Islamic scholars warning about Bin Laaden

In a meeting with al-Jareedah ar-Ra'iy, a Kuwaiti national newspaper [Dated 19th December 1998, Edition 11503] the Allaamah of Yemen Shaykh Muqbil said;

"I free myself before Allaah from Usaamah bin Laadin. He is a calamity and a trial for the Muslims (Ummah) and his actions are wicked!"

In the same meeting the Shaykh was asked;

Question:

"It is noticed that the Muslims in the west are subjected to hardship once a bomb goes off, no matter where in the world it occurs".

Answer:

"I am aware of this. Some of our brothers from Britain called me complaining about the difficulty that they face...

>>>Click here for full answer<<<

http://www.al-athariyyah.com/Data_Files/Ar...ofbinLaadin.pdf

This post is as base as it is obsurd...

It would be like asking a Democrat if they felt Tom DeLay was a honorable and good politician...

I do like the idea of an Islam thread being as we have new members who can add a lot to a discussion. However take a step back and think about it for a moment - no mainstream politicial leader (religious or not) in Muslim coutires is going to come out and support Osama, even the Taliban before we blew up Afghanistan explained they were wiling to turn Osama over if any evidence could be provided - its just that we didn't care...that said, I doubt most Muslims do support Osama, in the same way most Christians wouldn't say they support Eric Rudolph for blowing up Abortion clinics and killing people. However, there are a lot of people out there who don't completely disagree with eithers actions even if they don't stand up and shout it...

I heard an interesting thing on NPR the other day where a man whose name eludes me now explained that there had been something like 7 terrorist incidents in about ten years by Al Queda before 9/11 but 17 since going to war in Afghanistan and Iraq...he also added that after 9/11 SUV sales increased dramamtically which to any rational thinker increases our dependency on foeriegn oil ina time we all were atleast cautious about Arab Muslim countries...I mention these two things to reflect how irational our behavior as everyday people has been and how our national policy has in fact reinforced the reason we went to war, which lead to an increase in terrorism, which leads to otherwise good average people not becoming terrorist, but becoming the passive sympathizers who provide safe haven for those who would in another context be criminals...

I firmly believe we could have even gone to war as a National effort to punch back - which in another context, not seen since World War II, I agree with. However instead its like we wanted to beat the Hell out of people to see our point of view and just get revenge instead of using our muscle to preserve safety, but using our wit to compromise. We didn't and don't care about intelectual understanding or the factors that create extremism. We care about beating the heads in of our enemies, not realizing that everyone from Abrahan Lincoln to Biggie Smalls becomes a hero in death, especialy under the circumstances of an enemy the population might not agree with...and while this guy might not like what Osama does, beleive that every person in Iraq who had there houses bombed for no reason does on some level at least understand...

Suicide bombing cannot be explained by poverty and disadvantage. The London bombers were not the wretched of the earth. They came from working-class but comfortable backgrounds, living in one of the world's most prosperous countries. For all the talk of their being marginalized, none were living in hellish ghettos. Britain today does a decent job of assimilating its immigrants, certainly better than any other European country. If anyone had cause for rage, it was not the bombers but their parents. Muslim migrants from Pakistan (in three cases), they arrived in Britain in less multicultural times. They were dirt-poor and probably ostracized and persecuted. And yet they did not become murderers; they started fish-and-chips shops.

Like all ideologies, radical Islam is a phenomenon of the educated class. From Muhammad Atta to Mohammed Sidique Khan, almost all suicide bombers have been men who read and write. In V. S. Naipaul's book "A Million Mutinies Now," the author interviews a young Hindu fanatic. The man explains his fascistic views, and then Naipaul asks the man's father, who happens to be sitting there, what he thinks. The old man explains that he works at a factory from morning till night and doesn't really have time for these kinds of ideas. Extremist ideology is a leisure-time pursuit.

Nor can foreign policy really explain such rage. The invasion of Iraq clearly has greatly enraged many Muslims, radicalizing some deeply. But can a disagreement over foreign policy really make a Briton like Germaine Lindsay, who had never even visited Iraq, kiss his pregnant wife and child goodbye and go out and blow himself and others up? There is something deeper at work here. Last week Egypt, which sent no troops to Iraq and condemned the invasion, was targeted. Turkey and Indonesia—which are both opponents of the war—have also been attacked. (Besides, the demands keep changing. Osama bin Laden's primary one was that American troops leave Saudi Arabia, which they have done. Bin Laden seems not to have noticed.)

