Turn to islam have always been a nice forum to discuss the real issues, which the muslims are facing and it is still serving that purpose. However, I don't think, the brothers and sisters are doing any service to this forum, when they bring up some non-issues and quote fatwas, which belong to a narrow understanding of Islam.
The discussion in the time of our Salf about living among mushrikeen has a completly different context. The verses in Quran dealing with muslims, who chose to remain in Makkah do not apply to muslims living in non-muslim countries today. We should keep in mind the eternal law of itmaam al-hujja, according to which, when a rasool (and not a nabi) would leave his people after the permission of Allah, azaab of Allah could come to them any time. Hijrah to Medina was compulsory and and remaining in Makkah was not sanctioned by the Prophet.
The word mushrikeen used in Quran is specific to the mushrikeen of Arabia, who were punished by the hands of the muslims as specified in Surah Taubah. That punishment, however, has nothing to do with law, which applies to us.
Fuqaha have introduced terms like dar ul islam and dar ul harb and made laws about life of muslims in dar ul harb. What we should never forget is, that our deen consists of Quran and Sunnah. Quran and Sunnah are divine and above human criticism. Fiqh, however, is a human work and can always be criticized on the basis of Quran and Sunnah. When somebody wants to impose a certain understanding of Fiqh on everybody as "the islam", those verses come to my mind, which accuse jews of making their scholars their deity. Recall, when Abdullah bin Salaam RA asked Prophet SAW, what was meant by those verses, as he knew from the time, when he was a jew that it was apparently not the case. The prophet asked him, was it not the case, that you considered everything to be halal, which your scholars told you to be halal and was it not the case, that you considered everything haram, which your scholars told you to be haram.
It certainly is the case, that on the day of judgement, it will not be accepted as a reason not to act upon Islam, because the laws of the land were not permitting it. There are verses in Quran (and I have no time to find the exact reference), which make it compulsory to move to another place in that case. Looking at muslim youth living in Ghettos in France, for example, I would really think about those verses. However, having said that, I don't believe those laws of Fiqh have any relevance to the muslims living in west in general. The national states of today cannot be divided in dar ul islam and dar ul harb, even though some non-muslim countries are at war with some other. The reason, why I think this division does not apply today is the modern concept of Nationality, which was never there.
Now imagine, if I dislike west and like Saudi Arabia and am willing to move there. Is that all, what I need? my willingness? I am afraid not. If I really want to enjoy equal rights like other Saudi citizens, I might have to wait my whole life, unless one of his highnesses or his excellencies gets kind on me. Besides, I would feel suffocated living in a land, where state-financed scholars have declared political demonstrations a "Bid'a"
I summarize: Brother Salem, you are quoting fatwas, which are certainly meant for some people, who are not strong enough to transfer Islam to their next generations but have no general validity. Most of the quotations in the original fatwa have either no validity on today's political landscape or they are secondary resources like Fiqh (which represent opinions of a scholars but they are not equal to deen ) or akhbar al ahaad, which do not define our deen.
