Saudi cleric, lecturer at Prophet’s Mosque, former dean of Sharia Faculty at Islamic university, justifies killing of U.S. ambassador, praises al-Qaeda

Al-Suhaybani’s statements here are traditional Islamic theology regarding jihad, apostasy, and related matters. It would be refreshing to see Muslim spokesmen in the U.S. who would dismiss his statements as “extremism” explain why they consider them wrong on Islamic grounds. But they will not do so, and that is revealing in itself.

“Saudi Cleric, Lecturer At Prophet’s Mosque, And Former Dean Of Sharia Faculty At Islamic University At Al-Madina Justifies Killing Of U.S. Ambassador To Libya, Calls For Attacks On Airplanes, Praises Al-Qaeda,” from MEMRI, February 1 (thanks to Winds of Jihad):

The following report is a complimentary offering from MEMRI’s Jihad and Terrorism Threat Monitor (JTTM). For JTTM subscription information, click here.

On January 24, 2012, online jihadis posted on YouTube an audio clip of Saudi cleric Muhammad bin Nasser Al-Suhaybani in which he legitimized attacks on Western targets, including diplomats and airplanes, and praised Al-Qaeda. Al-Suhaybani, a former dean of the shari’a faculty at the Islamic University (IU) in Al-Madina, currently holds an official position as a lecturer at the Prophet’s Mosque in Al-Madina. Al-Suhaybani’s lectures can be found on the Saudi government website for the Prophet’s Mosque, www.haramain.gov.sa. Al-Suhaybani’s picture, it should be noted, is unavailable, as he refuses to be photographed for religious reasons.

Asked in the clip for his opinion regarding the appropriate response to “insults to the Prophet,” Al-Suhaybani answered that Muslims must muster their zeal and declare war on Westerners, attacking them in their embassies and on their airplanes. He explained that the Western states’ ambassadors do not merit protection by treaty, as diplomats traditionally do according to Islamic law, because they represent the government of a state that allows insults to the Prophet, thereby forfeiting such protection.

According to the clip’s description, Al-Suhaybani’s statements were made in the Prophet’s Mosque, apparently during one of his classes. The exact date when the statements were made is unknown, but they were clearly made in reference to the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi. One person who commented on the YouTube clip wrote: “This is a fatwa from a master of religious knowledge and a person who speaks the truth openly. I regard it as a groundbreaking fatwa that can be used as a proof before Allah in any jihadi or martyrdom-seeking operation against the crusaders.”

Following are excerpts from Al-Suhaybani’s statements:

“This Ambassador Nullified His Treaty”

[Unidentified speaker]: “What should be the Muslim’s stance toward insults to the Prophet, and is protesting against them good?”

Al-Suhaybani: “By Allah, on this matter we pray to Allah to put an end to the evil of these infidels. [As it says in Koran 2:217:] ‘They will not cease to fight you until they force you to renounce your faith.’ However, Allah the Exalted made it clear that we must have zeal… ‘But, if after coming to terms with you, they break their oaths and revile your faith, make war on the leaders of unbelief — for no oaths are binding with them — so that they may desist. Will you not fight against those who have broken their oaths and conspired to banish the Apostle? They were the first to attack you. Do you fear them? Surely Allah is more worthy of your fear.’ [Koran 9:12].

It is not permissible to remain silent vis-à-vis these people or to treat them tolerantly. Regretfully, instead of rebuking [those who insulted the Prophet], and not merely rebuking but also [acting in] zeal — the [governments] of the Islamic countries kill the masses that come out to show their zeal [for the Prophet.] They have apologized to the infidels and killed [the protestors.] That is to say, a number of zealous people who came out to protest what happened to the Prophet were killed. [Even] this did not please the Westerners.

An ambassador was killed — this ambassador had nullified his ‘ahd [treaty] and did not merit protection. Whoever nullifies the treaty by insulting the Prophet has no treaty… When the infidels insult the Prophet, they have no treaty, neither an ambassador nor anybody else. The ambassador represents his misguided, infidel government.

“Did [these] governments renounce what happened in their countries? They were ambiguous about it. If anyone speaks out against them [in our countries], they call him a terrorist and demand that he be handed over to them. Isn’t this not so? But we stand with our arms crossed, and regretfully — what is worse — we try to please them by having the police kill those protestors who are zealous for what has been done to the Prophet. And they apologize to the infidels and brag about this.

