LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
NOT WRITTEN BY ME, NOR DO I SHARE THEIR VIEWS
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem.
All praise is due to Allah (swt), Lord of the worlds. I bear witness that there is nothing to be followed, worshipped or obeyed other than Allah, and that Muhammad (saw) is His slave and final Messenger.
The reason I am initiating this topic is to kick off a discussion regarding a "group-less group", who float around on cyberspace. It seems this group, many of whom which claim tutelage to Abu Baseer, dedicate the majority of their time in character assassinating the Ulema ul-Haq, such as Shaikh Faisal (ha), Sheikh Omar Bakri (ha), Sheikh Abu Qatadah (ha), Sheikh Abu Hamza (ha), etc. They sometimes appear on Paltalk undercover (i.e. attacking others but never giving away their position lest they are exposed), and I have incidentally clashed with them on there before.
Abuz Zubair is the Amir of this groupless group's website; i.e. islamicawakening.com, and contributes regularly on his forum i.e. forums.islamicawakening.com
They regularly attack the Ulema and slander them as "fakes", "imposters", "ignorant" etc (although these charges are in fact hypocritical and reflect upon themselves). They even stoop so low as to insult these Shayook in their appearance (e.g. "pot-bellied") etc.
When one looks at their discrepencies with these Shayook, one can not find any leg they can truly stand on. These people are ignorant in the issues they profess disagreement with. They commonly use their own 'Aql, by slapping on some quote by Sheikh Abdullah 'Azzam (rhm), then claim affiliation with his understanding, mention 1 incident in Iraq, slander some Shayook in their attempted character assasination of anyone who is not of them, then quote a miscellenious ayah and that will be their cyber "halaqa" done and dusted.
These people believe the following:
1. You should not work in a jama'ah because it causes hizbiyyah (which is ironic, because if anyone advocates hizbiyyah - it is them, i.e. to their "groupless"-group). I.e. forget 3:104.
2. You should not work to establish Izharrudeen in the west; rather you should restrict yourself to 'Muslim' countries.
3. There is a covenant of security. (Abu Baseer holds this view, but then like the selection of articles', half these scattered moths use their own 'Aql in saying there isn't one - while adhering themselves to the same website. They must have selected a different article from the others I guess).
4. Da'wah is not fardh (forget the issue of whether it is Fardh Kifayah or Fardh ‘Muhattam’ -- it is not fardh, period). I.e. again, forget 3:104.
When one looks at their methodology of debating; their arguments lack credibility. We know how the Shayook such as Omar Bakri and Abdullah Faisal dedicate themselves to the da'wah - yet these people base their discussions on attempting to assassinate their characters with slandering, lies and insults - while at the same time including NO DALEEL WHATSOEVER in attempting to refute them. They make baseless accusations and habitually slander; Abuz Zubair RE: Omar Bakri "He is a liar by profession. We had known about his habitual lying before he decided to cloth himself with Salafiyya. His job is to maintain an atmosphere of fear in the UK to clear the way for the Home Office bringing in tougher laws. Which is why I said, that although I do not know if he is working for the Home Office or not, but if it ever turns out that he was, I would not at all be surprised." May Omar Bakri take what he is owed from him on Yawm ul-Qiyamah, Aameen.
Abuz Zubair starts trying to claim he knows the position of a dead-man's perspective (i.e. Sheikh Abdullah 'Azzam rhm) in that he apparently made baraa from these Shayook (even though this allegation has not been documented with proof or referenced anywhere whatsoever). Abuz Zubair "Abu Dujana... learn from people who have been in the game for decades... and as I have said numerous times... Azzam Publications were not a people who liked exposing anyone they disagree with. They disagreed with Abu Qatada, Faisal, Abu Hamza, etc... but never once wrote a public article even slightly criticising them... but they treated OBM and his deluded fans completely differently."
Where is the proof of this? There is none. Isn't it convenient how they apparently "were not a people who liked exposing anyone they disagree with", then in the next sentence readers are supposed to take his "word" for it that "They disagreed with Abu Qatadah, Faisal, Abu Hamza, etc" "but never once wrote a public article even SLIGHTLY criticizing them".
Take one look at their articles' collection. There will be articles by 'Uthaymeen, Inayat Bunglawala, Abdullah Azzam, etc. A complete cocktail of contradicting Manhaj; then they believe they have the right to sift out who is upon haq and who is upon baatil. What a joke these clowns are.
