Headlines:
• US Study Endorses Islam as Fastest Growing Religion, Popular in Youth
• End of Syria Regime 'Matter of Time': Turkey Minister
• Iran Warns Patriot Missiles in Turkey Could Lead to World War III
• Food Shortage Threatens to Kill Thousands of Yemeni Children
• More British Troops to Leave Afghanistan by Summer 2013
• America Pays Kayani and Zardari $688 million for being Its Watchdogs
Details:
US Study Endorses Islam as Fastest Growing Religion, Popular in Youth:
A recent study by a US forum has endorsed that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world and extremely popular in youth who are enthusiastic and curious to know the facts and conduct research to reach the truth. According to the recent study conducted by the Washington-based Pew Forum, Islam, the second largest religion in the world, is rapidly increasing across the globe and has the lowest median age as half of the Muslims are 23-year-old or younger, compared to 28 for the whole world population. Exact numbers for religious populations are impossible to obtain and estimates for the size of the larger faiths can vary by hundreds of millions. The study by Pew Forum appears to be one of the most extensive to date. There are about 1.6 billion Muslims around the world, or 23 percent of the global population. "The overwhelming majority (87-90 percent) are Sunnis, about 10-13 percent are Shia Muslims," the study said. Pew Forum demographer, Conrad Hackett, informed that the 2,500 censuses, surveys and population registers used to compile the report did not allow a further breakdown to estimate the world population of atheists and agnostics. He said, "It's not the kind of data that's available for every country." "A census will typically ask what your religion is and you can identify a number of particular affiliations or no religion," he added. An age breakdown showed Muslims had the lowest median age at 23 years, compared to 28 for the whole world population. The median age highlights the population bulge at the point where half the population is above and half below that number.
End of Syria Regime 'Matter of Time': Turkey Minister:
The fall of the Syrian regime is "only a matter of time", Turkey's Foreign Minister said on Wednesday, calling on other countries to help make the transition period as brief as possible. "It is clear that if a regime loses legitimacy and fights against its own people, that regime will lose that fight," Ahmet Davutoglu said at a press conference after meeting with his Finnish counterpart Erkki Tuomioja in Helsinki. "As to timing: now we can be more sure than before... it is only a matter of time. But it is up to the international community how to make the transition as fast as possible... in order to prevent further disasters," he added. The Turkish foreign minister said he was not in favour of international military intervention in the Syrian conflict, echoing the views of Tuomioja, who said he didn't think such a move was "on the table at all". The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights puts the overall death toll from the 21-month uprising against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's regime at more than 43,000 people, based on accounts from activists and medics on the ground.
Iran Warns Patriot Missiles in Turkey Could Lead to World War III:
Iran's Army Chief of Staff warned NATO on Saturday that stationing Patriot anti-missile batteries on Turkey's border with Syria was setting the stage for world war. General Hassan Firouzabadi, whose country has been a staunch supporter of President Bashar al-Assad throughout the 21-month uprising against his rule, called on the Western military alliance to reverse its decision to deploy the defence system. "Each one of these Patriots is a black mark on the world map, and is meant to cause a world war," Firouzabadi said, according to the Iranian Students' News Agency. "They are making plans for a world war and this is very dangerous for the future of humanity and for the future of Europe itself."
Food Shortage Threatens to Kill Thousands of Yemeni Children:
For decades Yemen has suffered critical food shortage affecting nearly half the country's population of 25 million, including hundreds of thousands of children. A popular uprising against a decades-old dictatorship and the consequent instability further damaged the country's already poor infrastructure and weakened the government's ability to provide basic services to the poor. About 60 percent of Yemeni children were chronically malnourished and about 15 percent - 257 thousand children under the age of five- suffer from acute malnourishment, according to a report by UNICEF Yemen. At least 700,000 are reportedly suffering from Moderate Acute Malnutrition (MAM). Jeremy Hopkins, acting Head of Office UNICEF Yemen, said Yemeni children suffer the second highest rate of chronic malnutrition in the world.
