 'kebangkitan Islam radikal' sedang giat dilakukan. Di Mesir sebagai contoh, pemerintahan tentera sementara telah melarang sebarang penggunaan simbol-simbol atau istilah-istilah Islam dalam pilihanraya Mesir akan datang. Perkara ini telah membuatkan gerakan Ikhwanul Muslimin mengambil jalan ‘aman’ dengan menghapuskan slogan “Islam adalah solusi” dan menggantikannya dengan slogan lain iaitu “Kami membawa kebaikan untuk Mesir”. Slogan yang sama telah digunakan oleh calon-calon Ikhwan dalam pilihanraya parlimen tahun lalu.

Sementara di Tunisia pula, parti-parti yang berdasarkan agama telah diharamkan sama sekali daripada terlibat dalam pilihanraya. Akibatnya, sikap pragmatik telah diambil oleh parti-parti yang berakarkan Islam ini. Parti An-Nahdha telah berulang-ulang kali mengisytiharkan bahawa mereka bukanlah parti agama, tidak akan menerapkan syariah Islam, mengiktiraf pluralisme dan bersahabat dengan Barat termasuk dalam bidang ekonomi. Setelah menang suara majoriti dalam pilihanraya Tunisia baru-baru ini, partai An-Nahdha telah berjanji untuk terus bekerja dalam membentuk masyarakat pluralistik, sekular dan menghormati hak asasi manusia. (http://www.maannews.net; 25/10)

Pemimpin An-Nahdha, Ghannouchi, juga pernah menyatakan sebelum ini bahawa jika an-Nahdha berjaya memerintah (berkuasa) di Tunisia, maka ia akan tetap terus mempertahankan Tunisia sebagai destinasi perlancongan, tidak akan mengharamkan arak atau mengharamkan wanita daripada memakai bikini di pantai. Parti An-Nahdha juga berjanji untuk tidak mengganggu kod undang-undang Tunisia yang menjadikan negara itu satu-satunya negara di dunia Arab yang melarang amalan poligami.

Rasyid Ghannouchi juga mengatakan bahawa gerakannya yang telah memenangi pilihanraya baru-baru ini tidak akan memaksa pemakaian menutup aurat terhadap wanita Tunisia, kerana semua usaha-usaha negara Arab untuk melaksanakannya terbukti gagal. Perkara yang sama seperti ini tidak mustahil akan berlaku di Mesir memandangkan satu-satunya gerakan politik yang terorganisasi di negara tersebut adalah gerakan Ikhwanul Muslimun.

Pengaruh Model Turki Sekuler
 
Sehingga ke hari ini, perkembangan seperti ini di Tunisia sudah tentu cukup menggembirakan Barat. Tawaran yang diberikan Barat melalui model negara Republik Sekular Turki di bawah rejim AKP nampaknya berjaya diwujudkan di Tunisia. Ia merupakan sebuah model negara yang dianggap sebagai mampu untuk memadukan antara Islam dan demokrasi, yang mana secara hakikatnya ia tetap sebagai sebuah pemerintahan sekular yang kuat.

Sejak awal-awal lagi, Amerika memang sentiasa berusaha untuk menguar-uarkan agar menjadikan model Republik Sekular Turki sebagai contoh dan arah ikutan kesemua negara-negara di Timur Tengah pasca pergolakan. Menteri Luar Amerika Syarikat, Hillary Clinton, melihat Turki sebagai negara ‘model’ dan ‘contoh’ bagi negara-negara di Timur Tengah dan Afrika Utara untuk mengikutinya. Presiden Obama juga pernah membuat kenyataan yang sama dalam sebuah akhbar Itali di mana ia mengatakan, “Kenyataannya adalah negara itu (Turki) adalah negara demokrasi dan negara yang mana sebahagian besar penganutnya adalah Islam, merupakan model yang sangat penting bagi negara-negara Muslim yang lain di wilayah itu (untuk mencontohinya).”

Akhbar The New York Times baru-baru ini mengatakan bahawa Perdana Menteri Turki, Recep Tayyip Erdogan adalah standard rujukan yang baru bagi pemimpin-pemimpin Islam. Erdogan menjanjikan Islam konservatif yang selari dengan kebebasan individu serta tetap terus berpegang kepada budaya konservatif, tetapi dengan polisi ekonomi yang liberal dan menjadi mercu tanda kebangaan bagi sebuah Timur Tengah Baru.

