Tag Archives: jihad

When the Jihâd is for the Sake of America


By the Shaykh Nâsir al-Fahd (may Allâh hasten his release)

In the Name of Allâh, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful

All Praise is for Allâh, and may Peace and Blessings be upon the Messenger of Allâh.

As for what follows:

So, we have heard recently the news of the Jihâd and the increase in armed resistance against the Crusaders in the Lands of the Two Rivers (al-‘Irâq), and following that, we came to know of the stance of the country known as Saudi Arabia regarding this resistance and its criminalizing any support for it.

And in this document, I do not wish to provide the evidences for the legislation of this Jihâd and assisting it, as this is a whole other issue. Rather, I want to expose the hypocrisy of this state by giving a quick comparison between its stance regarding the previous Afghân Jihâd against the Russians, and the present Jihâd in ‘Irâq and Afghânistân against the Americans.


The Russians came with a massive military campaign, during which they targeted the lands of the Afghâns (only), and installed a government that was subservient to them. Whereas, the Americans came with a massive military campaign in which they targeted the lands of the Afghâns as well as the land of ‘Irâq, and installed in them those who are subservient to them, and the Saudi government did not recognize the government of the Russians in Afghânistân, but it recognized the governments of America in Afghânistân and ‘Irâq.


The Saudi government encouraged the Afghân Mujâhidîn and supported them materially and morally, while it painted the Mujâhidîn in ‘Irâq as criminals and warned against supporting them. Rather, it made support of them to be a crime even if this support consisted simply of Qunoot and supplication for them!


The Saudi government let the Mashâyikh and the scholars to support the Afghân Jihâd and to issue fatâwâ in its favor, while it has now outlawed any fatwâ regarding the Jihâd in ‘Irâq. Rather, it has made the scholars issue verdicts that outlaw and forbid any participation in it.


The Saudi government assisted the youth in going to the Jihâd in Afghânistân, and lightened their (financial) burden of going by over 75%, while it outlawed going to the Jihâd in ‘Irâq, and whoever did this and fell into their clutches, then his destination would be the depths of prison!


The Saudi government hosted the leadership of the Jihâd in Afghânistân and allowed them to give lectures in their land, while it joined the Crusaders in hunting down the leadership of the Jihâd in ‘Irâq.

And the overall conclusion that can be drawn from this quick comparison is that when the Jihâd in Afghânistân was against the enemies of America, and served the interests of America, it was considered, according to the Saudi government, to be Jihâd for the Sake of Allâh, and it was allowed for the Mashâyikh to issue rulings regarding it, and material and moral support of it. And whoever participated in it from the youth was presented with that which would facilitate his going there, and he was referred to as a ‘Mujâhid’!

And when the Jihâd now in Afghânistân and ‘Irâq is against America and against the interests of America, it is ‘terrorism’ and ‘extremism’ and its people are hunted and killed. And whoever supports them with a fatwâ or with wealth is imprisoned – let alone those who support them with men – and it is not allowed for the scholars to issue fatâwâ regarding it. Rather, it is the opposite: they are to issue verdicts forbidding anyone from going to ‘Irâq and that the actions that take place there are ‘terrorist’ acts, not Jihâd.

So, the issue is very clear, and it is: that this (Saudi) state does not know of Jihâd or anything else for the sake of Allâh. Rather, it only knows Jihâd for the sake of America. So what the Crusaders allow, it (the Saudi government) allows and supports; and what the Crusaders don’t allow, then they don’t allow either.

And Allâh is Controlling of His Affairs, even if the disbelievers hate that.

(Sidenote: So, its support of the Afghân Mujâhidîn in the past was because of that serving American interests in the region, just as in the 1980s (during the Reagan administration), the Saudi state supported the Contra rebels in Nicaragua – as the American president himself embarrassed them by exposing this – because the revolution there served the interests of America. Otherwise, both sides of that conflict were disbelievers, the region is empty of resources and there was no interest for the Muslims in that war. Rather, it was Jihâd for the sake of America!!)


The Good Reminders – Compliance of the People (AQAP)



Al Malahim Media Institute for Media Production


Within the Wonderful Series

[The Good Reminders]

Reminder 16 || Compliance of the People – Sheikh Harith al Nithari (may Allah protect him)





Media Fire


For Direct Viewing



Daily Motion


Date of Publication

14 Safar 1436 Hijriyah | 6-12-2014 M


Accept the greetings of your brothers in the al Malahim Institute for Media Production

Don’t forget your brothers in your sincere dua’

al Qa’ida in the Arabian Peninsula

Our official accounts on Twitter

News of Ansar al-Sharia


Abdullah al Mujahid


al Basha’ir Institute


Between the permissible and what is better

From the Fruits of Jihād
Sixteen: Between the permissible and what is better, and between the legislated and what is more beneficial
Author: Abū Muhammad al-Maqdisī


إِنَّ هَـذَا الْقُرْآنَ يِهْدِي لِلَّتِي هِيَ أَقْوَمُ
Verily, this Qur’ān guides to that which is most just and right[1]

One of my prison mates asked me what I thought of how some of the Mujāhidīn had killed an American civilian then publicized it on television and the internet for the entire world to see, such that it became the news of the hour and almost completely stole the spotlight from news of the atrocities of the Americans – who claim to be defenders of human rights – in Abu Ghraib prison!!