More British Troops to Leave Afghanistan by Summer 2013:
Almost half the British troops still serving in Afghanistan will return home by the end of next year, the prime minister has announced. David Cameron told MPs that around 3,800 servicemen and women will come back to Britain by the end of 2013. Numbers are already being reduced from 9,500 to 9,000 before this Christmas. All military operations are due to finish by the end of 2014, with Afghanistan's own forces taking over responsibility for security. The British troops in Afghanistan are part of the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (NATO-ISAF) mission, trying to make the country more stable. NATO-ISAF has tens of thousands of troops in Afghanistan from 49 different countries including America, Germany and France. The decision to bring all troops home by 2014 was agreed at a meeting of the National Security Council on Tuesday. David Cameron also discussed Afghanistan in an hour-long video call with US President Barack Obama. They agreed that NATO's plan to bring troops home was "on track".
America Pays Kayani and Zardari $688 million for being Its Watchdogs:
The United States has decided to reimburse Pakistan $688 million for the cost of providing support for some 140,000 troops on the border with Afghanistan. Deputy Defence Secretary Ashton Carter notified Congress that the US would make the payment to Islamabad for expenses incurred from June through November 2011. "In making this determination, I find that the reimbursement is consistent with the national security interest of the United States and will not adversely affect the balance of power in the region," Carter wrote in the Dec. 6 letter. Lawmakers have expressed frustration with Pakistan, questioning its commitment in the fight against terrorism and using the foreign aid budget to punish Islamabad. The anger boiled over after the killing of Osama bin Laden in Pakistan in May 2011, with suggestions that the country was harbouring the terrorist leader.
Abu Hashim
On Saturday night, at around 8:30 pm, terrorists attacked Peshawar Airport. After a few hours the sneaky British state media, the BBC, aired news that an alleged Talban spokesman, Ehsan ullah Ehsan, a shadowy and unknown personality, claimed the responsibility of attack. Media channels then started commenting after airing this incident, with the "experts,"
On Saturday 22nd December 2012, The Central Media Office of Hizb ut Tahrir in coordination with Hizb ut Tahrir Indonesia, will gather 1500 influential women from across the world for a momentous International Women's Conference titled: "The Khilafah "Caliphate": Protecting Women from Poverty and Enslavement".
Thursday, 22/11/2012, President Mohamed Morsi issued a constitutional declaration that included the re-trial of those who killed rebels (of the revolution), the looking after the casualties of the revolution, the protection of the Constituent Assembly and the Shura Council against dissolution, and - for a period of no more than two months - to give immunity to the president's decisions from being reversed, as well as the dismissal of the Attorney General.
Some of the opposition political forces opposed this declaration through a sit-in at Tahrir Square. The widespread slogans raised by opponents against these decisions lies in their rejection of the President's holding of the judiciary, as well as the legislative powers. Their actions are based on ideas they were brought up on, which they view as sacred which Montesquieu produced long ago in his Bible called "The Spirit of the Laws." These people consider the issue of the separation of powers as the most important sacred cow as Montesquieu highlighted in his book.
Both sides are justifying their positions. The first side claims that this declaration is a provisional declaration; and the law gives him the right to issue such a decision until the adoption of the Constitution, whereupon a new people's assembly will be formed, thus restoring its legislative power. The second side claims that this declaration makes the president a pharaoh or an autocrat.
There is no doubt that both sides consecrate this cow; and they understand that it does not and will not speak to them, nor will it guide them.
The idea of the separation of powers, which is the structure of the civil state, is a purely Western idea, linked to democratic Western thought, which is a ‘sacred' thought that does not deserve any kind of sanctification. This idea emerged from the idea of the civil state, as opposed to the Western concept of the religious state. Its emergence was a reaction in order to restrict the powers of the dictators in Europe, namely the kings and emperors. Some Western political thinkers thought that the solution to tyranny lay in restricting of powers, mainly government powers in the hands of the ruler.
Perhaps it is the fascination with Western democratic systems that made one of the two disputing parties shout loudly, calling for true democracy, life and freedom. While, the other party mumbled behind them saying: yes, we want true democracy, Shura, a civil state, and Islamic law - thereby combining contradictions into one basket, without seeing the contradiction within themselves! They even see more than this, that Islam is the religion of democracy. They do not see anything wrong in abstaining from talking about the application of the Shariah as long as they are moving in the path of democracy that will lead to Shariah, sooner or later!
Their sacred cow has not been slaughtered yet. Instead, it will be offered as a temporary sacrifice; and will return wearing a new garment, after the adoption of the new constitution, so as to fool simple people. Then the sacred cow will speak saying this is your judicial power, which I have returned it back to you free from every impurity. And here is your legislative power, which I return it back to you, white, clean and untouched. O dear people! We have returned the cow to you; and we will never do any harm to it again.