Adalah sesuatu yang cukup meragukan bagaimana model Republik Sekular Turki ini boleh menjadi model terbaik bagi negara-negara di Timur Tengah. Memang terdapat beberapa faktor yang dapat merealisasikan kejayaan model Republik Turki Sekular ini di Timur Tengah. Namun persoalannya, sejauh manakah model sekular ini mampu untuk menyelesaikan masalah sebenar di Tunisia dan kawasan-kawasan Timur Tengah yang lain? Tidak dapat dinafikan bahawa masalah kemiskinan, buruknya perkhidmatan kesihatan, pengangkutan, pendidikan dan tahap pengangguran yang tinggi menjadi antara pendorong kepada bangkitnya anak-anak muda di Tunisia dan Mesir untuk melawan rejim yang berkuasa sebelum ini. Sehingga ke saat ini, parti An-Nahdha masih belum mempunyai konsep dan halatuju yang jelas dalam menyelesaikan masalah-masalah ini.

Jika kita merujuk kepada model ekonomi Republik Turki Sekular yang berasaskan ekonomi liberal itu, terdapat terlalu banyak persoalan yang timbul. Turki di bawah teraju rejim parti AK memang mengalami pertumbuhan ekonomi yang cukup signifikan di mana dilaporkan bahawa pertumbuhan ekonomi negara tersebut mencapai 8.9 peratus pada tahun 2010. Statistik peningkatan atau pertumbuhan yang tinggi itu langsung tidak menjamin atau menunjukkan bahawa setiap individu dalam masyarakat negara itu hidup dengan sejahtera. Ini adalah kerana, kekayaan boleh menimbun pada segolongan manusia sahaja di dalam negara.

Sepertimana negara-negara sekular yang lain, Turki juga menghadapi masalah yang sama iaitu terdapat jurang yang terlampau jauh antara golongan yang kaya dan yang miskin. Meskipun terdapat pertumbuhan ekonomi yang tinggi, angka kemiskinan di Turki pada 2009 meningkat dengan mendadak jika dibandingkan dengan tahun sebelumnya. Menurut laporan terbaru yang dikeluarkan oleh Institut Statistik Turki (TurkStat), peratusan rakyat Turki yang hidup di bawah garis kemiskinan meningkat daripada 17.79 peratus pada tahun 2008 kepada 18.08 peratus atau sebanyak 12.75 juta orang pada tahun 2009.

Pertumbuhan ekonomi Turki sekali-kali tidak dapat terlepas daripada program liberalisasi ekonomi sepertimana yang dicanangkan oleh Erdogan. Akibatnya, ekonomi Turki sangat bergantung kepada sistem ekonomi kapitalisme global dunia yang sangat rapuh. Jika Amerika dan Eropah sebagai negara pelopor kepitalisme pun boleh bergoncang dan bergoyah, apatah lagi negara Turki sebagai pengikut mereka. Segala-galanya hanya menunggu masa sahaja.

Masalah pokok di Timur Tengah dan di negeri-negeri kaum Muslimin yang lain tidak lain adalah  disebabkan oleh penerapan sistem kapitalisme liberal di negara masing-masing yang mana para penguasa boneka ini dijaga dan dipelihara dengan begitu baik oleh Barat. Hasilnya, Timur Tengah Baru yang bertunjuangkam sekularisme ini sekali-kali tidak akan dapat menyelesaikan masalah-masalah mereka, malah sebaliknya ia akan mengukuhkan lagi polisi kapitalisme Barat di samping memelihara campur tangan imperialisme kuasa asing. Di samping itu, sikap permusuhan dan penindasan akan tetap terus dikenakan terhadap aktivis-aktivis Islam yang menginginkan agar tertegaknya syariah Islam secara kaffah.

