With all due respects to the Sheikh, I don't see how he can simply dismiss people who are fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq as terrorist?
Granted the Sheikh does not believe these individuals who are fighting are fighting Jihad. He goes to the extent of calling them followers of Satan (Fighting Jihad for the sake of Satan)?
He also conveniently avoids mentioning the status of Kuffar soldiers in Saudi Arabia (There is no justification under Sharia), and only makes a general statement about kuffar workers in Saudi Arabia, which may or may not be right Allahu Alam.
For the life of me, I do not understand how they can justify having Kuffar army in their country! It baffles me!
One doesn't need to be an scholar to see this issue clearly. These so called scholars, not only abandon the scholarly consensus of the past concerning Jihad, but are creating a 'sissy idea of Jihad" which in my opinion is almost impossible to take part in. (Since it depends on the government )..
Allah knows best
As-salaamu `alaykum.
As-salaamu `alaykum
Yaa akhee! Where did the Shaykh dismiss those fighting in other countries?! I think you ought to listen to the fatwa again and to some of the other fataawaa the Shaykh has on these issues (I've not heard him speak ill of the true mujaahidoon).
The subject was about the police force and those who incorrectly take away the right of the ruler, and also distrub peace causing fitnah. They were not people fighting in Muslim lands, rather they
"wished" as the question was worded, they
wished to fight, and they
wanted to dismiss the kuffaar, stripping the right away from the ruler... So these people, they wanna fight in Iraq etc, but instead of doing that, they cause disturbance in their own lands and attempt to kill those who they have no right to. They can't be mujaahidoon, especially if they're too pathetic to actually do what they claim to do (do Jihad in the aforementioned lands).
Akh, baarak Allaahu feeka, you began saying with all respect to the Shaykh, and ended saying "these so-called scholars". So where is the respect you claim? And the Shaykh didn't clearly avoid anything. Where is the clarity you claim?
He answered to what he was asked, not needing to mention matters which are of no aid to the question being put to him. So remember akhi that the flesh of the scholars is poison, so be careful when you speak about them because your points would only be valid, if they were placed where they actually belong.
As for the issue of the kufaar, since you have mentioned it, do you know the ahkaam pertaining their residence? Did you know that some of the Salaf considered the Arabian Peninsula to include
only the Hijaaz, others said only as far as Tayma' (which is some-what north of Madinah), and yet others said upto the Tigris river etc, and according to some Yemen and the south is exluded, as is Najd. Further yet, even if they are in the peninsula, it does not give any Tom, Dick and Harry the allowance to kill them or dispell them, if only those people had some damn sense (according to one of the opinions in the Hanafi madhhab, they are even allowed in the peninsula)! The right is for the ruler to expel them, and that is not necessarily by death.
Another point worth mentioning, is that there exist numerous reports on the the salaf, that if a disbeliever has a pact with the Muslims, then he cannot be killed. This is to the extent that even if other then the ruler has issued it, they cannot be killed. The severity goes to the point where many of them have said that if the disbeliever thinks he has an agreement though in reality it is not valid, then due to the disbeliever believing he is safe, he cannot be killed and must be returned safely. If you want specific proof akhi (it's Jawm ul-Jumu`ah and I need to head off soon) then PM me and I'll provide them for you inshaa' Allaah, or if i get time I'll cite them.
Anyway like I said, refer back to the Shaykh's fataawaa on Jihaad and the scholars books on these matters, as some his fataawaa contradict your claims. The reason for this contradiction, is due to your misunderstanding his fatwa. Whilst he considers those who are actually defending their lives as mujaahidoon, he doens't rightfully consider these trouble-makers, who are ignorant of the shari`ah and ignorant of siyaasah as mujahidoon...
Was-salaam