The attempt to mobilize the people for the sake of so-called legitimacy and Shariah is a false argument to portray the country as divided between the two sides: one side that wants Shariah, and the other that rejects it - a matter that is contrary to the truth. Those who went out in the squares, to the exception of their leaders and those who mobilized them, do not reject the Shariah. Had the President - instead of announcing his constitutional declaration - declared the start of the implementation of the Shariah, the heads of secularism in Egypt would have not been able to mobilize the masses with the same momentum they did against the constitutional declaration, and nor would they have dared to raise any slogan that rejected the application of the Shariah. Is it possible, for example, that Hamdeen Sabahi would declare he is against the Shariah? The man took advantage of the event and spoke to the people from a platform in Tahrir Square on Friday 30/11, saying I am a Muslim, I am proud that I am a Muslim, and I will defend the Shariah.
The state of division that has hit the country these past few days is meant in order to pass the constitution prepared by the Constituent Committee and hurriedly approved on Thursday 29/11, so as to be handed to the president for (again hurriedly) submitting it to a popular referendum. This, perhaps, would be an appropriate way out of what caused by the Constitutional Declaration, in terms of protests, sit-ins and calls for civil disobedience.
This is a devilish plan to pass a sleazy Constitution that does not differ much from the Constitution of 1971. It is rather a constitution contrary to Islam, which was a few weeks ago the focus of rejection from a broad sector of the Islamic movement. Then this crisis suddenly made those who went down to Tahrir Square on the Friday of implementation of Shariah on 2/11 and 9/11 forget the reason of their arrival there! And Dr. Morsi suddenly succeeded in regrouping the scattered crowds behind a Constitution whose flaw is quite clear, and its violation to Shariah is clearer.
To those who cried out: "The people want the application of the Shari' of Allah!" - You must realise that Allah's Shari' cannot be applied through such a Constitution, which does not differ from past constitutions, and nor are its key clauses any different from them. Rather, its clauses that contradict Islam are still the same, without a change in either their wording or number! Even if the wording of some of its articles is similar to correct words of the Shariah, their adoption is not based on the Islamic Aqeedah. They are rather adopted based on interest and democracy. You must also realise that such a system would not be possible to change from within it. Don't people realise that the republican system is a system that is contrary to Islam? Its Aqeedah is the separation of deen from the state, which originated in Europe after a bitter struggle between the intellectuals and the Church in the Middle Ages. This system gives sovereignty to the people, i.e. it gives the authority to legislate to humans, where man can allow and forbid as he likes! While Allah Ta'ala says:
((إنِ الحُكمُ إلاّ لله))
"Indeed hukm is only for Allah."
We reiterate here again: you must sacrifice this sacred cow; you have to slaughter it completely by rejecting the democratic system altogether, and not just the sanctity of the separation of powers that the President had already slaughtered, so inciting the monks of the temple of democracy.
It is not possible for a devout Muslim president to give an oath of allegiance on 29/06/2012 to this regime, and proclaim loudly: "I swear by Allah the Almighty to uphold the Republican system" and the Muslim crowd of millions applauded him when he gave this oath of allegiance to the system they rebelled against. And he addressed them, saying: "Today, the Egyptian people placed the foundation for a new real democratic life and uphold the concept of institutions." He said: "I will respect and appreciate the judiciary authority, and the legislature authority, and do my part in ensuring the independence of these two authorities from each other and from the executive authority." And he said: "We will complete the journey in a modern, national, constitutional and civil state."
It is not possible for such a president to destroy a system he pledged to maintain, mistakenly thinking that it was a system that does not violate Islam; and that the slogan of implementation of the Shariah does not contradict with the civil, democratic republican system.
The crisis that the regime faces currently in Egypt is a contrived crisis that aims at passing the constitution, which was cooked in hurry and then put to a referendum in hurry on the 15/12/2012. Those Islamists who raised their voices yesterday, rejecting this constitution, they say now we refuse this Constitution, but we will vote yes for stability - arguing that the Shariah considers warding off harm has priority over bringing interests, according to their interpretation of harm and interests.