Model Negara Republik Sekular Turki ini pasti akan menemui kegagalan di Timur Tengah dan revolusi kebangkitan rakyat kali kedua mungkin akan berlaku. Apabila sistem demokrasi dan liberalisme telah terbukti gagal, rakyat di Timur Tengah akan hanya mempunyai satu harapan dan satu pilihan sahaja pada waktu itu, yakni negara Khilafah Islamiyyah. Negara inilah yang akan menerapkan syariah Islam secara menyeluruh dan menyelesaikan segala permasalahan manusia. Setelah perkara ini berlaku, ia bukan sahaja akan merubah arus perdana wilayah Timur Tengah, tetapi juga di peringkat antarabangsa. Majlis Perisikan Kebangsaan Amerika (NIC) pernah meramalkan bahawa Khilafah akan tertegak menjelang tahun 2020, namun bagi kalangan para pejuang Islam, mereka yakin bahawa janji Allah dan RasulNya untuk tertegaknya Khilafah buat kali yang kedua adalah terlalu hampir, dengan izin Allah SWT.

Call for 'sixth caliphate' alarms Tunisian liberals

Sabtu, 19 November 2011 16:21

The Islamist politician likely to become Tunisia's first democratically elected prime minister has alarmed liberals and secularists by claiming the arrival of the "sixth caliphate," a controversial term for a Muslim empire.
l
Hamadi Jebeli, secretarygeneral of Ennahda, the moderate Islamist party which romped to victory in last month's elections, told a rally in the city of Sousse: "My brothers, you are at a historic moment in a new cycle of civilization, God willing. We are in sixth caliphate, God willing."

Party officials, who have spent months insisting they wanted to pursue secular democratic politics rather than an international Islamist agenda, were forced on the defensive after his comments were posted on the Internet.
The left-of-centre, secular Ettakatol party, which came third in the vote, suspended talks with Ennahda over forming a government.

"We thought we were going to build a second republic with our partner - not a sixth caliphate," Khemais Ksila, a senior member, said.

Ennahda's other prospective coalition partner, the centre-left and secular Congress for the Republic, did not follow Ettakatol's lead, perhaps soothed by a deal making its leader, Moncef Marzouki, interim president.
The term "caliphate" refers to a governance system based on Islamic law as formerly used by successive Muslim empires.

It is a sensitive term in Arab politics, due to its associations with extremist groups like al-Qaida - and especially in Tunisia where it is promoted by Hizb-ut-Tahrir, the radical Salafi movement.

Source : montrealgazette.com

Syiar Islam Dilarang, Demokrasi dan Liberalisme Diizinkan?

بِسْمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحْمَٰنِ الرَّحِيمِ

Apakah Syiar-syiar Islam Dilarang, sementara Syiar-syiar Demokrasi

dan Liberalisme Diizinkan?!

Sungguh Itu adalah Perang terhadap Islam dan Pemeluknya

Komisi Tinggi untuk Pemilu, berdasarkan undang-undang mengeluarkan keputusan yang melarang penggunaan “syiar-syiar keagamaan dan simbol-simbol yang terkait dengan akidah dan agama”. Keputusan itu juga menyatakan bahwa siapa saja yang melanggarnya akan ditahan dan dijatuhi hukuman penjara dan denda. Padahal konstitusi saat ini menyatakan bahwa agama negara adalah Islam!

Sungguh keputusan jahat ini tidak datang dari ruang hampa. Akan tetapi, keputusan ini berada pada posisi pertama perang terhadap Islam. Ini adalah perpanjangan untuk setiap aktifitas yang berkaitan dengan lilitan revolusi. Hal itu untuk merealisasi apa yang diinginkan sejak asal berupa pemisahan agama dari negara menurut doktrin negara sipil sekuler. Juga untuk menundukkan semua hukum syara’ untuk ditundukkan kepada pemungutan suara menurut hawa nafsu Dewan Rakyat. Keputusan itu bertujuan agar mayoritas kursi diisi oleh setiap orang yang mengusung slogan-slogan liberalisme demokrasi, meski dengan jalan membeli suara menggunakan harta. Hal itu agar mereka bisa menghancurkan semua hukum Islam. Islam dijadikan agama kependetaan, dibatasi di dalam dinding-dinding masjid. Setelah itu dan dari dalam Dewan Rakyat khamr disetujui; porografi disebarluaskan atas nama kebebasan personal; manusia dijauhkan dari Islam atas nama kebebasan berakidah; wanita dilarang mengenakan busana syar’i di kehidupan umum, sekolah dan perguruan tinggi; apa yang masih tersisa dari hukum-hukum waris, perkawinan, dan talak dihapus dengan dalih kesetaraan; kaum Muslim ditekan atas nama demokrasi, sehingga masalahnya sampai pada meragu-ragukan manusia dalam akidah mereka. Semua itu akan menjadi konstitusional atas nama mayoritas di Dewan Rakyat. Dan akhirnya Mesir pun menjadi seperti masyarakat barat yang kehilangan nilai-nilai spiritual, kemanusiaan dan moral, disamping kondisinya yang terlanyar tidak diperhatikan sama sekali.