What this is about, as Tony Blair has argued, is fanaticism. Radical ideologies of hate and violence have often seduced disaffected young men searching for some great cause. Forty years ago they would have embraced Leninist revolutionary dogma, with Che Guevara as the bin Laden of his day. Today, for Muslims, it is a violent interpretation of Islamic fundamentalism. Born in the Middle East, it has spread like a virus across the Muslim world and into the Islamic diaspora in the West.

The good news is that in the heart of the Muslim world, this ideology is not doing so well. The bombings, increasingly of civilians, are showing Al Qaeda and its ilk in their true light. Arabs arefinally denouncing terrorism and also the ideologies that feed it. They need to do much more, and far more forcefully. It's a cliché, but true, that ultimately only Muslims can win this fight.

But Western countries can do more as well. We're fighting a military battle against a phenomenon that is largely nonmilitary. In a battle of ideas, no one bullet will win. We must present a positive vision for Muslim societies, be seen as a friendly and progressive force by them and thus strengthen the moderates and liberals.

But this is battle, not an academic seminar. We also have to discredit, delegitimize and dismantle barbaric ideas. After the London bombings, Arab commentators pointed out that for years Britain has granted asylum to noxious preachers and scholars who praise suicide bombings, argue for the overthrow of Western regimes and celebrate Al Qaeda's victories.

The director-general of Al Arabiya TV, Abdul Rahman Al-Rashed, asked two weeks ago in the London-based daily Asharq Al-Awsat, "Why would Britain grant asylum to Arabs who have been convicted of political crimes or religious extremism, or even sentenced to death? Not only were they admitted to this country, but they were also provided with accommodation, a monthly salary, and free legal advice... for those who want to prosecute the British government." Recall that bin Laden's original declaration of war against the West was published in only one venue, a London-based newspaper. Next time, let him publish it in Saudi Arabia if he can.

http://www.fareedzakaria.com/articles/articles.html

What Sect Does Osama Bin Laden Really Belong to?

As a result of the wealth which the Bin Laden Corporation generated, Osama Bin Laden used his family's money to live a carefree and luxurious lifestyle. Because of this, he never managed to exert himself to sit with any of the Muslim scholars, really seek knowledge, or ground himself in the fundamentals of Islamic beliefs. This state of ignorance continued even after he became religious and went to Afghanistan to fight against the Soviets. The fact that he failed to take advantage of studying under the guardianship of the elder scholars of Saudi Arabia led him to mix instead with the Qutbists, a newly arisen sect.

Eventually, he completely dismissed the methodology of the "Wahhabis" and expelled many of its people from the fold of Islam. Therefore, how could it be considered correct to say that Osama Bin Laden is a "Wahhabi"? In actuality, Osama Bin Laden and his al-Qaeda movement are not "Wahhabis", but rather, Qutbists.

Confirming this important link, the New York Times' Robert Worth said, "…But if one man deserves the title of intellectual grandfather to Osama bin Laden and his fellow terrorists, it is probably the Egyptian writer and activist Sayyid Qutb."

The Existence of Qutbism as an Ideology

In an article titled "Terror, Islam and Democracy," Ladan and Roya Boroumand correctly state that "Most young Islamist cadres today are the direct intellectual and spiritual heirs of the Qutbist wing of the Muslim Brotherhood."

They state that: "When the authoritarian regime of President Gamel Abdel Nasser suppressed the Muslim Brothers in 1954 (it would eventually get around to hanging Qutb in 1966), many went into exile in Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Syria and Morocco. From there, they spread their revolutionary Islamist ideas - including the organizational and ideological tools borrowed from European totalitarianism."

Expanding upon the link between European revolutionary ideologies and the dogma of Qutbism, The Independent's John Gray argues in an article entitled "How Marx turned Muslim" that Qutbism is not rooted in the Islamic tradition, but rather, is very much a Western based ideology.

He explains that Sayyid Qutb "incorporated many elements derived from European ideology into his thinking," and as such, Qutbism should be seen as an "exotic hybrid, bred from the encounter of sections of the Islamic intelligentsia with radical western ideologies."

Gray explains that Qutbism is a modern revolutionary movement and unrepresentative of the orthodoxy of true Islam:

"The inspiration for Qutb's thought is not so much the Quran, but the current of western philosophy embodied in thinkers such as Nietzsche, Kierkegaard and Heidegger. Qutb's thought -- the blueprint for all subsequent radical Islamist political theology -- is as much a response to 20th-century Europe's experience of 'the death of God' as to anything in the Islamic tradition. Qutbism is in no way traditional. Like all fundamentalist ideology, it is unmistakably modern."

