Skip to main content

Government crackdown on Muslims heading to Syria hypocritical

Image source: The AustralianImage source: The Australian
Two Sydney Muslims have been arrested by the AFP this morning for allegedly intending to travel to Syria to fight against the Assad regime. This comes in the context of a broader crackdown by government authorities on Muslims seeking to travel to Syria to assist those oppressed by Assad’s bloody repression.
Hizb ut-Tahrir Australia emphasises the following in this regard:

1. The Attorney General, George Brandis, linking these arrests to Australia’s national security is ridiculous and irresponsible fear mongering. The Government seeks thereby to justify what is plainly an unjustified and hypocritical policy of effectively criminalising support for the oppressed. This crackdown is being sold on the line that joining the fight against Assad is a criminal offence. Why it was made a criminal offence was never debated nor justified and this question is religiously avoided by authorities as it reveals uncomfortable truths.

2. The Government has some explaining to do. Since when did making personal sacrifice to assist the oppressed become an immoral act? Why has it been made a criminal offence? Why is it okay for Australian troops to partake in conflicts overseas under the pretext of supporting the oppressed, but not so for Muslims? Why are the acts of Australian troops in conflicts abroad characterised as an ultimate sacrifice to be celebrated but the sacrifice of Muslims in wanting to assist the oppressed characterised as criminal, problematic conduct to be condemned?

3. AFP Deputy Commissioner Peter Drennan this morning justified the arrests by jumping on the moral high horse and lecturing Muslims about how there was, “no justification for violence” and that, “violent killing of people should not be glorified or justified for any reason.” Where was Mr. Drennan in the last decade when Australian troops were deployed to the Muslim world for this very purpose?

4. On the one hand the Government has criminalised support for forces opposing Assad, yet on the other is itself, through its foreign ministry, undertaking various political manoeuvres in support of the secular elements of the opposition. The truth is that government policy on this issue is not about violence or national security. It is about seeking to legitimise and push the political alternative for Syria the Government deems acceptable and de-legitimising and criminalising that which it deems problematic. It is about promoting and working for a secular lackey as the alternative to Assad and working against the potential of an Islamic government in Syria.

5. The notion that Muslims who go to Syria will become ‘radicalised’ and be a security threat when they return is nonsense. It is based in the all-too-familiar Islamophobic Orientalist narrative that sees Muslims as sub-human, somehow less civilised, unable to control themselves and hence needing the intervention of the civilised white man. Why are the same concerns about radicalisation and national security not raised in relation to other Australian citizens training and fighting in the armies of foreign allies or indeed Australian troops going to partake in invasions abroad?

6. We advise the Muslim community not to be intimidated by the cheap tactics of government authorities. The intent of these policies is to intimidate and silence. Our response should be to raise our critical voice in questioning why support of the oppressed in Syria has been criminalised. Syria is under siege by the regime of the tyrant Assad as well the ‘international community’ which seeks to suffocate the Islamic resistance in favour of secular forces. Our silence in this context would be a betrayal of the Muslims in Syria.

Media OfficeHizb ut-Tahrir Australia
03 December 2013

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An advice to Muslims working in the financial sector

Assalam wa alaikum wa rahmatullah wabarakatahu, Dear Brothers & Sisters, We are saddened to see Muslims today even those who practise many of the rules of Islam are working in jobs which involve haram in the financial sector. They are working in positions which involve usurious (Riba) transactions, insurance, the stock market and the like. Even though many of the clear evidences regarding the severity of the sin of Riba are known, some have justified their job to themselves thinking that they are safe as long as they are not engaged in the actual action of taking or giving Riba. Brothers & Sisters, You should know that the majority of jobs in the financial sector, even the IT jobs in this area are haram (prohibited) as they involve the processing of prohibited contracts. If you work in this sector, do not justify your job to yourself because of the fear of losing your position or having to change your career, fear Allah as he should be feared and consider His law regard

Q&A: Age of separating children in the beds?

Question: Please explain the hukm regarding separation of children in their beds. At what age is separation an obligation upon the parents? Also can a parent sleep in the same bed as their child? Answer: 1- With regards to separating children in their beds, it is clear that the separation which is obligatory is when they reach the age of 7 and not since their birth. This is due to the hadith reported by Daarqutni and al-Hakim from the Messenger (saw) who said: When your children reach the age of 7 then separate their beds and when they reach 10 beat them if they do not pray their salah.’ This is also due to what has been narrated by al-Bazzar on the authority of Abi Rafi’ with the following wording: ‘We found in a sheet near the Messenger of Allah (saw) when he died on which the following was written: Separate the beds of the slave boys and girls and brothers and sisters of 7 years of age.’ The two hadiths are texts on the separation of children when they reach the age of 7. As for the

Q&A: Shari' rule on songs, music, singing & instruments?

The following is a draft translation from the book مسائل فقهية مختارة (Selected fiqhi [jurprudential] issues) by the Mujtahid, Sheikh Abu Iyas Mahmoud Abdul Latif al-Uweida (May Allah protect him) . Please refer to the original Arabic for exact meanings. Question: What is the Shari’ ruling in singing or listening to songs?  What is the hukm of using musical instruments and is its trade allowed? I request you to answer in detail with the evidences? Answer: The Imams ( Mujtahids ) and the jurists have differed on the issue of singing and they have varying opinions such as haraam (prohibited), Makruh (disliked) and Mubah (permissible), the ones who have prohibited it are from the ones who hold the opinion of prohibition of singing as a trade or profession, and a similar opinion has been transmitted from Imam Shafi’i, and from the ones who disliked it is Ahmad Ibn Hanbal who disliked the issue and categorised its performance under disliked acts, a similar opinion has been tran