Al-Zendani, or al-Zindani as he is styled in other reports, grounds his call to arms in explicitly Islamic terms. Will any Western spokesman for the Religion of Peace™ step forward to refute his martial and bellicose vision of Islam? What do you think? "Yemen Qaeda chiefs killed in air strike: official," by Hammoud Mounassar for AFP, January 15:
[...] In a Friday sermon, meanwhile, powerful cleric Sheikh Abdulmajeed al-Zendani said it would be "a religious duty dictated by God" to defend Yemen through jihad, or holy war, if it is occupied by a foreign power. [...]"From the moment the enemy invites itself onto our territory and occupies us, our religion imposes (the obligation of) jihad on us," said Zendani, whom the US administration labels a "global terrorist."
"It is a religious duty dictated by God," he said during his sermon.
"This order of God cannot be annulled by anyone... not a king, not a president, not ulema (Muslim scholars)," Zendani added.
Yemen's council of clerics, which includes Zendani, had made a similar call for jihad on Thursday if foreign forces join the fight against AQAP.
"If any party insists on aggression, or invades the country, then according to Islam, jihad becomes obligatory," said a statement signed by 150 clerics.
The clerics stressed "strong rejection of any foreign intervention in Yemeni affairs, whether political or military."
They also rejected "any security or military agreement or cooperation (between Yemen and) any foreign party if it violates Islamic sharia (law)" and the "setting up any military bases in Yemen, or in its territorial waters."
On Friday, Zendani urged Arab and Muslim states to support Yemen "before a catastrophe occurs."
"The Islamic nation will not stand by with its arms crossed in the face of these Crusades," he added.
"To defend ourselves and defend our country and our territory, we only fear God... And we are confident in victory," he said to cries of "Allahu Akbar" (God is greater)....
This is in line with the Islamic doctrine that jihad becomes obligatory upon all Muslims whenever a Muslim land is attacked. (Provocations by Muslims from that Muslim land don't factor into this equation -- if the non-Muslim enemy strikes back, that constitutes an invasion of Muslim land.) All the schools of Islamic jurisprudence agree that when a non-Muslim force enters a Muslim land, jihad becomes the individual obligation of every Muslim (fard 'ayn) rather than a collective obligation of the entire umma, from which one is released if others are taking it up (fard kifaya). Bulghah al-Salik li-Aqrab al-Masalik fi madhhab al-Imam Malik ("The Sufficiency of the Traveller on the Best Path in the School of Imam Malik,") says this:
Jihad in the Path of Allah, to raise the word of Allah, is fard kifayah [obligatory on the community] once a year, so that if some perform it, the obligation falls from the rest. It becomes fard `ayn [obligatory on every Muslim individually], like salah and fasting, if the legitimate Muslim Imam declares it so, or if there is an attack by the enemy on an area of people.
The Hanafi, Maliki, and Shafi'i schools of Sunni jurisprudence further declare that jihad, once it is fard 'ayn, is no different from prayer and fasting -- in other words, to engage in warfare with non-Muslims in that case is a religious devotion that cannot lawfully be evaded. Hashiyah Ibn `Abidin, an authoritative text of the Hanafi school, says that jihad is "fard 'ayn if the enemy has attacked part of the Islamic homeland. It thus becomes an obligation like salah [prayer] and fasting which cannot be abandoned."
"The islamic nation will not stand by with its arms crossed in the face of these Crusades," said Zendani.
No, you'll saber-rattle and wax Quixotic which will result in the deaths of thousands of your idiot followers, then you'll hide in a small hole when the explosions get too loud for you.
See Saddam Hussein for a prime example of how islamic tyrants stand up to the might of the allied forces.
"I'm dreamin' of a Lepanto New Year..."
"I'm dreamin' of a Lepanto New Year..."
Al-Zendani seems to be a seriously confused sheikh. On the one hand he wants jihad against foreign invaders and occupiers. But on the other hand, he wants other Moslem countries to help Yemen -- i.e. to send invaders and occupiers .... Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia already has attacked and invaded Yemen. So, are the Saudis the invaders he wants help against, or are they the help?
And maybe Yemen should stop exporting jihadists all over the world, and keep them at home to fight the occupiers.
A pleasant thought: Jihadists from dozens of Islamic countries take him at his word, and congregate in Yemen to help fight the occupiers. who turn out to be other jihadists there for the same reason. The war of all against all, and the last mob standing wins.
Let's turn Yemen into an infidel state.
May Hellfire visit with with then all.
I got to thinking: If jihad is obligatory whenever a Mulim land is attacked by non-Mulims, even if the non-Muslims were provoked, then any aggression against non-Muslims is justifiable as defensive warfare. It's just that defensive really means offensive.
It's analagous to the prohibition against killing an innocent person, where no unbeliever is innocent, so that innocent really means guilty.
Heads they win, tails you lose. An Orwellian morality.
Crossed arms, uncrossed arms, it makes no difference when the drones come overhead. They see you, they shoot, they explode, they kill. You go to your "Paradise" (There they will inform you that you guys had it wrong on Earth. You are to become the virgins.), and we just go on with our lives.
We will give you our symbol then. It consists of a fist with the middle finger raised in salute!
Yemen declares jihad on the crusaders, world yawns.
Because we all know that jihad is peaceful inner struggle, right?
Jewdog wrote:
I got to thinking: If jihad is obligatory whenever a Mulim land is attacked by non-Mulims, even if the non-Muslims were provoked, then any aggression against non-Muslims is justifiable as defensive warfare. It's just that defensive really means offensive.
.....................
Give that man a cigar!
Social relativists have got nothing to put up against this sort of wise guy. They have to buy his rap.
I don't.
Personally I love this kind of stuff.
I mean, the dude has it locked up tight.
It's WHAT I SAY GOES to the umpteenth power.
God's word trumps everything ... and just by coincidence, I happen to be the guy who's got the inside dope on God's word.
Nice work if you can get it.
I say we terminate his present employment.
================
By the way, any body who's interested in a VERY fascinating coincidence will want to look into:
Inside the Criminal Mind: by Stanton Samenow
You will find an interesting and very close similarity to the mentality displayed by Al-Zendani.
http://i426.photobucket.com/albums/pp343/livingengine/thumbsup.jpg
Cool graphic.
Thnx
"...will not stand by with its arms crossed..."
Doesn't Sheikh Abdulmajeed al-Zendani know that the only gesture permitted Muslim clerics during their harangues is vigorous finger-wagging? Arms-crossing is Bid'ah! He is hereby penalized at least one virgin in Jannat (heaven).
"Crusades"
Oh, gimme a break! The eternal victims!
Newsflash: If there had been no Islam, then there wouldn't have been any need for the defensive and 100% justifiable, Crusades.
So, sorry but - the Crusades are YOUR fault. YOURS.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqKTFFOqT-w&feature=related
Write a brief description of your youtube link, and then more people will be inclined to take a look.
Only the West is self-deluded enough to allow this kind of garbage.
If the Mob was going around terrorizing a neighborhood we would start the process of snuffing them out one by one or as a lot. But for these xenophobic haters we make excuses for them.
The only way to defeat Islamic terrorism is to discredit ISLAM around the world for the hate filled garbage that it is.