Wahai kaum Muslim, wahai warga al-Kinanah

Bagaimana mungkin syiar-syiar barat yang dibawa oleh penjajah kapitalis barat pemilik berbagai musibah dan krisis, bisa diizinkan diimpor dan dibawa ke negeri kita, sedangkan syiar-syiar lâ ilâha illâllâh Muhammadun rasûlullâh justru dilarang dan orang yang mengusungnya dijatuhi hukuman?! Bukankah ini pelecehan terhadap akal pikiran warga Mesir?! Sungguh ini perkara yang sangat mengherankan!!!

Demokrasi liberalisme kapitalisme telah dicoba dan dibuktikan kegagalannya di masyarakat-masyarakat barat. Tidak perlu diperlihatkan, apa yang dimunculkan oleh ide-ide dan syiar-syiar ini berupa komunitas gay dan lesbian, berbagai kriminalitas dan krisis-krisis ekonomi yang akhirnya menimpa seluruh dunia. Lihatlah, anak-anak syiar-syiar itu sendiri di dunia berdemonstrasi untuk mengadili demokrasi mereka dikarenakan ketidakmampuan demokrasi mereka memberikan solusi-solusi bagi berbagai permasalahan mereka dan kemiskinan, dan pengangguran justru menyebar di tengah barisan mereka. Pada saat yang sama, kekayaan justru terkonsentrasi di tangan sekelompok kecil orang dari mereka. Ini sekadar satu contoh dari ribuan contoh semisalnya. Lalu bagaimana bisa orang yang mengklaim memelihara urusan-urusan masyarakat di Mesir justru menerima untuk memaksakan kepada warga mereka kaum Muslim, peradaban yang tidak datang dari mereka dan mereka juga bukan bagian dari peradaban itu?! Ingatlah, alangkah buruknya apa yang mereka pikul.

Pemilu yang direncanakan dan fitnah berupa undang-undang dan keputusan-keputusan zalim itu, datang dari rezim yang sama dengan rezim sebelumnya yang masih tetap memerintah. Jika tidak, lalu apa artinya pengeluaran undang-undang dan keputusan yang melayani demokrasi dan liberalisme itu? Kenapa penyebutan Islam yang merupakan agama warga Mesir justru dilarang? Bukankah itu merupakan perang terhadap Islam dan pemeluknya?

أَمْ حَسِبَ الَّذِينَ فِي قُلُوبِهِم مَّرَضٌ أَن لَّن يُخْرِجَ اللَّهُ أَضْغَانَهُمْ

Atau apakah orang-orang yang ada penyakit dalam hatinya mengira bahwa Allah tidak akan menampakkan kedengkian mereka ? (QS Muhammad [47]: 29)

Wahai kaum Muslim, wahai warga Mesir

Sesungguhnya semua versi tindakan ini adalah bagian dari rencana Amerika dan rezim yang menjadi kaki tangannya. Maka Anda harus memupus jalan bagi mereka, beraktifitas untuk mengusir mereka dari bumi Kinanah dan tidak mentolerir mereka untuk memasuki tanah Anda, sehingga mereka tidak bisa menjamah Anda, agama Anda dan keamanan Anda dan tidak bisa merampok kekayaan Anda seperti yang mereka lakukan terhadap saudara-saudara Anda di negeri-negeri kaum Muslim. Mereka tidak memelihara kekerabatan dengan Anda dan sama sekali tidak mengindahkan perjanjian. Ketakutan terbesar mereka adalah diterapkannya syariah melalui daulah al-Khilafah ar-Rasyidah yang akan menghentikan dan mengeluarkan mereka dari negeri-negari kaum Muslim dalam keadaan tercela dan kalah. Hari-hari ini adalah kesempatan Anda wahai orang-orang mukhlish di antara militer Mesir Muslim untuk melaksanakan hal itu.