Speaking about the incontestable link that exists between Bin Laden and Qutbism, the Arab News' Amir Taheri said: "In time, Maudoodo-Qutbism provided the ideological topos in which Bin Ladenism could grow."

Shaykh Rabee' ibn Hadi al-Madkhali, the renowned Salafi scholar who has written several books refuting the mistakes of Sayyid Qutb, concludes the following about Qutbism: "The Qutbists are the followers of Sayyid Qutb… everything you see of the tribulations, the shedding of blood and the problems in the Islamic world today arise from the methodology (of this man)."

- abridged from the book: The 'Wahhabi' Myth

http://www.thewahhabimyth.com/osama_sect.htm

Question:

What is the ruling regarding acts of jihaad by means of suicide, such as attaching explosives to a car and storming the enemy, whereby he knows without a doubt that he shall die as a result of this action?

Answer:

Indeed, my opinion is that he is regarded as one who has killed himself (committed suicide), and as a result he shall be punished in Hell, for that which is authenticated on the authority of the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam).

"Indeed, whoever (intentionally) kills himself, then certainly he will be punished in the Fire of Hell, wherein he shall dwell forever" [bukhaaree (5778) and Muslim (109 and 110)].

However, one who is ignorant and does not know, and assumes his action was good and pleasing to Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala), then we hope Allaah (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala) forgives him for that which he did out of (ignorant) ijtihaad, even though I do not find any excuse for him in the present day. This is because this type of suicide is well known and widespread amongst the people, so it is upon the person to ask the people of knowledge (scholars) regarding it, until the right guidance for him is differentiated from the error.

And from that which is surprising, is that these people kill themselves despite Allaah having fordbidden this, as He (Subhaanahu wa Ta'aala) says:

{And do not kill yourselves. Surely, Allaah is Most Merciful to you}, [soorah an-Nisaa., Aayah 29].

And many amongst them do not desire anything except revenge of the enemy, by whatever means, be it halaal or haraam. So they only want to satisfy their thirst for revenge.

We ask Allaah to bless us with foresight in His Deen and action(s) which please Him, indeed He is all Powerful over all things.

Shaykh Muhammad bin Saalih al-`Uthaymeen

Kayfa Nu'aalij Waaqi'unaa al-Aleem - Page 119

http://www.spubs.com/sps/sp.cfm?subsecID=M...&articlePages=1

This post is absolutely not base , nor absurd....It is a clarification from one of the (deceased) Leaders of the muslims(may Allah have mercy on him) who is explaining the evil condition of Usaamah Ibn Laden, and his evil effects upon Islaam, and the world in General . The reality is that, Islam has not been established for killing and destroying.

Islam is an institution that caused harmony between Muslims and non muslims during the great majority of Islamic history.

Islam seeks to protect the rights of people in general, Muslims and non muslims, and I will say , As one of our great scholars , Sheikh Muhammad Al Banna said, that if ISlaam was truly being established upon the earth , then we would not see the likes of these killing and bombings. The people would be living in safety and security, free from dispicable acts of violence, crime and immorality. So It's upon is, the muslims to condemn these terrorist acts, and to openly proclaim it, from any media oulet or source of information we have available. So , No I do not think this post is base or absurd.

Very interesting. I had never heard of Sayyid Qubt. So, now that it has been established that the terrorists are not serving the interests of Islam, are Muslims going to put them on the "arrest on sight" list, or what? I'm surprised that it has taken this long for this information to come to light, even in the West.

Well, heres the interesting part........We don't know who they are either. I guess unless you are a member of a terrorist organization, you wouldnt know many terrorists. But if they blow up a building near me, and I'm on the scene,

Rest assured kabar, I'm calling the cops.

Islam=Unedited Christianity.

Simple as can be. They have been fucked with for far too long. I mean holy shit The Crusades, comstant challenging of their way of life.

If you want to get rid of the terrorist just leave them the hell alone. And especially dont challeng their religon. Just leave them be.

Good Idea...

Actually, Jesus was a muslim.

christianity is something people after Jesus made up....

Jesus taught Islam

Originally posted by Dawood@Aug 2 2005, 04:25 AM

Actually, Jesus was a muslim.

 

christianity is something people after Jesus made up....

 

Jesus taught Islam

Quoted post

LOL!!! Jesus was a Jew you big dummy.:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

Okay, here we go. No wonder the world is so full of hatred and rancor. And mind you, ALL THREE of the Mosaic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) use many of the exact same documents, or slightly different versions of the same documents. You'd think that we would have a great deal in common with one another, but alas--t'ain't so.

