The Shaykh’s (may Allah have mercy on him) advice to those eager for jihad in the Gulf crisis: that they should stay in their homes.

The Shaykh : The important thing is, let us call this group the Jordanian Popular Army, and it has an emir and a president. Will they fight under the flag of Iraq and its regime, or under a separate flag? What do you think?

The questioner : No, I want to tell you how the matter is carried out.

The Shaykh : And I am asking you so that you do not tell me.

The questioner : Your current understanding of the matter is different from what will actually happen.

The Shaykh : How do you know? I am asking you.

The questioner : And I want to tell you how volunteering is done. When you volunteer, I have experience in Egypt when volunteering was happening, and not just in Egypt, but in all countries of the world. You volunteer when you want to volunteer.

The Shaykh : What do you want, Professor? I am just asking you. May Allah reward you with good.

The questioner : I am volunteering properly. When I volunteer, why do I volunteer?

The Shaykh : I am not asking you that; that is not the question. May Allah be pleased with you. Haste is not beneficial. The Scientific Research Committee does not benefit from haste. I am asking you: when this Jordanian popular volunteer army goes to Iraq to help it against the Americans, will they fight the Americans under the Iraqi regime, or independently of it?

The questioner : Iraq.

The Shaykh : This is the question. Do you see? Now you are telling me "Iraq." One word takes me to Egypt, puts me in Syria. Excuse me, excuse me. Iraq. What is your opinion? Is the Iraqi regime based on the Islamic system? I hope your answer is clear, and that you do not take us to Egypt and bring us to Syria. It needs an idea and it needs thought, Professor.

The questioner : This is a trap, and even to reach this point from the beginning...

The Shaykh : What are you afraid of? May Allah bless you. You remind me of one of our brothers. We lived with him for more years than we lived with each other. When he sees me asking a question here and there, I know where you want to take me. I will take you to good or to evil. Either we reach the truth, or we reach the error. It means either I guide others, or I am guided by others. So when I ask you a question, think about this question: does it have a place in the grammar or not? No, by Allah, it has no place in the grammar, as I told you. When you say, "Okay, I am finished with my speech," it has no place in the grammar. If you answer, then now this volunteer people want to fight to support Iraq against the Americans. Will they fight under the flag of Iraq and its regime? The answer is yes. Is this an Islamic regime or not Islamic?

The questioner : It is not Islamic.

The Shaykh : This needs to be memorized. May Allah bless you. Excuse me for a moment. Tonight you need to learn patience, Doctor. Now we know what the consequences are if this people, whom we called the Jordanian fighting people, are Islamic, and that regime is not Islamic. I think you do not need me to explain to you what will happen of conflict between this group and that group, who are supposed to be one hand and one system in the path of fighting the common enemy, the enemy of both the Iraqis and the Jordanians. I think we do not need to give examples of what will result from the differences between this popular army and the Iraqi army, or is there a need for examples?

The questioner : No, I am satisfied, meaning the popular army.

The Shaykh : Excuse me a little, Abu Yahya. You are satisfied, but what is the result of being satisfied?

The questioner : Meaning, if we were to discuss until morning, we would not reach a result, because on the other hand...

The Shaykh : This is what you are satisfied with. This means you have wasted the entire research.

The questioner : I have not wasted anything. This is not the course of the research. An Islamic regime or not Islamic? Here we need to enter: what is the Islamic regime and what is the non-Islamic regime?

The Shaykh : This is what you need. An example. Now I am telling you, you need an example? I will give you an example.

The questioner : Honestly, I mean, the discussion... You are telling me an Islamic regime, meaning a complete, comprehensive system that applies Islamic teachings.

The Shaykh : Why are you explaining? This is not your job. This is my job, because my question is general. If my question is general, what will your answer be? General. And if my question is detailed, what will your answer be? Detailed. Now I have opened both paths. I asked, if you allow me, Doctor, we need to learn patience tonight. So the point is, I have opened both paths. I opened the path of the general question, a general question, then is there a need for examples? This is the detail. I said you do not need it. So if you have wasted the entire discussion for us, I think when we were about to reach the fruit and say, "Stay in your homes," because you cannot jihad with Iraq, because it itself is not a mujahid. You want to fight with Iraq. Can you fight with Iraq? What is your opinion of this philosophy between jihad and fighting?

The questioner : That is fine.

The Shaykh : I have it, okay. But you have nothing with me, unfortunately. Okay, please proceed.

