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

[abdulrahman al muhajir]

As salamualaykum

I am just asking...

However I do believe that the Muslims need to unite under one banner to defaet the aggressors via Physical and verbal struggle. As for blowing up trains and all sorts then I am not an educated person in those fields. However there are people out there who are knowledgable ahve condoned it and there are also people who condemn it.

[al-boriqee]

Originally Posted by abdulrahman al muhajir

As salamualaykum

I am just asking...

However I do believe that the Muslims need to unite under one banner to defaet the aggressors via Physical and verbal struggle.

this is somewhat agreed upon but there is one problem here. THAT itself is a deterrent from the mission we are SUPPOSE to be doing. Defeating the aggressors comes through people who fulfill the uboodiyyah of Allah. If we have a nation who is severely disconnected from that total uboodiyyah that our predecessors fulfilled, then we will continue to only imagine victory rather than witness its reality.

Ibn Taymiyya said pretty much to the effect that
"if our capital is damaged then we focus our efforts on the capital"

In this statement, the capital hear is the muslim nation.

I state all of the above on three basic statements, 2 from the prophet and one from Imaam Maalik

1. the prophet alaihi salatu salam stated in part of a longer hadeeth about what will happen to muslims in the future, he said "....no, but you wil be many, however you will be like the ghuthaa (scum of the water i.e. no good) also another hadeeth "If the people of Sham become corrupt, there will be no good in you (the ummah)"
2. the next statement of the messenger is with regard to the hadeeth of the rock and trees calling out to the muslims concerning the jew who is hiding behind it. In some of the narrations it states
"Ya abdillah, ....". Some of the scholars who commented on these narrations stated that they did not call out "oh muslim" rather the object, through divine miraculous nature, will call out "oh Servant of Allah". They explained this that when this happens, it will only because the people at the forefront of this struggle are the true people of tawheed and Islam who have fulfilled the uboodiyyah of Allah and who follow the shar that was revealed to Muhammad without the tabdeel of any innovator.
3. Lastly, Imam Maalik stated "NOTHING will rectify the later part of this ummah except what rectified the first part of this ummah". victory comes through modeling their techniques in every subject, including jihad (we are not talking about non shar'i innovations like weaponry and stuff).

As for blowing up trains and all sorts then I am not an educated person in those fields. However there are people out there who are knowledgable ahve condoned it and there are also people who condemn it.

those people who condoned it are not knowledgeable. And the people who are knowledgeable who have hinted towards a condonment of it is based on assessing the situation of the people of a region. In other words, the same one who found some excuse for our brothers in Palestine to do it at the same time did not find excuse for OBL to do whatever other attacks he did (im not even counting the 9/11 event cuz I think that was a collaboration of efforts which OBL may have agreed with the kuffar to place the blame on them and offer some men in the ultimate planning of it).

One of the mujahideen friends that I have stated in a lecture about jihad "when I fight, I fight armies" and this is the way of the salaf. We the actual Mujahideen do battle, they battle combatants with scarcely few non combatants as collatoral damage in between. When cowards fight, they fight non combatants. Im not saying our brothers our cowards, Im saying that the attribute of a coward is to inflict damage (or in our case "try" to inflict damage which results in little success only because the damage was not where it is to be targeted at) on people who do not fulfill the requirements of combatantship. Its like the average punk at school who would try to rag on people who are smaller than him, but he dares not mess with people equal or greater than him.

The salaf of this ummah understood warfare like ever other knowledgeable person of war understands. Here is the difference
Mujaahideen- understood that attacks against the enemies were directly targeted for a military purpose and objective. Its objective was clear to the commanders.
irhaabiyeen- on the other hand, people like OBL and those who agree with his madhaab offer a completely different thought pattern for performing the same action. There is no military objective other than to inflict harm on the muslims (this is not what is stated nor may not be intended, but this is the outcome when people carry out their objectives). Likewise, their objective is to falsely implement the ayaah "and strike fear within them" to mean that terrorize them with these practices. IN reality they are not striking fear in them (at least not the fear pointed in this ayaah), but rather that they are striking into the hearts of the kuffar is rage and oppression.

