Serving Brigadier arrested for suspected links with Hizbut Tahrir

[1 ummah]

The Pakistani Armed Forces do not allow any other "culture" to compete with it's own, if this guy felt so strong, about Hizbut'T he should have resigned his commission, become a civilian and then fought for his idea's in the realm of politics.

u know islam is so practical!! it is allowed to lie in war to tric enemy,save life!!
Allah has ordered in quran to prepare horses i.e be strong,have materialistic power to scare enemies...
army has power to defend and protect...so y wud he do that as that is y we ask army to give nusrah??

 

[1 ummah]

All those imbeciles that bring up jihad as a glorious thing forget that the Prophet spent more time in makkah under worse conditions than in Medina..
Did he declare Jihad then ?
All I ask.

i guess u understand y he didnt declare jihad then as i mentioned above he had no power then he fought after gaining nusrah(protection) and ultimately becoming head of state!!

 

[1 ummah]

Army officers who have worked with the brigadier say that nobody who knows him seriously believes that he has been involved in anything illegal.
“But the problem is that his anti-American views and [opinions on] self reliance were getting popular with middle and lower ranking officers,” one remarked.



Ex Army Chief Beg says Hizb ut Tahrir is non-violent and wants implementation of Shariah through convincing others

ISLAMABAD: Former Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Mirza Aslam Beg does not believe that Brigadier Ali Khan and four other officers have been arrested on the grounds of having contacts with a banned organization, the Hizb-ut-Tehrir.
“There are some other reasons behind these arrests, which, the present army leadership is concealing,” he said while talking to The News here on Tuesday.
Beg was however confident that if a brigadier level officer is detained in the army it must be after a thorough and in-depth investigation with solid evidence of his involvement in some crime.
Pointing to the timing of his disappearance and detention, the former army chief said it was almost impossible for an officer to get elevations to the position of brigadier while maintaining contacts with an organization banned in Pakistan.
He referred to army procedures saying the military keeps intelligence check on each and every officer and soldier from top to lower level. It starts from the army units, then at stations, corps and field level. “Discreetly, they (intelligence people) carry out investigations under a system that exists within the army from very first day.”
Besides, he said, the Military Intelligence (MI) and Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) keep a vigilant eye on all officers and Jawans.
“So, what I want to say is that the arrested brigadier or others on the same charges would have certainly committed some crime as the concerned authorities would have collected concrete information before the action.
On contacts with the banned Hizbul Tehrir, Beg said arresting a high ranking official for having contacts with it is nothing except to conceal the facts. There are some other factors that led to Ali Khan’s detention.”
The former COAS said the HT is purely a non-violent organization which neither forces its agenda nor plans to do so. “Their people want the implementation of Shariah through a convincing mechanism and their books, some of them I have read, are a research work.”
“I told their people, when I was in command and even after leaving the command, that their system of Shariah is possible to be implemented in Pakistan provided the Constitution of Pakistan, based on Quran and Sunnah, and it (their system) has coherence.”
Beg said he was surprised when General Musharraf had banned the HT and “I do not think any one else as USA had asked the dictator to declare it a terrorist organization.
On Brigadier Ali’s case, he said the military courts would try him even after the intelligence gatherings, providing him opportunity to defend his position under the laid down procedures.
The News

Now read these Ahadith....

Muslim and Bukhari have related through Muawiya who said: I heard the
Messenger if Allah (saw) say, "A Party (Taifa) from my Ummah will
be established upon the order of Allah (qaimat bi amrillah) they
will not be harmed by those who abandon them or differ with
them, until the order of Allah comes and they are victorious over
the people.."

Imam Ahmed and Tabarani narrated through a chain with reliable narrators
(Rijal al Thiqa) on the authority of Abu Umama who said that the Prophet
(saw) said, "There will be a Party from my Ummah who will be
Victorious upon the Deen (of Islam), and they will defeat their
enemies, they will not be harmed by those who differ with them
except what strikes from trials and tribulations until the order of
Allah comes and they are upon it.." The narrators then asked the Prophet
(saw): O Messenger of Allah (saw) where are they? And he said: "They
are in Bayt al Maqdis and the surrounding areas.."



