15 new terrorist organisations to be banned
The government it seems has finally had enough of tolerating extremist organisations that coordinate their worldwide operations from London. About time too.
Fifteen international groups believed to be terrorist organisations are set to be banned, the Home Office has said. These are on top of 25 international organisations already proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000, and a further 14 already banned in Northern Ireland.They include groups with links to Iraq, Uzbekistan, Libya, Pakistan, Somalia, Bangladesh, Afghanistan and Morocco. The government is also planning to change the law so that it can ban groups which glorify terrorism.
Should they also ban Hizb ut-Tahrir? I’m still undecided on that one, even though they’re a bunch of pompous chimpanzees who think they know it all.
| Post to del.icio.us |
Filed in: Current affairs, Religion
Should they also ban Hizb ut-Tahrir? I’m still undecided on that one, even though they’re a bunch of pompous chimpanzees who think they know it all.
Naah. Until 1996, there’d have been a good case for it. Check out this OBM era ruling which shows how unreserved they were about sanctioning terrorism in those days.
But with the departure of OBM, I reckon most of the active promoters of terrorism moved over with him into Al Muhaj. The worst that can be said of Hizb is that they’re millenialist racist sectarians who teach their followers that they’re engaged in an eternal violent battle with non-Muslims. They reckon the final strugle will start just as soon as they’ve established the Caliphate: but are presently confining their activities to appearing on radio, putting stickers on lamp-posts and generally carrying out the ‘Second Stage’ of their “masterplan”:
The stage of interaction with the Ummah, to let the Ummah embrace and carry Islam, so that the Ummah takes it up as its issue, and thus works to establish it in the affairs of life.
They’re a nasty organisation with a vicious ideology which needs to be exposed rather than cosied up to. Guardian journalists who soft soap them should wise up rather than providing them with free PR.
In Denmark, its clear that they’re closer to Al Muhaj in style; but unless they actively solicit terrorism, I can’t see what grounds there’d be for banning them.
“even though they’re a bunch of pompous chimpanzees who think they know it all.” …
having read a lot of your “articles” i think this sounds a bit like you mr sunny..
Perhaps we should ban Madeleine Bunting instead? (only joking)
pompous,
Oh deary me a flame war with someone with a TOP lighter. I think Sunny’s positions are well thought out, unlike those commentators who have an agenda here.. What do you have to say to that, TOP lighter man? Or is your light extinguished?
douglas
David, that PDF is hilarious! Typical of HuT though.
They’re a nasty organisation with a vicious ideology which needs to be exposed rather than cosied up to. Guardian journalists who soft soap them should wise up rather than providing them with free PR.
I agree with you on this one. I’ve had enough bad experiences with HuT to see past the suit they put on. They’re very much like the BNP these days.
The problem is this though. They keep regurgitating these stupid ideas, which can be destroyed with fair ease, but are attractive to some.
Those kids may not be directly indocrinated by HuT to join the Al-Qaeda but I can be pretty sure they become more susceptible to brain-washing by the fanatics.
On the conveyer belt to becoming a fully fledged suicide bomber, HuT may be playing a part. And that worries me.
While the “conveyor belt” argument is the best argument for banning them, frankly I don’t think that’s a decent basis for banning anything.
Not unless you’re going to ban an awful lot of “nearly dangerous” groups too…
Can’t we ban the Government? They’re far more dangerous than all those “extremist” groups combined; none of them have managed to enact an illegal war that killed 100 000 people…
You can vote them out. Or not.
And then what? The Tories? Who voted for the war?