The thing that I do worry about is that another attack similar to the one happens in 9/11 on another non-combatant area, and then in return, the muslims abroad are then ultimately are brought under their wrath and then the muslims here are then put to concentration camps as they did with the japenese and virtually putting the muslims on a furthr plight of humiliation, destruction, the loss of life, and the overall miserableness of life on part of muslims on account of a bunch of munafiqs who posed as muslims who performed such an action thinking that there was some military achievement that they can gain through such an action.

THe ONLY benefit that I would see that would come out of such a scenario is that the ummah would wake up, turn to the path of the salaf, and by virtue of doing that, they in turn expell the munafiqeen like these cowards and kill them wherever they find them just as the messenger of Allah commanded the muslims to do when they find them. And they expose and expel the heretics like Hawaali, Abu Qatadah, Abdul-Iblees Faisal, Abu Baseer at-Tartusee, and other kharijite scoundrals like Abu Hamza and chop of their heads.

to build a nation for the sake of the nation has never been done, EVER. to form a khilaafa for the sake of forming it because "we have to have one" is an ideology of insanity because it has never worked nor will it ever work.

The way nations are built is through building people. we we have the muslims agree and concede to the fact that Islam is what the salaf were, then and only then would ALlah facilitate the means to have a khilaafa WHY? because Allah said "We grant rulership over the land to whom We choose".

Khilafa is not a divine right of Muslims, rather it is a privilege THAT IS EARNED. Khilaafa is granted to us, it does not fall upon the realm of our working for it, it is earned because the power of rule lies in the Hands of Allah, it is not "up for grabs".

the sahaba did not take the khilaafa, they earned it and it was a reward from Allah for their proving themselves worthy of it.

When we work on people, you then have the ability to transform nations and the future. working for anything outside of that is tantamount to asking for the coke out of the coke machine without putting the money in it first, it is virtually useless.

[salman]

@al-muhajir



akhee, almost everyone believes that we need to unite under one banner and fight the falsehood with qalm (pen) and sayif (sword). But how we go about it and implement it, that is where the problem lies. The Messenger of Allah (sal-allahu 'alayhi wa sallam) said that his ummah will never unite upon error. Therefore, we should reflect upon his (sal-allhu 'alayhi wa sallam) statement; there is nothing wrong in working together for mutual cause; however, this does not mean we do not correct the mistakes of each other or over look at them. Allahu A'lam

as far your comment on blowing up trains and what have you, can you please tell us how do these knowledgeable brothers justify it?

The kuffaar are divided in 3 different categories:

1 - who are hostile toward Muslims
2 - who are not hostile toward Muslims
3 - who are in treaty with Islamic or under its protection

I do not think that the third category is applicable now days. So looking at first two categories, how do these brothers justify blowing up people belonging to first two categories?

I may understand their line of argument about first category of people to a certain extent but for the second category it is nothing but extremism, and rape of Shari'ah or whatever one wants to call it.

[Sampharo]

Not really interested in entering this argument to refute the repeated non-sensical approaches of the side that wants to bend words and conditions as usual to justify mindless acts of Khawarij of death and destruction as legitimate Jihad, but just wanted to point out the OBVIOUS:

This thread says "Salafi". All scholars of Salaf including the companions Ibn Abbas and Ibn Omar, along with the legends of Sunni scholarship Ahmed Ibn Hanbal, Malik, Shafei, Ibn Taymeyya, and others have flatly rejected all these twisted notions and established such actions to be criminal and pointless and its perpetrators are destined for hellfire. Suicide has NEVER been ambiguous or anything other than a grave sin that a person cannot be repenting from since... they're dead the moment it's commited! As for the rest of the actions of killing noncombatant people in peaceful cities they are flatly unacceptable to all.