Look at this excerpt which I have copied and pasted from one of his forum postings regarding the permissibility of joining the kufr Police force:
"Abuz Zubair 10th February 2007, 12:45 PM
1) The question is genuine and of serious nature
2) Not everything in Islam revolves around Iman and Kufr, just as not every issue of hukm bi ghayri ma anzalAllah revolves around Tawheed and Shirk.
3) If you think you are a faqih to be able to answer such questions, then go ahead and ruin your hereafter. If you have some humbleness, then it is always best to keep quite about issues you have no knowledge of.
4) Some of the scholars allowed one to join the Police, while others did not, because it may involve enforcing laws that are contrary to Islam and in a police force, you have to put your duty above your religion and conviction.
5) I do not know of a scholar who regarded it to be an act of apostasy...
6) Not joining the police does not mean we cannot co-operate with them and work together against drugs and other such crimes to make our society a better place."
The first thing that springs to my mind upon reading that is it’s a shame he doesn’t follow his own advice, i.e. point 3. The future doesn’t look to bright for him then according to his own logic.
Look at his point 5. So now he is Murji'ah like a Talafi, saying that joining the kufr Police is not kufr akbar/riddah (without backing his case with any daleel as opposed to our Shayook who provide plenty). Another point he emphasises his 'Irja is when he encourages Muslims to unite with democracy advocating munafiqeen:
(The following is a quotation of a review after an open question & answer session he held in Regents Park mosque):
"He thinks that basically the brothers in U.K should get involved in society and mix even with brothers like MCB and so on in order to get our voice heard. he says " MCB have the loudest voice in britain for the muslim" and thats why he say that he quotes from them on his forum. How ever prior to that he said that MCB are sell outs."
- Right, so even though it has been acknowledged that they are sell outs, he still wants to propagate their organisation (and effectively ideals)? Does aiding and abetting a sell out not make him a sell out too? Does him propagating organisations advocating democracy not make him an equal advocate of democracy?
As one commenter rightly exposed them in saying; “Are you guys so jealous and small petty minded individuals that you think by character assassinating other scholars yours suddenly becomes the only one worth to be followed?
Alhamdulillah, people have all moved on from your sorry state of affairs. We ask Allah to expose those who do not act sincerely for his sake, but rather are full of jealous and hatred and do actions for the sake of partisanship and Assabiyyah to a group or individual.”
They will try to justify their attacks on Ahl us Sunnah by claiming they are attention-seekers. We know the reality; which is that they are declaring their bughd in rejecting the taghout, and making their baraa apparent, and following the example of the ‘Anbiya by coming out openly and publicly into society in forbidding the munkar. Their snide comments of connoting our brothers to mere “megaphone loudmouths” or what have you simply reflects their inactivity in doing what they should be; in forbidding munkaraat. Rather they glue themselves to their PC chair and criticize those who do, for doing just that. That is why I call them armchair critics – because criticizing inactively from their armchairs is all they will do, that is as long as recipients are not from the democracy-advocating MCB of course...
As a quick end note in exposing their band of haribis (or “haribos” as I call them); if they have no covenant of security then why do they not fulfil their obligations of living in a land of war with no covenant of security? At most, they will use that excuse to attempt justifying their credit card fraud; then ironically they will PURCHASE their food shopping from Asda – All this while going to work from 9-5 as normal, sleeping in their home as normal, going to weddings as normal, etc. They will base their understanding of covenants on Sheikh Abdullah Azzam's book entitled "Defence of the MUSLIM lands", whilst living in the non-Muslim west. Then when THEY are asked "What do you do? You don't give da'wah - instead you attack the du'aat. You don't carry out any operations - well you wouldn't have time to with your 9-5 office job." They'll say something ludacris like "We're waiting for 'the call'". LOL. As if someone from the top is going to phone these clowns - given the security and precautionary measures that are considered beforehand.
My article has probably not even scratched the surface in doing justice to this issue compared to what can potentially have been said in exposing these people for what they really are.
Anything good I have said is from Allah. Any mistakes are my own.
N.B. All these quotes can be copied and pasted into Google for direct links to their forums where they were quoted from. If you can not find them contact me, I will provide the URLs insha' Allah.
http://www.revolutionmuslim.com/foru...opic=1360&st=0
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Baghdadi 
Or maybe its that time of the month?
Bookmarks