“Do you fear them? Surely Allah is more worthy of your fear. We ask Allah to put a stop to their evil and harm. Their insults to the Prophet do not cease. This recurs in the countries of Europe — in France, in Holland, in Belgium, as well as in the U.S…”

The Victories Of “Our Brothers In Afghanistan… Make Us Happy”

“They do this in order to abuse and ridicule the Muslims, and their religious practices and feelings. The Islamic governments must say no. They must not treat the matter mildly or with tolerance. They must let the Muslim peoples act as they please and do what they wish to do. Trust Allah and be honest with Allah. Allah the exalted said: ‘Had Allah willed, He could have Himself punished them; but He has ordained it thus that He might test you, the one by the other.’ [Koran 47:4] If Allah willed it, no infidel would say anything, and if he did, Allah would strike him with lightning. However, he left the matter to us, [to see] if we will be zealous or not.

“All these statements calling on the Muslim peoples to boycott [Western products] are mistaken. Rather, the right thing to do is for the Muslim peoples to show zeal and anger in a manner that fits the stature of the Prophet, to the extent that the infidels are deterred and feel that the Muslims will not leave them alone. They should chase them down in their embassies, in their consulates, and in their airplanes, on land and in the sea. This is what should be done. We will not surrender to them or abide [their insults].

They should declare war! Are we not a people of war? Our brothers in Afghanistan — their victories these days make us happy. They destroyed airplanes and killed many of Allah’s enemies, even though they are few. They have very few weapons, but Allah has blessed their efforts, and we pray that He [continue] to bless their efforts. We also pray that He grant success to the Muslims in Palestine, that they may declare a jihad war there and forget about this nonsense [of negotiating with Israel], [and that Allah] grant our brothers in Syria a swift victory and deliver them from this tyrant [Assad] and his followers and supporters. I pray that He lead us all to what pleases Him…”

Al-Suhaybani’s Anti-American Opinions On Twitter

In the past, Al-Suhaybani has expressed strong anti-American opinions on his Twitter account (http://twitter.com/mns979). On May 1, 2012, he harshly criticized the Afghan government for requesting security assistance from the U.S., to which he referred as “the great tyrant [al-taghout al-akbar].” On March 28, 2012, he criticized the Pakistani parliament for considering to resume supplying NATO. He wrote: “The Pakistani parliament is considering to renew the [approval for the] supplying of the Christian — American and European — forces, NATO, that have been fighting our Muslims brothers in Afghanistan for ten years. There is no doubt that supplying these forces in their war on the Muslims constitutes an apostasy from Islam”¦” In another occasion, Al-Suhaybani praised an Afghan soldier who was sentenced to death for killing five NATO soldiers. He said: “This Afghan mujahid killed five Christian invaders. The hypocrite apostates sentenced him to death. The Prophet said of this man and those who are like him ‘he is one of mine and I am one of his’.”

Raymond Ibrahim: Saudi Hypocrisy At Its Best
Saudi cleric calls for burkas for babies
FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint

Comments

  1. says

    …They must let the Muslim peoples act as they please and do what they wish to do…

    the Allah god (unknowable; as imagined), with all the pretty names to the contrary, is full of bloodlust, seeking to enslave even the True Believers to the way that offers only damnation.

    for the sake of their soul the adherants should not be allowed to do what they wish. the brothers down at the mosque are not being rightly guided to True Righteousness.

  2. says

    “They should declare war! Are we not a people of war?

    Why yes you are your grace…But you are going to get beat in America…As we all know, Al-Qaeda is dead or at least on the ropes…Rasulullah Obama has droned you into submission…Now you buggers will get droned right here in America…It is now legal to drone attack anyone in America who is an Al-Qaeda member or ‘affiliate’, with no due process, ‘suspicion’ is good enough…Obama will drone these terrorists even if it means droning populated areas of innocent Americans, to ‘get’ one guy…Rasool has every intention of keeping you and your children safe…

  3. says

    Saudi cleric, lecturer at Prophet’s Mosque, former dean of Sharia Faculty at Islamic university, justifies killing of U.S. ambassador, praises al-Qaeda
    ……………………….