ۚ وَإِن تَتَوَلَّوْا يَسْتَبْدِلْ قَوْمًا غَيْرَكُمْ ثُمَّ لَا يَكُونُوا أَمْثَالَكُم

dan jika kamu berpaling niscaya Dia akan mengganti (kamu) dengan kaum yang lain; dan mereka tidak akan seperti kamu ini. (QS Muhammad [47]: 38)

Wahai kaum Muslim

Sesungguhnya tidak ada keselamatan bagi Anda kecuali dengan Islam. Kezaliman dan kemiskinan tidak akan hilang dari Anda kecuali dengan penerapan syariah Allah. Anda telah mencoba sosialisme, kapitalisme, nasionalisme dan patriotisme, akan tetapi kondisi masyarakat tetap saja terpuruk dalam segala aspek kehidupan. Maka campakkan bendera syike-picot. Kibarkan panji Rasulullah saw. Berjuanglah bersama Hizbut Tahrir untuk menegakkan syariah Allah melalui daulah al-Khilafah al-Islamiyah ar-Rasyidah yang hanya di dalamnya sajalah terdapat jalan keluar Anda. Allah bersama Anda dan tidak akan menyia-nyiakan amal-amal Anda.

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِن تَنصُرُوا اللَّهَ يَنصُرْكُمْ وَيُثَبِّتْ أَقْدَامَكُمْ

Hai orang-orang mukmin, jika kamu menolong (agama) Allah, niscaya Dia akan menolongmu dan meneguhkan kedudukanmu. (QS Muhammad [47]: 7)

23 Dzulqa’dah 1432 H

21 Oktober 2011

Hizbut Tahrir

Wilayah Mesir

Kisah Pemimpin Khilafah Islam Terakhir Sambungan

Sambungan..

Yahudi Mula ‘Menggigit’ Daulah Islamiah

Semua pihak mahukan sebahagian daripadanya, tidak ketinggalan kaum Yahudi. Orang-orang Yahudi yang menjadi warga Daulah Islamiah adalah pelarian dari negara-negara Eropah seperti Sepanyol dan Portugal selepas pemerintah Islam di Andalus dikalahkan oleh tentera Kristian. Pada tahun 1895, sebuah buku bertajuk Der Judenstaat (Negara Yahudi) karangan Dr Theodore Hertzl (1869-1904), seorang Zionis dari Hungary, diterbitkan.

Dalam buku itu disebutkan bahawa kaum Yahudi mesti mempunyai negara sendiri. Oleh itu, Yahudi lantas mengadakan pertemuan pertama di Switzerland pada 29-31 Ogos 1897 untuk meletakkan asas pembentukan negara Yahudi di Palestin. Selepas persidangan itu, pergerakan Yahudi semakin aktif. Ini menyebabkan Sultan Abdul Hamid mengeluarkan keputusan tahun 1900 untuk tidak membenarkan orang-orang Yahudi yang datang ke Palestin dan tinggal lebih daripada tiga bulan. Segala cara dilakukan kaum Yahudi untuk memujuk Sultan Hamid membatalkan keputusannya. Termasuk dengan menawarkan sejumlah pampasan dan pelbagai janji lain. Abdul Hamid enggan menerima tawaran tersebut. Ia menghantar jawapan kepada mereka melalui Tahsin Pasha:”Katakan kepada Yahudi biadap itu, hutang negara Usmaniah bukan sesuatu yang memalukan.”