Muslims would not have accepted democracy or the separation of powers, nor called for a civil state had they been fully aware that the separation of powers is not realised in truth; and that there is only one authority managed by one person called the Khaleefah, by divine rulings (ahkam shar'iyyah) derived from the texts that came through the revelation (wahy). What happened in the West did not happen with us. Rather our history was bright and different from their dark history. It did not happen that people ever asked during the 13 centuries for the removal of the Khaleefah for being one individual that governs or that he is a despot. This is because such a Khaleefah has never been a dictator. He never governed according to his whims and interests, but rather ruled by the revelation of Allah; so no one objected to his rule. Therefore, he was neither a despot and nor a dictator. All that they objected to was the misapplication of the pledge of allegiance (bay'ah), where the Khaleefah used to nominate his son, his brother or one of his relatives so as to be pledged as a Khaleefah after him, through wrong interpretation for maintaining the unity of the state, and in order to prevent dispute amongst people after him and to prevent disorder.
It is well known as well that Islam gives the Ummah the right to choose and give pledge to whomever it wants, whether he was a son of the Khaleefah or his relative or any other person from amongst the Ummah that was legally competent. There is no category of clergy in Islam because Islam did not give the right of legislation to 'ulema and nor to other human beings. The task of the scholars is only to make ijtihad. So, they exert their utmost effort in deducing the divine ruling of an issue from the detailed evidences, i.e. from the Quran and Sunnah and whatever they pointed to, namely the consensus of the companions (ijmaa' us-sahaba) and the divine qiyas. The Khaleefah might also be mujtahid. So, if he adopted a divine ruling whether he derived it, or it was derived by other scholars it becomes a divine ruling binding upon people so that the Khaleefah can manage their affairs and run the state interests. The Islamic state is not a religious state by the Western sense, although its basis is the Islamic religion. In other words, its Constitution and laws stem from the Islamic religion. But it is a human state ruled by human beings, who rule with the revelation of Allah. Its rulers and deputies are chosen from amongst humans, and not appointed by Allah. So, it is neither a divine state and nor a theocratic state. Its head, whether the Khaleefah or Imam is not infallible, but he is human that can do right or wrong. Islam rejects the immunity of the rulers and the people's representatives as approved by the democratic system.
The Khaleefah or any governor in the state or any member of parliament can be tried by the court of grievances (mahkamat ul-madhalim) immediately. His decisions have no immunity unless they are based on the divine evidence. The archetypal state is that which follows the method of the prophet. i.e. a rightly guided Khilafah "Caliphate". This is according to the saying of the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him: "عليكم بسنتي وسنة الخلفاء الراشدين من بعدي" "I urge you to adhere to my sunnah and the sunnah of the guided Khulafaa' coming after me."
Dr. Morsi should work for such a state; and millions should be mobilized for such a state, where the people shout from the depths of their hearts that they want an Islamic Khilafah "Caliphate". For such a state, Dr. Morsi would have to challenge the whole world, not just challenge a bunch of self-haters who want to live in darkness, without seeing the light of Islam through its great state, the Khilafah "Caliphate" State on the model of prophecy.
Sharif Zayed
Head of the Media Office of the Hizb ut-Tahrir, Wilayah of Egypt
28 Muharram 1434 AH, 12/12/2012
http://www.hizb-ut-tahrir.info/info/index.php/contents/entry_21631
![O you who believe, do not betray Allah and the Messenger, and do not knowingly betray your trusts. [Surah Al Anfal, 27]](/en/media/k2/items/cache/0562a0d86b78c2118c302ee89573cf3e_M.jpg)
International interest has recently increased in the arrangement of the post-Assad Syrian Household. As such, a re-install of the Syrian National Council has been completed, and the so-called "Syrian National Coalition" has been formed, so it can act as an Islamic face for the secular National Council, and a political front to manage the post-Assad transition. On December 9th 2012, a "Military Chiefs of Staff" was formed as an arm of the National Coalition...
A little-known Perth-based ‘think-tank' claiming ‘independent strategic analysis of Australia's global interests' published a paper this week about Hizb ut Tahrir. Riddled with errors of fact and scant of anything that can be called analysis the paper simply regurgitates a tired and discredited narrative about Hizb ut Tahrir. The 4-page article based entirely on secondary sources, primarily newspaper articles, reads more like a high-school essay completed in a rush rather than a think-tank paper.