    Gee”how could a lecturer at the Prophet’s Mosque have gotten Islam so very, very wrong? sarc/off

    More:

    Asked in the clip for his opinion regarding the appropriate response to “insults to the Prophet,” Al-Suhaybani answered that Muslims must muster their zeal and declare war on Westerners, attacking them in their embassies and on their airplanes.
    ……………………….

    Not just the crushing of freedom of speech and enforcement of “blasphemy” laws, but declaring war on all Infidels. And why? Because we have “insulted the Prophet” by the mere act of remaining unbelievers.

    More:

    He explained that the Western states’ ambassadors do not merit protection by treaty, as diplomats traditionally do according to Islamic law, because they represent the government of a state that allows insults to the Prophet, thereby forfeiting such protection.
    ……………………….

    The very cornerstone of civilized relationships between nations is the protection of diplomats. Even in case of out-and-out war, civilized nations will do no more than expel an ambassador, all while ensuring the safety of diplomatic staff.

    You simply cannot have civilized relations on any other basis.

    But then, Al-Suhaybani does not want civilized diplomatic relations with Infidels”nor does any other pious Muslim.

    More:

    Following are excerpts from Al-Suhaybani’s statements:

    “This Ambassador Nullified His Treaty”
    ……………………….

    That fact that Ambassador Chris Steven”utterly foolishly”had been *aiding* the Jihadists in Libya counts for nothing”his life was forfeit because he was a “filthy Kuffar”, and because some of his free countrymen had dared to criticize Islam.

    More:

    Al-Suhaybani: “By Allah, on this matter we pray to Allah to put an end to the evil of these infidels. [As it says in Koran 2:217:] ‘They will not cease to fight you until they force you to renounce your faith.’
    ……………………….

    What utter crap. As though our exercising our freedom of speech in criticizing Islam somehow forces Muslims to ‘renounce their faith’.

    But this is how pious Muslims see the world”if they are not violently controlling us, then they are not being allowed to fully practice their faith.

    And, really, this is true”Islam cannot be practiced fully *unless* they are doing everything possible to control and oppress free Infidels.

    More:

    “It is not permissible to remain silent vis-à-vis these people or to treat them tolerantly. Regretfully, instead of rebuking [those who insulted the Prophet], and not merely rebuking but also [acting in] zeal – the [governments] of the Islamic countries kill the masses that come out to show their zeal [for the Prophet.]
    ……………………….

    In other words, even the Jihadists of Libya are “insufficiently Islamic”, as far as this pious Muslim is concerned.

    More:

    However, Allah the Exalted made it clear that we must have zeal… ‘But, if after coming to terms with you, they break their oaths and revile your faith, make war on the leaders of unbelief – for no oaths are binding with them – so that they may desist. Will you not fight against those who have broken their oaths and conspired to banish the Apostle? They were the first to attack you. Do you fear them? Surely Allah is more worthy of your fear.’ [Koran 9:12].
    ……………………….

    When Muslims talk about waging “defensive” warfare, *this* is what they mean. Unless Infidels are *absolutely servile* in their relations with Muslims, Muslims consider themselves to have been “attacked”.

    Also, the idea that any Western nation has made an “oath” to any Muslim nation that none of its citizens be allowed to criticize Islam is utterly false. But Muslims consider the servile deference of Infidels to be an unspoken prerequisite for any non-homicidal relationship with them.

    See the rules for dhimmi people codified in the 7th-century Pact of Umar:

    The Status of Non-Muslims Under Muslim Rule

    http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/source/pact-umar.asp

    More:

    “An ambassador was killed – this ambassador had nullified his ‘ahd [treaty] and did not merit protection. Whoever nullifies the treaty by insulting the Prophet has no treaty… When the infidels insult the Prophet, they have no treaty, neither an ambassador nor anybody else. The ambassador represents his misguided, infidel government.
    ……………………….

    That means that *every* Western diplomat is subject to murder at any time, and all on Islamic grounds.

    More:

    “They do this in order to abuse and ridicule the Muslims, and their religious practices and feelings…
    ……………………….