Pada tahun 1902, Hertzl untuk kesekian kalinya menghadap Sultan Abdul Hamid dalam percubaan untuk melakukan rasuah. Diantara rasuah yang disogokkan Hertzl kepada Sultan adalah :

1. 150 juta poundsterling Inggeris khusus untuk Sultan.
2. Membayar semua hutang pemerintah Ustmaniyyah yang mencapai 33 juta poundsterling Inggris.
3. Membangun kapal induk untuk pemerintah, dengan kos 120 juta Frank
4. Memberi pinjaman 5 juta poundsterling tanpa bunga.
5. Membangun Universiti Ustmaniyyah di Palestin.

Semuanya ditolak Sultan, bahkan Sultan tidak mahu menemui Hertzl, diwakilkan kepada Tahsin Basya, perdana menterinya, sambil mengirim pesan,

“Nasihati Mr Hertzl agar jangan meneruskan rancangannya. Aku tidak akan melepaskan walaupun sejengkal tanah ini (Palestin), kerana Palestin bukan milikku. Tanah itu adalah hak umat Islam. Umat Islam telah berjihad demi kepentingan tanah ini dan mereka telah menyiraminya dengan darah mereka. Yahudi silakan menyimpan harta mereka!! Jika Khilafah Othmaniyah dimusnahkan pada suatu hari, maka mereka boleh mengambil Palestin tanpa membayar harganya. Akan tetapi, sementara aku masih hidup, aku lebih rela menusukkan pedang ke tubuhku daripada melihat Tanah Palestin dikhianati dan dipisahkan dari Khilafah Islamiyah. Perpisahan adalah sesuatu yang tidak akan terjadi. Aku tidak akan memulai pemisahan tubuh kami selagi kami masih hidup.”

Al-Quds (Jerusalem) menjadi sebaagian dari tanah Islam sewaktu Umar bin Al-Khattab menaklukkan kota itu dan aku tidak akan mencatat sejarah yang memalukan dengan menjual Tanah Suci kepada Yahudi dan mengkhianati kepercayaan rakyat.” Tahun 1901, Abdul Hamid mengeluarkan perintah melarang tanah di Palestin dijual kepada Yahudi.

Tindakan Abdul Hamid ini sesuai sabda Rasulullah SAW: ”Imam adalah perisai (pelindung) yang dibelakangnya kamu berperang dan mendapat perlindungan.” Dengan penyertaan Yahudi dan Zionis dalam konflik, maka barisan musuh Islam semakin kuat. Yahudi akhirnya meminta bantuan Inggeris untuk mewujudkan impian mereka. Setelah Abdul Hamid II digulingkan pada 13 Mac 1909 maka pembentukan negara Yahudi di Palestin semakin dekat. Inggeris kemudian melancarkan serangan terhadap Khilafah Usmaniyah dan inilah menjadi punca kejatuhannya. Tahun 1918, Sultan Abdul Hamid II meninggal dunia.

Peristiwa kejatuhan Sultan Abdul Hamid II

Malam itu, Sultan Abdul Hamid dan keluarganya dikunjungi oleh sekumpulan manusia yang tidak akan dilupakan oleh sejarah.

Emmanuel Carasso, seorang Yahudi warga Itali dan wakil rakyat Salonika (Thessaloniki) di Parlimen Othmaniyyah (Meclis-i Mebusan) melangkah masuk ke istana Yildiz. Turut bersama beliau adalah Aram Efendi, wakil rakyat Armenia, Laz Arif Hikmet Pasha, anggota Dewan Senat yang juga pemimpin Armada Othmaniyyah, serta Arnavut Esat Toptani, wakil rakyat bandar Daraj di Meclis-i Mebusan.
“Bukankah waktu seperti ini adalah waktu khalifah menunaikan kewajipannya terhadap keluarga. Tidak bolehkah kalian berbincang dengan aku pagi esok?”, Sultan Abdul Hamid tidak selesa menerima kedatangan mereka yang kelihatannya begitu tergesa-gesa.
Tiada simpati di wajah mereka.“Ummah telah memecat kamu”, Esat Pasha memberitahu. Angkuh benar bunyinya.Satu persatu wajah ahli rombongan itu diperhati oleh Sultan Abdul Hamid.
“Apakah mereka ini sedar dengan apa yang mereka lakukan?”, baginda berfikir.