The questioner : There are clarifying and essential points. Honestly, we are hearing now, and Tahir has read more than once in new bulletins about the front of Adnan, that the European mentality now acknowledges and says that our main enemy now is Islam.

The Shaykh : No doubt, this is what Abu Yahya mentioned.

The questioner : And we heard now that Saddam Hussein has started to speak about changing everything that contradicts the teachings of Islam. This speech was before Iraq occupied Kuwait. And I think our Shaykh is aware of some matters. We say that the example of Afghanistan...

The Shaykh : I have an objection to this speech. You are free to either continue to finish your speech, or I will comment on this speech.

The questioner : I would like to hear the comment.

The Shaykh : I am honestly surprised by this speech. Saddam, when he was Ba'athist, and I do not mean that he became non-Ba'athist, because that is for Allah to know.

The questioner : He is still Ba'athist.

The Shaykh : No problem. Let us be political jurists at the same time. Was his people Ba'athist? Was his people Ba'athist?

The questioner : Part of them, not all of them.

The Shaykh : I am saying the people, meaning at least this body, this government.

The questioner : His government was, yes.

The Shaykh : So from here, we take a point of convergence among all the discussants that the man, when he was Ba'athist... representing the people, because the people are not Ba'athist, is this correct? And I say I want to build, I want to build on this which we agree on. Okay, now if we assume that the man became, as we hope, Islamic, not that you started speaking about others that he started. I assume, not started, as we were speaking about the organization, started and ended. The man became Islamic. Does he represent the people?

The questioner : He represents the people.

The Shaykh : No.

The questioner : Contradiction of speech. Is it not so, Shaykh? Because the people are with him.

The Shaykh : Please pay attention to what I mean. He now started to lean toward Islam, and I assume he finished, he became a Muslim. And you know what a Muslim means, meaning he applies the rulings of Islam.

The questioner : And this is not present.

The Shaykh : I assume this hypothesis, because I mean what is behind it. I assume that Saddam became a Muslim, finished, a Muslim. And I assume, and I heard this, and I did not believe that he denied Ba'ath. I assume he denied Ba'ath.

The questioner : The Ba'ath Party. He does not deny Ba'ath.

The Shaykh : This is known in Arabic, the deletion of the added. The intended meaning. So the power with which he lived as a Ba'athist, just because he announced his disavowal of Ba'ath, did this power become Muslim?

The questioner : How do we know? And it is possible that he convinced them.

The Shaykh : I am speaking logical speech, not speech. Excuse me, we are speaking logical speech, not historical speech. You are answering with historical speech.

The questioner : Honestly, if you allow me without blame, my lord. The man and the position. Let us say now at this moment, we forget that Saddam made a statement against the principles of the Ba'ath Party that contradict Islam. With this current position, the man said, "I raise the flag of jihad in the path of Allah, and I want to start applying Islam." That is what he said.

The Shaykh : It will not come out in his hand, Shaykh.

The questioner : My lord, he said, and the man says how it will not come out in his hand.

The Shaykh : Please, Doctor, I am not saying he did not say it. I told you earlier, they reported that he said it, and I did not believe it. But I am answering your statement that he announced jihad. I am telling you he cannot jihad. Now, if we take the general people from here, who do not pray and do not fast, and are always in the bars and pubs, and so on. Do you think this people can jihad? The type of people who can jihad?

The questioner : He cannot.

The Shaykh : Yes, may Allah bless you. Okay, so now if we take the majority of the Muslim people in any country, can they jihad?

The questioner : He cannot.

The Shaykh : That is why, if you take a person who was a Ba'athist yesterday and today has become an Islamic, from one evening to the next, he cannot do this. You cannot imagine it.

The questioner : I agree with you, my Shaykh, on this point, but because of that, I tried to interrupt to reach a point, my Shaykh...

