> Sunni Response Salafi/Wahhabi Jihadists Terrorists supported by rich oil bearer Arabs

[salman]

Sunni response to critical and popular topic of our time: Salafi/Wahhabi Jihadi movement. The west understand and promote it as a terrorist movement started and lead by Islamists fundamentalists Muslims and supported by rich oil bearer Arabs (i.e., Saudi Arabs), who take the literal interpretations of the Qur'an and Sunnah.

insha'Allah, in this thread we will critical analyze the salafi/wahhabi jihadi movement, delineates inconsistencies founded in their claims and discuss the two extremes and adopting the middle & balanced position.

this thread will be updated over time as I continue my research on this topic to produce best of the material, insha'Allah. And for now, it will serve as my notes.

1 - The two extremes about salafi jihadi movement supported by rich oil bearer Arabs. Why does west not focus on core of the problem and come up with a solution to stop this supposedly terrorist movement?

[Umm Sufyaan]

maybe one way is to explain and clarify to people what Salafism/Wahhabism actually is :|

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by salman

Why does west not focus on core of the problem and come up with a solution to stop this supposedly terrorist movement?

because they already know who is the saved and victorious group. In the hadeeth where the jews will hide behind stones and trees and they will yell out to themuslims, the wording of those hadeeth, (some of them) mention the term "abdullah". So the tree and stone will be saying "ya abdullah"

the term abdullah was explained by the jordanian shaykhs and others that it means the "one who has fulfilled the uboodiyyah of Allah" hence abdullah. So its not just gonna call out to anyone who calls themselves Muslim, it is goin to call out who has truely fulfilled his slavehood in a manner that would please Allah enough to allow for this miracle to take place.

So, they already know this, this is why their biggest aim is to smear the salafi movement because they know what would happened if the ummah turns back to the affair that transformed the first generations.

[abdulrahman al muhajir]

Does anybody oppsoe the salafee/jihaddee other than the kuffar (on this forum)?

[salamfromrom]

Does anybody oppsoe the salafee/jihaddee other than the kuffar

If by salafee/jihadee you mean terrorists who blow up marketplaces in Iraq, trains in London/Madrid, clubs in Bali, etc etc , then the majority of the rightly guided muslims oppose those.

If by salafee/jihadee you mean those who are fighting to uphold justice in the name of Allah(swt) by using halal methods that do not involve targeting of non-combatants then I would say the majority of the ummah support these people and we pray for their success.

Ramadan Kareem!

Salam a leikum!

[salman]

^suicide bombing issue is not as straight forward as some of us simply put it. Some of our (salafee) contemporary ulama allow this given that the target is the kuffaar and there is not other option. In some areas (i.e., Israel), there are hardly any innocent civilians. They consider anyone 14+ as an army soldier.

As far these attacks taking place in western countries, there is not much evidence to support that it was done by Muslims.

Allahu A'lam

[salamfromrom]

suicide bombing issue is not as straight forward

wether a man decides to fight with his rifle or to participate in a suicide operation is none of my concern. I don't care what weapons the mujahid uses as long as the situation doesn't degenerate into indiscriminate killing as was happening in the marketplaces of iraq, streets of london, etc etc. As long as opressors are targeted, and not women and children, I have no problems with using any methods or tools of war.

As far these attacks taking place in western countries, there is not much evidence to support that it was done by Muslims.

I respect your right to hold any opinion you wish even though I disagree with it. My response was primarily to make sure nobody would support these sort of indiscriminate killings of civilians regardless of who the perpetrators are.

with all due respect to bro abdulrahman al muhajir , I got the impression from reading his post, that he might be one of the people that believes muslims carried out the attrocities (9/11, etc) and supports them. If that is the case (and I pray that I'm wrong about this) I just want to dissasociate myself from that and state that I have met no muslims who agree with killing civilians and operations of that nature, and even if 1 million among the ummah agrees to that sort of thing , it's still wrong.