Imam al Hakim in his Mustadrak has related with an authentic sanad
(chain) on the authority of Umar ibn al Khattab (ra), "There will be a
Party (Taifa) from my Ummah that will remain victorious upon
the Truth until the establishment of the Hour"

It has been related by Darimi from Mugheerah ibn Shuba (ra) who said
that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said, "There will a band of people
(Qaumun) from this Ummah who will be manifest from the people
until the order of Allah comes and they are victorious"

Read more on: Who is Hizb ut Tahrir? athttp://http://www.hizb.org.uk/press-releases/who-is-hizb-ut-tahrir

 

[Rafi]

Again Mr Ummah - it was not his job, to implement Sharia or anything else, his job was to defend "PAKISTAN", and it's territorial integrity, nothing more, nothing else.

 

[Jango]

looks like the dollar loving generals didn't like a brigadier showing them the mirror- it's clear as to why he got arrested!

BBC News - Brigadier Ali Khan: Pakistan's dissenting army officer


he had been exerting strong pressure on the top echelons of Pakistan's military to stop co-operating with American forces in the fight against Taliban and al-Qaeda insurgents, army officers who served with the brigadier during his 32-year career told the BBC

his career hit a roadblock when he openly criticised Gen Pervez Musharraf when he was still army chief-of-staff.

Brig Khan asked Gen Musharraf why he would not divulge the details of an agreement with the US to the Pakistani public.

The brigadier also said the "limits" of co-operation with the US on "the war on terror" should be clearly defined.


Brig Khan started writing letters to army generals, some of whom were his former colleagues, with suggestions on how to become "self reliant" and "to purge the army of the American influence".

He told senior officers such as Gen Ashfaq Pervez Kayani that Pakistan's "unconditional" support to the Americans was causing resentment in the lower ranks of the army.

He said that "growing" American involvement in Pakistan - especially in its military affairs - was negatively affecting the morale of the armed forces.

"But the problem is that his anti-American views and [opinions on] self reliance were getting popular with middle and lower ranking officers," one remarked.

where did you get this ????,,,,,,, he was in the rules and regulation branch and that branch is the most weak and disregarded branch in the whole of GHQ!!!,,according to some people i know including a major general in GHQ, they are calling this whole episode a drama, HT had no links with him whatsoever, he simply voiced his opinions about taliban and was a bit supportive of them, and you get kicked out of the army for anything you say like this in a uniform.

 

[1 ummah]

n where do these rules n responsibility and blah blah disapeares wen this army lets the american army in,allows them to built base in pakistan,sell air bases to them,takes instructions for each n every step n policy!!?????
do u really care about or want to support fitna(intentionally on unintentionally!)

 

[nescafe]

Bring somebody better than Maududi please..
I dont agree with his interpretations..
He was the most disrespectful "scholar" known to me.
Even the most arrogant of western scholars acknowledge their predecessors.
Here is a man who choose to ridicule the policies of all the scholars before them and declaring his misinterpretations as the only correct path.
He is as responsible for the ruin of Islam today as anybody.

please read the book. its very brief. will not take more then a day or two. and bro, you disagree with syed qutb as well....

people say things about madudi. personaly i beleive his tafseer is better then the "mariful quran". he has more references from bible / torah. he goes in more detail. he is more open to ideas as well. actually, maududi is CONTEMPORARY and the maulvis just couldnt absorb him just like they couldnt absorb HARUN YAHYA or for that matter IMRAN HOSSEIN in our daily life.

"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation"

try making your own opinion

 

[SQ8]

please read the book. its very brief. will not take more then a day or two. and bro, you disagree with syed qutb as well....

people say things about madudi. personaly i beleive his tafseer is better then the "mariful quran". he has more references from bible / torah. he goes in more detail. he is more open to ideas as well. actually, maududi is CONTEMPORARY and the maulvis just couldnt absorb him just like they couldnt absorb HARUN YAHYA or for that matter IMRAN HOSSEIN in our daily life.

