He spoke about the people who curse the rulers and forget themselves.

The Shaykh : ... between a ruler and the ruled, for we all constitute this bad reality. It was said long ago, and a hadith was narrated, traced back to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), but its chain of narration is not authentic, even though its meaning is correct in many or most cases, which is their saying: "As you are, so will your rulers be." This is the meaning embodied in the common proverb: "The worm is in the vinegar and in it." Therefore, I am amazed at some of the youth who pour all their anger on their rulers and forget themselves, not remembering that these rulers are from us and among us, and that they emerged from our midst and did not come to us from another world other than the world of our land. The purpose of all this is to draw attention to the fact that we, the Muslims, all of us, rulers and ruled, bear the responsibility for this great fitnah (trial, discord or temptation) that occurred in this time and struck the Muslims in their lands; hardly anyone escapes it, whether their home is near the fitnah or far from it. You are today living in Jordan, far from what is perceived as the problem, but the problem grows larger as time passes because of these residents who migrated on their own from those countries and made Jordan a passageway for them, if not a residence, even if for a limited time. You must be reading with us in the newspapers and hearing on the radio the difficulties and problems that the state or the Jordanian government is currently bearing, to the point that it was forced in turn to call for help from the Western world to remove this problem that has befallen it. Who is responsible for this problem and this great fitnah? We Muslims, all of us. Do not distinguish between a ruler and the ruled, between the righteous and the wicked, for we are all that wicked man. This is an introduction to the answer of the question posed earlier. I say here three things: two of them relate to two states, each of which, in my opinion and my firm ijtihad (independent legal reasoning), is wrong in the shar'i'ah (Islamic sacred law) in the most severe way, and the third matter relates to the Muslims as individuals and peoples, and what is obligatory for these peoples to do in standing toward this fitnah that occurred between these two states. As for the first error, as I mentioned to the questioner who posed that question, it is that an Arab state attacked another Arab state, both of which are Muslim. We cannot, in terms of the shar'i'ah, and not merely in terms of speech, say that they are two disbelieving states, no matter what faults and criticisms the extremists of each one mention. These faults and criticisms do not justify us in issuing a ruling of takfir (declaring someone a disbeliever) on either of the two states. As for the first state, by its aggression against its neighbor, and you heard from me just now the saying of Allah the Exalted: In the beginning of this verse, there is an indication that two Muslim groups may fight each other, and the completion of the verse points us to the remedy, so He the Exalted said: We said this is the remedy, but we also said, in effect, that the doctor is missing, unfortunately. So this aggression does not make the aggressor a disbeliever, but rather makes him a baghy (armed rebellion against legitimate authority), and the one who commits baghy does not leave the Islamic circle by his baghy. This is the position of the first state in terms of its violation of the shar'i'ah in its aggression against its Muslim neighbor. As for the other state, which met the first state's error with an error like it, or worse and more dangerous, namely the Saudi state, which permitted itself to seek the help of disbelievers to ward off a suspected danger, namely that the state which committed baghy against Kuwait would attack it. We say that the rule established by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is not a rule that can, in any way, be like some fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) rules that may have been established through ijtihad and personal opinions that are subject to error and correctness. The rule was established by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him); there is no doubt that this was revelation from his Lord, for the saying of Allah the Exalted in His Book: And as came in the authentic hadith that 'Abdullah ibn 'Umar ibn al-Khattab, or ibn 'Amr—I am uncertain now—it was in a gathering of the polytheists; I am now inclined to think it was ibn 'Amr ibn al-'As. He was in a gathering of the polytheists, and they said to him: "You write down what Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) says in contentment and anger." So he came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to tell him what he had heard from the polytheists, and he (peace and blessings be upon him) said to him: and the one with peace and blessings upon him pointed to his noble mouth . This is the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) who speaks not from personal desire...