Salam a leikum

[al-boriqee]

al-Muhajir has agreed with the views of the Islamic awakening forum, a forum base comprised of enemies of Islam and even munafiqeen

most of the other members are just juhaal whom Allah did not wish good for.

as for the issue at hand, here is a more accurate position of the senior salafi scholars

below is a comprehensive thesaurus of sunni salafi scholars on suicide missions

[salman]

^wa'alayka as-sallam

Jazak Allah khayr for sharing akhee. But these two seems to be compiled by madkhalis. No? I had a look at them and I do disagree with some of the point brought therein. I personally feel the suicide bombing is legitimate as long as the conditions mentioned by shaykh al-Albani (rahimahullah) are mentioned and such act is beneficial to Muslims who are being oppressed and mascaraed by the kuffaar; Allahu A'lam

To me it seems to be two extreme views and no one is willing to adopt the middle way. again, Allahu A'lam

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by salman

^wa'alayka as-sallam

Jazak Allah khayr for sharing akhee. But these two seems to be compiled by madkhalis. No?

but remember something here. these people are called madkhalis by none other than who. the islam against terrorism is a compilation of of the senior scholars on the topic, so even if it is compiled by madkhalis according to the khawaarij, what matters is the content of the shiyookh, not what they say. Secondly, Alaamah Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbadd is the most senior of all the shiyookh. He is deemed as the muhadith of the ummah as of right now and he is the one who blasted the super salafis back into the stone age in a detailed work of his who exposed the atrocities of Faalih al-Harbi and he even spoke on Rabee and even mentioned something about Najmee and Ubayd. I will send to you privately this work which an excerpt has been translated in english. Well never mind, I will make it open on the Madkhali thread that I formed. So by all means Abdul-Muhsin al-Abbadd is by no means a madkhali, infact, madkhali sat under his tutelage.

I had a look at them and I do disagree with some of the point brought therein. I personally feel the suicide bombing is legitimate as long as the conditions mentioned by shaykh al-Albani (rahimahullah) are mentioned and such act is beneficial to Muslims who are being oppressed and mascaraed by the kuffaar; Allahu A'lam

I meant to try to work on this topic becaue people are still confused between two things. There is a difference between
1. martyrdom operations
vs
2. suicide operations

suicide operations are completely unacceptable even to al-Albanee. So those shiyookh who allowed it are speaking in terms of the martyrdom operations which does not exactly entail the suicide missions. What the khawarij are doing, and might i add successfully, is to blend the two together. The basic difference between the two is that in the martyrdom operation, the agent that is performing the action intends to get out of it, but the reason why it is called a martyrdom operation is because there is a great chance where he will not make it out. Secondly, it is not merely a strap on a bomb and show up at a club type of mission. the purpose of the mission is virtually a military tactic. The only military tactic that comes out of present day suicide bombers is that the kaafirs take out 40 times more from our side. That, in my book, is not a military tactic for us, rather it is an advantage for the kuffar, and when people promote the continual destruction of our lives, I don't view them as muslims, I vie them as munafiqs.

To me it seems to be two extreme views and no one is willing to adopt the middle way. again, Allahu A'lam

this has some basis. But there is one problem. I should have stressed this more. The sunnah itself is the middle way as you know. Islam itself is the middle way of all ways and the sunnis are the most middle of all people.

However, as one bknowledgeable brother pointed out to me, the middle way is NOT SOLELY defined as the sore thumb that sticks up between two sides. RATHER, in many cases, the middle way is to seek the truth therein and stand firm on that position. What I mean to say is that if the truth lies in following a harsh or extreme stance, then it is to be adopted. For example. The sunni stance regarding the theif who steals above the ordained portion, his hand is to be cut off. In this case, this is an extreme stance as opposed to everyone else in the world, however, the immense benefit in such a stance outweighs the softness or the "middleness" of other views. So the shariah is not always as the sore thumb that sticks out between two polar opposites, sometimes, it falls into the extreme of a topic, but we as the people of the sunnah KNOW that such an extreme is the overall benefit of humanity at large and the CORRECT way to follow and any other way, even if it be middle or too lenient is baseless from a shar'i point of view.

anyways, on the topic, there is a difference between the two actions. there are examples of Islamic history where the practice of the first have been perofmred and this is natural, every military has performed it on the face of the planet. However, the second act, the first to initate this act were the Japanese, then it was adopted by the shia, and then it carried over to the palestinians may Allah rid them of their enemies.

anyways akhee Sami al-Muhajir, I did not mean to offend you for the above comment on you, I was merely point out the manhaj and nature of the IA and that you have merely followed suit in their views (of course not to their extent), however it was more of a naseeha to you to re evaluate some of their unislamic views. Of course, you may initially view me as a madkhali given the nature who invented this madhaab to begin with.