"Most people are other people. Their thoughts are someone else's opinions, their lives a mimicry, their passions a quotation"

try making your own opinion

I have read his book.. and currently on another tafseer.
And no, he is not open to ideas, rather extremely opinionated about them .
His language too is not refined compared to other tafseer's and he has only states what he believes as the single correct amalgamation of meanings in the verses.Just the brevity he has used for Surah Fatihah leaves a lot to be desired.
In my view, he is the least "contemporary" of all recent scholars to publish tafseer's.
Deoband has produced excellent scholars.. however in my opinion, Maulana Maududi is not one of them.

I suggest you read a few other tafseer's then make your own opinion.
Instead of acting if the rest of us are all ignorant when it comes to Quran and hadiath.
Arrogance will bring you nothing in the way of knowledge, only ridicule.

 

[niaz]

ya i know history!!
u shud know most of the lands were conquered during hazrat umer's khilafat!! n in islam we call this jihad ...in case u forgot..muslim's leader sent invitation to non-muslim countries (gov) asks them to embrace islam as it is deen e haq in case they reject ...they r asked to live under islamic system as non musliims ,paying jizya..(because to implement islamic system is must) and if they refuse that then muslim army invades them (and the rule for this jihad is not to kill innocent civilians or cut trees,which means destroying cities/buildings)

This statement is not correct and overly simplistic.

During the reign of Hazrat Omer (RA), Byzantium possessions in Asia Minor and Sassanid Empire as well as Egypt came under the Muslim rule. Next phase of conquests occured during the reigns of the sons of Abdul Malik ibne Marwan. The process was started during the reign of Walid bin Abdul Malik (705-714 AD) and lasted until reign of Hisham (724-743). This was the maximum expansion of Arab Islamic empire which included all Spainish peninsula including parts of Southern France, all of North Africa, most of Central Asia, Sindh and parts of southern Punjab.
There was no further expansion during Abbasids.

While Byzantium and Sassanid Empires had provided pretext for attack, there was never any offence given to the Muslims by the Egyptians, occupation of Egypt should therefore classified as a conquest not a jihad.

Conquests during during the Omayyad period cannot be classified as Jihad as the campaigns had no other purpose but an expansion of the Omayyad rule. Certainly conversion to Islam was not the reason. There is no record on any invitation sent to the rulers of Spain (Visi Goths) to accept Islam or face jihad.

Because non-believers were exempt from ‘Jizia’ as soon as they converted; historical records suggests that many Omayyad rulers discouraged conversion to Islam as it meant a loss of revenue. This is also one of the reasons why very few conversion to Islam took place in Spain which remained under the Ommayads for a very long time.

There is also no record of invitation to accept Islam to the people living beyond the Amu Daraya (mainly Turkish tribes), it was not until the 10th century when majority of Central Asian people became Muslim. Some tribes such as Qara Khitai never did.

 

[All-Green]

To cut a long story short.

Practically, HT blames the installed puppets in Muslim world as the root of the problem and wants to adopt a top to down approach.
Mostly the dictators and royal dynasties are declared by HT as puppets which have been installed and imposed upon the Muslims to further the cause of global powers.

However the contradiction in HT's diagnosis of the core issue and the proposed way forward is clear.
They want the Pakistan Army to install them as the government of Pakistan via a coup, in the same manner the alleged puppets of the west are installed mostly to serve the foreign masters.
At the end of the day we have only leaflets and the UK brand to put our faith in, that this group can deliver.
They have not orchestrated any social reform resulting in the social uplift of any Muslim country but we are supposed to trust them to run Pakistan and then the entire Muslim world!

We believe foreign hands in everything but we need to make an exception in this case despite the movement being revived in UK and despite its doomed strategy of using coup as the only means to grab the reign of power.
I am afraid this movement with this intent cannot be called a peaceful movement and actually is nothing but an attempt to grab power in the name of Islam.
A more legitimate approach would be to prove themselves in the societies of few major Muslim countries by participating in social reforms and principle based politics.
Only through such actions can it be established whether this is a genuine movement for change or a bid for power with multiple string pullers at the back.
It will take time but shall be worth it if indeed HT is about a positive change....however it suggests a "2 minute noodle" approach which is not at all practical and will backfire if indeed some doomed country falls prey to such half cooked plan.

