The Shaykh commented on a segment in which a man named (al-Ghannushi) was mentioned.

The Shaykh : What is the name of this party?

The questioner : The Ennahda Party of Rached al-Ghannushi. All right, let us listen to see.
Al-Halabi: He criticized them.

The Shaykh : I criticized them; I noticed that, but he is saying, wait a moment, let us listen for a bit.
Al-Halabi : This is al-Ghannushi.

The Shaykh : No, no, excuse me, leave that in the margin, set it aside, so we can see if there is praise... whereas Abu Yusuf considers it praise.
Al-Halabi : No, he said, our Shaykh, that the evidence is that he is pleased, and he also brought it up with so-and-so and so-and-so.

The Shaykh : No, I see that Abu Yusuf was harsh with the man. I do not doubt your intention, pay attention, and do not misunderstand me. Pay attention, I do not doubt your intention, but I am clarifying the reality. The reality is that first, you attributed the man’s words regarding what he quoted from the Christian and from the Middle East, in which he supports al-Turabi, on the assumption that he is a fundamentalist. He is not speaking of people who said this and people who said that. Then, now, this al-Ghannushi, whom I did not notice, I understood from you that, look, he also praises this, but I noticed the last word, which I missed the name of the party for, but I noticed the last word that he criticizes it. I do not know what he said about tolerance.
Al-Halabi : Their concepts are weak.

The Shaykh : This is blame, Professor, Abu Yusuf. This is blame. So let us go back and listen.

Another questioner : Abu Yusuf is speaking about the Wahhabis, about the Salafis.

The questioner : About the people of Hadith.

The Shaykh : No problem, every occasion has its own discourse. May Allah reward you. Bring it so we can see. Please.
"The tape: This term also included the Ennahda Party of Tunisia, which is one of the most tolerant, indeed lax, Islamic trends in its ideas, its terminology, and its relations."

The Shaykh : This is blame.
"The tape: As for the Islamic groups in Egypt, tell us and there is no harm. Indeed, even the Afghan mujahideen have now been classified as extremists, and several publications have come out warning against them and against the Arab Muslim youth returning from there. We have never heard voices warning against these people, nor against the youth returning from... and carrying the AIDS virus in local newspapers in this country. And unfortunately, local publications and newspapers have become involved in this matter, when they should have at least supported the Hisbah and the people of the Hisbah in this country, which is the focus of the attention of Muslims everywhere. In any case, my intention in this... is to say that these newspapers and these faces do not speak about a specific category, but they use the talk of extremism as a pretext to vent their anger and resentment, and their hatred and enmity, toward those who carried the message of Islam, even if they were moderate, or even if they were negligent and lenient."

The Shaykh : Tolerant.
"The tape: And the term 'extremists' may be employed... or a behavior may sometimes be employed against doctrinal positions."

The Shaykh : Even if they are from the tolerant ones. Is this what you call it regarding al-Ghannushi? It is very clear. This is why that Christian described al-Turabi as what? Yes, this, may Allah reward you, is praise or blame? After he has blamed the tolerant ones? There is no doubt that al-Turabi is among the tolerant ones because he adapts. And we, what did we blame the Muslim Brotherhood for, or some of it? We blamed them for the fact that whenever a state rises, they are with it, whether it is a military revolution, or a republic, or a dictatorship, etc. They adapt. This is blame, may Allah reward you, not praise at all. But in any case, he is only a transmitter, and a transmitter of disbelief is not a disbeliever. He is presenting to the listeners or the attendees that this Christian says this about al-Turabi, and this Middle East says that. And now it is clear that not all Islamic groups support him. He has people who are certainly tolerant, loose, and so on. So this is very clear, I mean.

Another questioner : Your words reminded me of what was transmitted, or what happened to some of the transmitters, regarding Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah, that he praised the Asha'irah in his fatwas, and that after investigation and scrutiny, it became clear that Shaykh al-Islam did not praise them, and that this praise was not from his words.

The Shaykh : Yes, exactly.

Another questioner : Rather, it was a transmission from some of the Asha'irah.

The Shaykh : This is correct.

Another questioner : It seems he reminded me of this.

The Shaykh : Yes, by Allah.

The questioner : ... some of the brothers there in our lands, and his review. Let me speak with complete frankness.

The Shaykh : Please go ahead.

The questioner : In some of the apparent Islamic movements, the man means to highlight those movements in one way or another. But perhaps we have forgotten, or we have made us forget, the rule of good assumption... zeal for the methodology, and we do not mean by this that we bear witness to Allah the Exalted that we serve a faction or serve an objective.

The Shaykh : If Allah wills.

The questioner : And I mean, I am on that, but what became clear to us, perhaps from haste or otherwise, is that the man reviews from one place to another, meaning in all his evidence, the movements that are known for their affiliation to the Muslim Brotherhood, and that is enough, whether it is a jab, blame, or praise. The issue here is that he did not refer to what the movements suffer from, whether they are in agreement with the methodology or in opposition to it. That is what we want. As for the tape, as a fact, there is no doubt that it is not devoid of benefits.

The Shaykh : But Abu Yusuf, may Allah reward you, now the war is between Islam and between secularism.

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : So in this situation, it is not befitting for the Muslim man who is zealous for Islam to come in the way of clarifying his position regarding some of the Islamic groups that have a little or a lot of deviation from Islam. It is not befitting to enter into these details as long as all these Islamic groups are against this fierce secularist attack. Here, there is no room for him to come and vent the anger of the believers' chests by saying, these are from the Islamists, these are on the right, and these are slightly deviated from the right, and these are greatly deviated from the right. This is not the place for that, may Allah reward you. Now, there is an Islamic front that has this and that and that, and another front that does not have this and that. They are all the front of disbelief and misguidance. They all agree to fight Islam. So here, it is not befitting for us to demand of such a lecturer that he relieve us of his specific, precise position regarding all these Islamic groups. This is for every occasion its own discourse, as they say, exactly.

The questioner : O Shaykh, we have accepted, for example, what you mentioned of this theory in Afghanistan. What happened to the Salafis there?

The Shaykh : We say, O Professor, may Allah guide you. We say, regarding what we hear here. As for what we said earlier, I, who looked into al-Turabi’s words, his blame is a very serious blame. The Professor looked into other things, which you heard earlier. That is enough for us regarding his blame. But our topic is that this man supports al-Turabi and makes him a fundamentalist in the Salafi sense. No, by Allah, no, by Allah. This is a statement that does not indicate that. It is permissible for you or someone else to come to us with very clear words and say that al-Turabi’s call is the call of the truth. It is permissible. I am not saying this is impossible. But here, there is nothing of this at all.

The questioner : Praise be to Allah.

The Shaykh : Praise be to Allah, may Allah reward you.