Originally posted by KaBar2@Aug 2 2005, 03:31 AM

Okay, here we go. No wonder the world is so full of hatred and rancor. And mind you, ALL THREE of the Mosaic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) use many of the exact same documents, or slightly different versions of the same documents. You'd think that we would have a great deal in common with one another, but alas--t'ain't so.

Quoted post

You would think so but false interpretations and false associations that have caused the split and confusion.

Originally posted by KaBar2@Jul 31 2005, 11:14 PM

Very interesting. I had never heard of Sayyid Qubt. So, now that it has been established that the terrorists are not serving the interests of Islam, are Muslims going to put them on the "arrest on sight" list, or what? I'm surprised that it has taken this long for this information to come to light, even in the West.

Quoted post

There is an great lecture you should hear by Da`ee Abu-Khadeejah Abdul-Wahid. It mentions how the same ones that speaking of overthrowing Muslim leaders/governments (and are even allowed to preach this in the radio) and committing this terrorist acts are living in countries where they have political asylum so they can't be touched by the Middle Eastern country they come from.

Here's the link, it's in English.

http://www.salafiaudio.com/audio/SA129_1A.mp3

Originally posted by SF1+Aug 2 2005, 04:31 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SF1 - Aug 2 2005, 04:31 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Dawood@Aug 2 2005, 04:25 AM

Actually, Jesus was a muslim.

 

christianity is something people after Jesus made up....

 

Jesus taught Islam

Quoted post

LOL!!! Jesus was a Jew you big dummy.:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

[/b]

Jesus was sent to the Jews and he was from the children of Isreal (meaning the Jews) But being of Jewish descent does not stop him from being a muslim. The word Muslim literally means.. "one who submits his will to the will of God" So with that description, what was JEsus other than a Muslim? Muhammad was an Arab so does that mean he is not a muslim? Judaism is not a nationality, it is a religion.

So therefore Jesus was born as a Jew in blood, not in religion (because the judaism that the Jews are upon today is not what Moses was upon then...........P.S. Moses was a muslim too.

peace be upon them

Originally posted by Dawood+Aug 3 2005, 01:54 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Dawood - Aug 3 2005, 01:54 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'>

Originally posted by SF1@Aug 2 2005, 04:31 AM

<!--QuoteBegin-Dawood@Aug 2 2005, 04:25 AM

Actually, Jesus was a muslim.

 

christianity is something people after Jesus made up....

 

Jesus taught Islam

Quoted post

 

 

LOL!!! Jesus was a Jew you big dummy.:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

Quoted post

Jesus was sent to the Jews and he was from the children of Isreal (meaning the Jews) But being of Jewish descent does not stop him from being a muslim. The word Muslim literally means.. "one who submits his will to the will of God" So with that description, what was JEsus other than a Muslim? Muhammad was an Arab so does that mean he is not a muslim? Judaism is not a nationality, it is a religion.

So therefore Jesus was born as a Jew in blood, not in religion (because the judaism that the Jews are upon today is not what Moses was upon then...........P.S. Moses was a muslim too.

peace be upon them

[/b]

JESUS WAS A JEW, A JEW WHO INSPIRED CHRISTIANITY YOU BIG DUMMY!!! :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

Jesus a muslim? <---- :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

If the word Muslim means " one who submits his will to the will of God" then you tell me what Jesus was.

[Arabic definition of muslim], one who submits, active participle of 'aslama, to submit or surrender; see Islam.]

Muslim adj.

And when I (Allâh) put in the hearts of Al-Hawârîeen (the disciples) of Jesus to believe in Me and My Messenger, they said: "We believe. And bear witness that we are Muslims." (Al-Ma'idah 5:111)

He Jesus was not more than a slave. We granted Our Favour to him, and We made him an example to the Children of Israel (i.e. his creation without a father). (Az-Zukhruf 43:59)

Then whoever disputes with you concerning him (jesus)after (all this) knowledge that has come to you, (jesus) being a slave of Allâh, and having no share in Divinity) say: (O Muhammad SAW) "Come, let us call our sons and your sons, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves - then we pray and invoke (sincerely) the Curse of Allâh upon those who lie." (Aali Imran 3:61)

jesus was a muslim........you act like you dont know!!

:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

speechless, funny guy??

insults and "lol's" make for a poor argument.

There's nothing to argue, everyone knows that Jesus was actually a hindu, Budist, Black Isrealite Peagan priestess. :jpotato:

:haha: :haha: :haha: :haha:

that was weak, really, you don't have to resort to insulting one of God's greatest prophets to try to make me look bad.....bad form SF bad form...

dawood dont waste your time with these nerds.