Comment on the statement that the Iraqi army is only defending the Ba'ath Party, and since the Ba'ath Party is a disbeliever, the army is a disbeliever.

The Shaykh: Whereas regarding morals, customs, and traditions, the later generations bear the burden of the earlier ones, are you not distinguishing between an Arab people, regardless of their party affiliation and their misguidance, between their customs and traditions and the customs and traditions of the French, the British, and so on?

The questioner: I do distinguish.

The Shaykh: Yes.

The questioner: There is a difference.

The Shaykh: But just now you did not distinguish.

The questioner: I said communism, my Shaykh.

The Shaykh: I did not say communism, I said the Arabs. Yes, I said the Ba'athist communist Arabs. I believe that the Ba'ath, as I said about the Syrian Ba'ath, was communist, but it evolves according to politics. So if the expression is difficult for you, Student: Peace be upon you.

The Shaykh: We withdraw the word "upon you peace," we withdraw the word "communist," we say "Ba'athist." So is the Arab Ba'athist, let us say, a disbeliever who has apostatized from the religion, is he, in terms of caring for honor and jealousy over women, like the Soviet communist? Let the group hear this.

The questioner: There is a difference.

The Shaykh: Okay, so is it not possible that the Arab Iraqi army, when it defends, is not defending only for its party, but is defending its honor? And this is not possible, may Allah reward you. So we must not come and say he is defending his party, he is defending his Ba'ath; this is a mistake.

The questioner: HeThe Shaykh : Ibn Baz limited the issue to this limitation.

The Shaykh: My brother, let me, may Allah reward you, please, I am...

The questioner: It is a general fatwa, this, my Shaykh, is a general fatwa adopted in Iraq and it has its effects.

Another questioner: His ijtihad...

The Shaykh: A strange matter. I am saying it is a general fatwa. Okay, we are talking, meaning it is not a general fatwa.

The questioner: Yes, it is also a general fatwa.

The Shaykh: All right.

The questioner: Invalidating the opposing fatwa, so this analogy is a mistake. This mistake exists. We can speak with this. We can say Ibn Baz's analogy is that because these are a disbeliever regime.

The Shaykh: My brother, why did you take us back?

The questioner: No, I did not take you back, my Shaykh.

The Shaykh: No?

The questioner: I have reached the end now. I am taking the essence.

The Shaykh: Please, Ibn Baz was not mentioned at the beginning of the topic.

The questioner: Yes.

The Shaykh: And we stated our view regarding him and warned the youth not to attack the scholars, these and so on.

The questioner: Yes, God forbid.

The Shaykh: And we stated that he has a viewpoint which we see as a mistake, and it has been about half an hour for us.

The questioner: This is it.

The Shaykh: Or more, and we go east and west, near and far, until we know that this fatwa is a mistake. Among the things raised was your saying it is a mistake, but this does not show its mistake except with the explanation that these Iraqi army are not defending except for the Ba'ath rule. I told you this is a mistake, so what is the relation of this...?

The questioner: He is the one who linked it this way. He linked the issue to this matter.

The Shaykh : For what?

The questioner: Linking that the army is defending the regime and the regime is a disbeliever, so everyone is a disbeliever.

The Shaykh: What do I have to do with him? Now it is clear to you.

The questioner : Yes, yes.

The Shaykh: That this group, this army, do not imagine that it is fighting only for its party, my brother. It is defending its land, it is defending its honor, it is defending its wealth. Why only is it defending its party? And as I told you just now, if Saddam were assassinated today, no eye would weep for him. Why? Because they want their benefit. And perhaps the bad policy that destroyed the crops and the people, this group of Ba'athists might wish, between one evening and the next morning, that Allah saves them from this tyrant and they rest from his corruption on earth. Therefore, the intention is that it be said first that they are defending the Ba'ath, this is a mistake. And second, you took us back toThe Shaykh : Ibn Baz, and we said our view regardingThe Shaykh : Ibn Baz and his knowledge and his virtue, and that he issued this fatwa based on opinion and ijtihad, so he is rewarded in any case. So your going back to the past...

The questioner: No, I did not go back, my Shaykh.

The Shaykh: Ah, I am mistaken.

The questioner: No, no, please.