“Jika benar Ummah yang menurunkan aku, mengapa kamu datang dengan lelaki ini?”, Sultan Abdul Hamid menundingkan jarinya kepada Emmanuel Carasso.
“Apa kena mengenanya Yahudi ini dengan Ummah?”, wajah baginda kemerah-merahan menahan marah.

Sultan Abdul Hamid memang kenal benar siapa Emmanuel Carasso itu. Dia jugalah yang bersekongkol bersama Theodor Herzl ketika mahu mendapatkan izin menempatkan Yahudi di Palestin dengan penuh licik lebih sedekad yang lalu (1898). Mereka menawarkan pembelian ladang milik Sultan Abdul Hamid di Sancak Palestin sebagai tapak penempatan Yahudi di Tanah Suci itu. Sultan Abdul Hamid menolaknya dengan tegas, termasuk alternatif mereka yang mahu menyewa tanah itu selama 99 tahun.

Pendirian tegas Sultan Abdul Hamid untuk tidak mengizinkan Yahudi bermastautin di Palestin, telah menyebabkan Yahudi sedunia mengamuk. Harganya terlalu mahal. Sultan Abdul Hamid kehilangan takhta, dan Khilafah disembelih agar tamat nyawanya.

“Sesungguhnya aku sendiri tidak tahu, siapakah sebenarnya yang memilih mereka ini untuk menghantar berita penggulinganku malam itu”, Sultan Abdul Hamid meluahkan derita hatinya di dalam diari baginda.

Perancangan untuk menggulingkan baginda sudah dimulakan lama sebelum malam itu. Beberapa Jumaat kebelakangan ini, nama baginda sudah tidak disebut di dalam khutbah.
“Walaupun engkau dipecat, nyawamu berada di dalam jaminan kami”, Esat Pasha menyambung katanya.

Malam itu juga, baginda bersama ahli keluarganya hanya dibenarkan membawa sehelai dua pakaian, dan mereka diangkut di dalam gelap menuju ke Stesyen Keretapi Sirkeci. Khalifah terakhir umat Islam, dan ahli keluarganya dibuang negara ke Salonika, Greece.

Gerombolan tentera kedengaran melangkah penuh derap ke istana. Meriam diletupkan sebagai petanda Sultan Mehmed V Resad ditabal menjadi raja boneka. Rasmilah malam itu Sultan Mehmed V Resad menjadi Khalifah ke 99 umat Islam semenjak Abu Bakr al-Siddiq r.a. Tetapi khalifah yang satu ini sudah tiada kuasa. Hanya boneka umpan menahan pemberontakan masyarakat terhadap pembubaran Khilafah Othmaniyyah.

“Entahlah, di saat hidup dan matiku tidak menentu, aku terasa begitu tenang dan aman. Seperti sebuah gunung besar yang selama ini menghempap dadaku, diangkat penuh kelegaan” kata Sultan Abdul Hamid di dalam diarinya.

Sultan Abdul Hamid mengusap kepala anaknya Abdul Rahim yang menangis ketakutan. Anak-anaknya yang lain turut menangis sama. Perjalanan dari Sirkeci Istanbul menuju ke Salonika di Greece penuh misteri.

“Sabarlah anak-anakku. Jika Allah mengkehendaki kematian bagi kita, bukankah kematian itu kesudahan untuk semua”, kata Sultan Abdul Hamid kepada sekalian kaum kerabat baginda.

Kereta api meluncur laju. Bumi khilafah ditinggalkan di belakang. Sejarah kegemilangan 600 tahun Bani Osman, berakhir malam itu. Palitan hitam yang mustahil untuk diputihkan kembali.

Lama benar baginda dan ahli keluarganya dikurung di istana Yahudi yang buruk itu. Mereka dikurung di dalam bilik tanpa perabot. Pintu dan tingkap istana, dilarang daripada dibuka. Hari demi hari, adalah kematian sebelum mati bagi baginda sekeluarga. Akhirnya pada tahun 1912, Sultan Abdul Hamid dibawa pulang ke Istanbul, dan anak-anaknya bercerai berai, dibuang ke Perancis sebagai pengemis dan pelarian yang merempat di jalanan.

Sultan Abdul Hamid dikurung di Istana Beylerbeyi selama 6 tahun