Are these "madkhalis" as well? The word Madkhali is completely baseless to start with and is a very poor attempt at reducing the validity of the established scholars of sunnah and salaf by some uneducated devious sect followers just to make themselves feel better, and is a flat rejection of God's commandments and unambiguous dictation that puts the limits on what is permissible and what is not in order to go for something they want, which is political power.

Every argument placed by those people uses human-based reasoning of what could be better for people, and using it to negate or argue a way out of God's commandments and authenticated evidence of Sunnah. It is simply unislamic. It attempts to argue for what would bring about "Return of Ummah" and other non-issues that were never part of the muslim charge to begin with. Every forbidden crime being commited is always twisted out of what it is and has no evidence whatsoever to suggest it was ever permissible, and the only factor that matters in the argument is always "We have to do this because it's better for the muslims!" Or "are you willing to let the Ummah go!" Or "you must approve of the current corrupt apostates ruling us then, therefore you are an apostate like them!" bla bla bla.

What I am trying to say basically is that there is nothing to be taken from Khawarej who has been named and condemned by the prophet -pbuh- himself. The evidence-backed statements of the great scholars of our time and that of Salaf is crystal clear and a compromise with khawarej is selling our religion for the sake of Worldly gain. I noticed what you said Salman about "bringing the two sides together", and I have to say that is an unislamic notion at its core because it will mean to knowingly "negotiate" allowances that are strictly forbidden for the sake of coming closer.

Can we move forward without placing a consideration for them? Absolutely, we just have to be open about it and start educating undereducated people about this so as to reduce their recruitment effort and treat them as an additional problem to deal with. For this the Ummah needs the most important thing, a unified populace that wants to abide by God's true message of Islam.

Until we are one, we will never BE one nation.

God knows best

[al-boriqee]

there's a difference between suicide operations and martyrdom operations

the salaf performed martyrdom operations, they never performed suicide operations. It is the interest of some people who are khawaarij or are influenced by them to take what was narrated by the salaf and the Imaams of sunnah and to try to extract what they said to be applicable for suicide operations as is currently practiced now.

and your right, madkhalism was only a recent invention invented by scoundrals like abu hamza, abu qatadah, and others.

[salman]

Shaykh al-Albani (rahimahullah) on these suicide operations:

YouTube- Suicide operation or Shahada - Shaykh Al-Albani

YouTube- Suicide operation or Shahada - Shaykh Al-Albani

[ardianto]

Originally Posted by al-boriqee

there's a difference between suicide operations and martyrdom operations

the salaf performed martyrdom operations, they never performed suicide operations. It is the interest of some people who are khawaarij or are influenced by them to take what was narrated by the salaf and the Imaams of sunnah and to try to extract what they said to be applicable for suicide operations as is currently practiced now.

and your right, madkhalism was only a recent invention invented by scoundrals like abu hamza, abu qatadah, and others.

There was (is) a group that made some terror with suicide bombing in Indonesia. I cannot say their operation as martyrdom because they exploded their bombs out of war zone and always targeting innocent people.

I have read profiles of suicide bombers in two operations and I found ......
- They were new recruited in that group.
- They had no experience in jihad or experience in jihadi group.
- They were known as good but naif people before joined in that group.
- They were not aggressive or temperamental persons.
- They had high intention in learn Islamic knowledge.

According to some 'expert' they were recruited by that group just for die.

Honestly, I feel they also victims of 'men behind them' because they had similar stories. They meet 'men behind them' when they were in process to find someone who can teach them Islamic knowledge. And they didn't knew if their teacher were wrong teachers.

[Qatada]

asalam alykum

Whats ur opinion on the situation in afghan br.boriqee?

[al-boriqee]

I don't know much about what's goin on there to comment but I have mixed feelings

On one hand I want the Muslims to totally eradicate the imperialist occupiers while on the other hand I know that doing that may bring more harm to Muslims the main reason being their inadequate resources and then to regroup

I'm really not to sure to say anything

asalamu alaikum