If HT is not willing to spend time and effort in local politics in order to prove themselves and win the support of people, then what kind of stomach do they have to deal with the pressures of ruling and catering to the different needs of so many different groups in the Muslim world which require a great political balancing act.
Throughout history of Islam, the rulers who did not cater to the political needs of different groups in vast Muslim empire were faced with bloody civil war. Here is a group mostly based in UK which is trying to impose itself on the Muslim world through military uprising and we are to accept this without any doubts and consider it a most peaceful/meaningful transition?

I am sorry but without active local political representation and extensive social work, HT cannot channel support of people and has actually adopted a very dodgy approach which raises too many questions about its origins and agenda.
If HT is unable/unwilling to spend time, effort and energies towards achievement of a better morrow for the Muslims via a legitimate and popular mechanism which certainly takes a lot of doing; there is a huge element of doubt about their intent, capability and popular support.

I do not doubt the intent of most of the people involved in HT in the lower levels, however i completely disagree with the declared approach.
Their proposed piggyback ride to power on the shoulders of a military coup begs the same question they ask of current leadership...
Are you a puppet or do you represent the people?

 

[Abu Basit]

If HT is not willing to spend time and effort in local politics in order to prove themselves and win the support of people, then what kind of stomach do they have to deal with the pressures of ruling and catering to the different needs of so many different groups in the Muslim world which require a great political balancing act.

our local politics is like a 'Gutter- who ever falls in it, you know the next------' We are seeing again and again the gifts our rotten political setup giving us, the baboons from Zardari gang wins the election in AJK

i don't think that HT has ever demanded to install them in the government----

 

[nescafe]

I have read his book.. and currently on another tafseer.
And no, he is not open to ideas, rather extremely opinionated about them .
His language too is not refined compared to other tafseer's and he has only states what he believes as the single correct amalgamation of meanings in the verses.Just the brevity he has used for Surah Fatihah leaves a lot to be desired.
In my view, he is the least "contemporary" of all recent scholars to publish tafseer's.
Deoband has produced excellent scholars.. however in my opinion, Maulana Maududi is not one of them.

I suggest you read a few other tafseer's then make your own opinion.
Instead of acting if the rest of us are all ignorant when it comes to Quran and hadiath.
Arrogance will bring you nothing in the way of knowledge, only ridicule.

recommend me one , dont leave me haywire. i bet you will find hard time mentioning the third one....i BET!!

 

[1 ummah]

To cut a long story short.

Practically, HT blames the installed puppets in Muslim world as the root of the problem and wants to adopt a top to down approach.
Mostly the dictators and royal dynasties are declared by HT as puppets which have been installed and imposed upon the Muslims to further the cause of global powers.

However the contradiction in HT's diagnosis of the core issue and the proposed way forward is clear.
They want the Pakistan Army to install them as the government of Pakistan via a coup, in the same manner the alleged puppets of the west are installed mostly to serve the foreign masters.
At the end of the day we have only leaflets and the UK brand to put our faith in, that this group can deliver.
They have not orchestrated any social reform resulting in the social uplift of any Muslim country but we are supposed to trust them to run Pakistan and then the entire Muslim world!

We believe foreign hands in everything but we need to make an exception in this case despite the movement being revived in UK and despite its doomed strategy of using coup as the only means to grab the reign of power.
I am afraid this movement with this intent cannot be called a peaceful movement and actually is nothing but an attempt to grab power in the name of Islam.
A more legitimate approach would be to prove themselves in the societies of few major Muslim countries by participating in social reforms and principle based politics.
Only through such actions can it be established whether this is a genuine movement for change or a bid for power with multiple string pullers at the back.
It will take time but shall be worth it if indeed HT is about a positive change....however it suggests a "2 minute noodle" approach which is not at all practical and will backfire if indeed some doomed country falls prey to such half cooked plan.