    Why do “hurt feelings” so often lead to blood running in the streets when it comes to Islam? (this is, of course, a rhetorical question)

    Also, while we do indeed reserve our right to ridicule Islam, it must be kept in mind that *any* criticism or even questioning of Islam is regarded in just the same manner by pious Muslims.

    More:

    The Islamic governments must say no. They must not treat the matter mildly or with tolerance. They must let the Muslim peoples act as they please and do what they wish to do…
    ……………………….

    And what Muslim people wish to do is slaughter Infidels.

    More:

    If Allah willed it, no infidel would say anything, and if he did, Allah would strike him with lightning. However, he left the matter to us, [to see] if we will be zealous or not.
    ……………………….

    In other words, a Muslim is not sufficiently devout if he is *not* murdering Infidels.

    More:

    “All these statements calling on the Muslim peoples to boycott [Western products] are mistaken. Rather, the right thing to do is for the Muslim peoples to show zeal and anger in a manner that fits the stature of the Prophet, to the extent that the infidels are deterred and feel that the Muslims will not leave them alone. They should chase them down in their embassies, in their consulates, and in their airplanes, on land and in the sea.
    ……………………….

    This is just a slight variation of the infamous “Sura of the Sword”, the penultimate “revelation” of the Qur’an:

    Sura 9:5: “And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush.”

    More:

    “They should declare war! Are we not a people of war?
    ……………………….

    Well, yes. Let any Infidel describe Muslims as a “people of war”, though, and be prepared for outraged condemnation and denial.

    More:

    They destroyed airplanes and killed many of Allah’s enemies…
    ……………………….

    Glorifying Al Qaida, the Taliban, and the horror of 9/11″as all good Muslims should. *Ugh*.

    More:

    We also pray that He grant success to the Muslims in Palestine, that they may declare a jihad war there and forget about this nonsense [of negotiating with Israel], [and that Allah] grant our brothers in Syria a swift victory and deliver them from this tyrant [Assad] and his followers and supporters. I pray that He lead us all to what pleases Him…”
    ……………………….

    There you have it”the war against Israel is Jihad”as if we didn’t know. And the Syrian rebels are not “freedom fighters”, but are more Jihdists. Of course, Assad *himself* is a Jihadist, with his support of Hizb’allah.

    But just like fellow fallen dictator Gadaffi in Libya”also a Jihadist, responsible for the Lockerbie Bombing”he just isn’t Islamic enough…

    More:

    There is no doubt that supplying these forces in their war on the Muslims constitutes an apostasy from Islam…”
    ……………………….

    Yep”the Pakistanis may be imprisoning Christians for “blasphemy” and locking up rape victims, but they *still* are nothing but “apostates” as far as the truly devout are concenred…

    This is why you have horror shows like Somalia, where Jihadists regularly slaughter each other for being “insufficiently Islamic”…

    The real question is whether we will foolishly continue to put our diplomatic staff in harm’s way in Dar-al-Islam, considering the Muslim attitude towards them.

    Of course we will! Just as Westerners appeared to have learned nothing from the US Embassy Hostage Crisis in Iran, I doubt very much that we will learn anything from the slaughter of Ambassador Stevens and his diplomatic staff”or from the words of Muslim Cleric Al-Suhaybani, either.

  4. says

    Fifty generations of insanity.

    The Spirit World is make believe. There are no exceptions.

    Every purported prophet is phoney. There are no exceptions.

    Every believer is a dupe and a fugitive from actual thought. There are no exceptions.

    Their insults to the Prophet do not cease.

    This is correct. My only weapon is the truth. My utterances will cease only upon my death.

    And I like this guy’s openness and clarity of depiction. He is everything I despise. I would love to meet him in the flesh, to ridicule him and mock him to apoplexy, to provoke him to attack, then beat him without mercy.

  5. says

    Imagine…
    …if a senior CARDINAL of the RCC approved the assassination of SAUDI ARABIA’S ambassadors!!!

    Would there be an outcry? Calls of RACISM? Calls of ISLAMOPHOBIA??

    A senior cleric appointed by the SAUDI ROYAL FAMILY can SOLICIT MURDER of AMERICAN DIPLOMATS in public and get a free pass!

    What’s the morality of that?

    President Obama, where is thy outrage?