I replied that I do not support or like such actions, even though I know how the Mujāhidīn who did them felt; their yearning for the religion of Allāh to be victorious, their care for restoring it to strength, their pain for the affairs of his Ummah, and their anger at how the enemies pounce madly on their prey. I know that all of this is what propelled them to publicize their actions, despite which I maintain that I do not like what they did, and wish they had neither done nor publicized it.

It is more befitting for a person who attributes himself to the great school of the Islamic Jihād not to announce or adopt any actions for which he will be censured. Instead, he should focus on actions that will raise the banner of Jihād and distance it from anything that will discolor it or enable the enemy to exploit it by, defaming the Mujāhidīn, or using it to achieve their own goals.

My companion remarked, “You surprise me! Why do you not like them – are they not permissible?”

I replied: O my brother, when I say that I do not like something, it does not necessarily mean that that thing is in opposition to the Sharī‘ah or a matter of contention. There is nothing more beloved to me than agreement between the Muslims and partaking in acts of good, but I am devoted to destroying anything that will harm the Jihād and its reputation during a time in which the war no longer solely depends on physical combat, for the media now plays a large role in this war. So my statement stems from my choosing what is purer and more beneficial for the da‘wah, the Jihād and the Muslims in these circumstances.

I have repeatedly stated throughout my writings, speeches and lessons – to you and others – that the callers and the Mujāhidīn will not be victorious or benefit their Ummah and Jihād in the manner they desire unless they rise above only looking at what is permissible and impermissible, and instead begin to weigh up the permissible things for their benefit and harm, advantages, which is stronger, and which is more preferable.

Allāh the Exalted said,

Continue reading

So That Your Foot May Not Slip Over Unjust Takfeer.

Dr. Abdullah Bin Muhammad Mohaisany


The issue regarding which I will be speaking to you tonight, is a matter that is extremely important. So lend me your ears and I specifically mention my mujahideen brothers.

So that your foot may not slip…

It is a matter in which a lot of hearsay based on “it is said” and “they said”… has become widespread.

If we were seeking the guidance of the Quran, we would have followed the statement of Allah, “But if they had referred it back to the Messenger or to those of authority among them, then the ones who [can] draw correct conclusions from it would have known about it“.

Dear brothers, Continue reading

Dialogue with Imam Az Zarqaawee

In The Name Of Allah The Most Gracious The Most Merciful

The brothers in the media section of the Al-Qaeda organization in the land of the Rafideen (Iraq) had asked nearly year ago to meet with Sheikh Abu Musab in order to gain convincing answers to a few questions but the Sheikh told them that he would perform Istikharah and then reply to their this request.

The reply came after a period of time that the Sheikh has agreed to this request and the call was given to the reporter of the media section of the Al-Qaeda organization in the land of Rafideen. The “reporter” at that time, Brother Abu Yaman al-Baghdadi (Rahimahullah ) then met with Sheikh Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi. The meeting took place in the form of an interview where Brother Abu Yaman entered into a detailed discussion with Abu Musab.

Script Of The Dialogue With Sheikh Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi (May Allah Have Mercy On Him)

Baghdadi: Assalamu Alaikum Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatu, our sheikh Abu Musab

Zarqawi: Wa Alaikum As Salaam Wa Rahmatullah Wa Barakatu

Baghdadi: Who is Sheikh Abu Musab?

Zarqawi: O Allah there is no ease except that which you make easy, and you make difficult easy if you wish. Your brother in Islam, the slave who is poor to the mercy of his Lord, Zarqawi is Ahmed Fudail Nizal Al-Khulilah, from the family of Bani Hasan in Jordan. Continue reading

What is the ruling on the one who judges by other than what Allah Sent down and what is wajib on us towards him?




What is the Shariah ruling ruling (or judging) by other than what Allah Sent down (i.e. The Shariah) and is it like the rulers of the Ummawiyaah and Abassiyah states- kufr duna kufr – or is their kufr the kufr which exits one from the Milat (Islam, i.e Major kufr). And what is wajib on us towards these rulers so as that we will be excused in front of Allah, in either situation?


The ruler who rules by other that what Allah Sent down, whether that is by the Man made laws or whether it is by customs and traditions, theses are kuffar mushrikeen.

Allah said:

وَلَا يُشْرِكُ فِي حُكْمِهِ أَحَدًا
He makes none to share in His Decision and His Rule
Surat Al Kahf 18:26

And Allah Said:

إِنِ الْحُكْمُ إِلَّا لِلَّهِ
The decision is only for Allah
Surat Al Anam 6:57

And their kufr is kufr akbar (major kufr) by Ijmaa (concensus) and this consensus was reported by Ibn Kathir and others from his contemporaries from Ahlus Sunnah.

Allah Said:

ومن لم يحكم بما أنزل الله فأولئك هم الكافرون
And whosoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed, such are the Kafirun
Surat Al Maidah 5:44

And Allah Says: Continue reading