If HT is not willing to spend time and effort in local politics in order to prove themselves and win the support of people, then what kind of stomach do they have to deal with the pressures of ruling and catering to the different needs of so many different groups in the Muslim world which require a great political balancing act.
Throughout history of Islam, the rulers who did not cater to the political needs of different groups in vast Muslim empire were faced with bloody civil war. Here is a group mostly based in UK which is trying to impose itself on the Muslim world through military uprising and we are to accept this without any doubts and consider it a most peaceful/meaningful transition?

I am sorry but without active local political representation and extensive social work, HT cannot channel support of people and has actually adopted a very dodgy approach which raises too many questions about its origins and agenda.
If HT is unable/unwilling to spend time, effort and energies towards achievement of a better morrow for the Muslims via a legitimate and popular mechanism which certainly takes a lot of doing; there is a huge element of doubt about their intent, capability and popular support.

I do not doubt the intent of most of the people involved in HT in the lower levels, however i completely disagree with the declared approach.
Their proposed piggyback ride to power on the shoulders of a military coup begs the same question they ask of current leadership...
Are you a puppet or do you represent the people?

social reforms and principle based politics. i wud be glad if u elaborate wat exactly r these social reforms u want h.t to do..

h.t does not want army uprising but ONLY protection from army...wat happened in libya or syira r exaple which might help u understand... wat is hapening there??
who is standing against awaam??

its army..so wen army is not willing to support u and is american ghullam so this is how the change will end up!
do u want h.t to make such blunders n ruin hope ..??
h.t is Palestine based

 

[Icarus]

social reforms and principle based politics. i wud be glad if u elaborate wat exactly r these social reforms u want h.t to do..

h.t does not want army uprising but ONLY protection from army...wat happened in libya or syira r exaple which might help u understand... wat is hapening there??
who is standing against awaam??

its army..so wen army is not willing to support u and is american ghullam so this is how the change will end up!
do u want h.t to make such blunders n ruin hope ..??
h.t is Palestine based

1) Pathetic argument, just because the Syrian and Libyan army are opposing their people doesn't mean our's will. Just because their military is oppressing their people doesn't mean every country should disband their military.
2) If our military were "American Ghullams" why would we have such poor relations with America ? And why would they expel 345 Americans from Pakistan ?

 

[1 ummah]

This statement is not correct and overly simplistic.

During the reign of Hazrat Omer (RA), Byzantium possessions in Asia Minor and Sassanid Empire as well as Egypt came under the Muslim rule. Next phase of conquests occured during the reigns of the sons of Abdul Malik ibne Marwan. The process was started during the reign of Walid bin Abdul Malik (705-714 AD) and lasted until reign of Hisham (724-743). This was the maximum expansion of Arab Islamic empire which included all Spainish peninsula including parts of Southern France, all of North Africa, most of Central Asia, Sindh and parts of southern Punjab.
There was no further expansion during Abbasids.

While Byzantium and Sassanid Empires had provided pretext for attack, there was never any offence given to the Muslims by the Egyptians, occupation of Egypt should therefore classified as a conquest not a jihad.

Conquests during during the Omayyad period cannot be classified as Jihad as the campaigns had no other purpose but an expansion of the Omayyad rule. Certainly conversion to Islam was not the reason. There is no record on any invitation sent to the rulers of Spain (Visi Goths) to accept Islam or face jihad.

Because non-believers were exempt from ‘Jizia’ as soon as they converted; historical records suggests that many Omayyad rulers discouraged conversion to Islam as it meant a loss of revenue. This is also one of the reasons why very few conversion to Islam took place in Spain which remained under the Ommayads for a very long time.

There is also no record of invitation to accept Islam to the people living beyond the Amu Daraya (mainly Turkish tribes), it was not until the 10th century when majority of Central Asian people became Muslim. Some tribes such as Qara Khitai never did.

orignally the conquests r jihad in islam as they r based on hukm "to spread the deen"
wid wat intention later rulers did is separate ...
n sending invitation,..,.. is also the corrct way of islam

if sum1 did not follow thats his fault..
but once we have khilafa we will invite america to embrace islam i bet they wud atleast agree to join islamic state as dhimmis!! they wont go 4 war with muslims!!