The Shaykh : We agree, so that you can finish your point. We agree that just because Saddam became Islamic, it does not mean that those who were Ba'athists with him turned Islamic with him. Their ideas remain deviated from Islam, and their behavior is deviated from Islam. If he says "Bismillah al-Rahman al-Rahim," you will hear him mispronounce it because he is newly uttering it. If you do not notice this in the Basmala, let alone some verses and so on, then he cannot strive in jihad. And by that, infer the strength with which he lived and was raised in the Ba'ath Party for twenty years, more or less. I am saying this: he cannot strive in jihad. He can fight, and as our companion said earlier, the Iraqi army now has its own account. He can fight, but he cannot strive in jihad because he does not know jihad in the cause of Allah, and he was not raised on jihad in the cause of Allah. And so I am amazed at our committed brothers, and I do not say Salafis, because it is a general affliction, I do not know how they imagine a people who were Ba'athist yesterday and today became Islamic, and they are to strive in the cause of Allah. This is impossible, my brothers! That is the Sunnah of Allah in His creation, and you will not find any change in the Sunnah of Allah. It is not possible for this person to strive in jihad. He may fight. I am telling you, he may fight.

The questioner : I agree with you that he cannot strive in jihad, but I say that the example of Afghanistan in fighting the disbelievers, the Russians, and the great power of the Russians, started with very simple, contradictory groups in thought, until they reached the point where, under the banner of jihad, they gathered people and entered battles against...

The Shaykh : Excuse me, a note: how are they contradictory?

The questioner : They are contradictory, sir. Among them are those who do not pray, who went to strive in jihad.

The Shaykh : Who? The Afghans?

The questioner : Yes, among them are those with different ideas, to the point that they do not know what the teachings of Islam are. A few of them know the adhan and prayer, and some do not know how to pray. Therefore, my Shaykh...

The Shaykh : As a people, my brother.

The questioner : As a people, sir.

The Shaykh : Wait, wait. The Afghan people, as a people, meaning the majority of them, those who strove, whether of this type or that type, they maintain their prayer, their worship, their modesty, their women, and so on. What is the majority like? We are the Companions of the Messenger of Allah, who are the best of people after the prophets, and among them were those who committed zina and those who stole, but we do not describe the Companions with this description. We say that individuals were found among them. So what is the majority of the Afghans like now? The majority is not what you are describing. No.

The questioner : My Shaykh, when the Russians occupied Afghanistan, there were men in Kabul and elsewhere like the men in Oman and outside Oman. From them, categories emerged, my brother, like the general category in many countries. So I say, my Shaykh, may Allah bless you, if we can utilize the establishment of an Islamic system, the group, these people will say... we will eliminate you.

The Shaykh : Excuse me, Abu Muhammad.

The questioner : If, sir, the Americans say, "We want to eliminate, we want our interests, we want to eliminate every power that raises its head," when will we stop? After Iraq is struck, which is now raising the banner, even if only in name, of jihad, and will be under the banner of Islam, when will we move? If Iraq is struck.

Another questioner : Now Iraq and Saddam are gone. America, its goals toward Islam and Muslims, now we want to fight America. A direct question: Is it not permissible now for a Muslim to fight the disbelieving America with all its shirk and kufr under any banner? We are asking now? We do not want to fight with Saddam because he is a Muslim or not a Muslim. We want to fight America. America came to the region to colonize it and occupy it and support Israel, and now the only entity fighting America with a regular army happens to be Saddam. Now we want to fight America.

The Shaykh : As if we were born today. Subhan Allah. You, my brothers, be realistic. Why don't you fight the Jews?! Do you not have eighty thousand?

The questioner : The answer is, why not fight now? It is available to me.

The Shaykh : You need clarification. Yes, yes, but which system?

The questioner : I am just asking this question. This question, I am asking it directly. We are not asking a question.

The Shaykh : I am making my brother's question realistic so that you know what my answer really is. Now, if the Jews attacked Jordan, what would you think? What would my position be?

The questioner : Your position is to fight them.

The Shaykh : Is there any doubt in this?

The questioner : No, there is no doubt.

The Shaykh : Why am I distinguishing between this and that?

The questioner : I want to tell you why. I am not answering his question. I want to speak about my own case. My first question is, why am I not fighting Israel, and I am ready to fight America? My answer is that it is available to me now.

Another questioner : ...reactive, and we must be patient with it.

The Shaykh : I am patient. How do you see me, I mean.

The questioner : Unlike usual.

The Shaykh : Correct, I am blond, unlike usual.

The questioner : Israel is America.

The Shaykh : Did we not say, fight America? Here is closer to you, my brothers. Fight here.

The questioner : My sir, it may be a requirement of the battle that the battle takes place... in Jordan, not that we go to fight on the Iraqi border. Tomorrow, it is possible that we, the Muslims, or the leader of the Muslims, find that it is better to strike an American base in Tabuk, so we go and strike them.

The Shaykh : It is like that. Yes, it is possible.