Posted on 10/11/2001 9:22:17 PM PDT by JohnHuang2
Muslim Scholars Back Fight Against Terrorists
By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
panel of prominent Muslim scholars in the Middle East has issued a fatwa, or religious opinion, denouncing the terrorist attacks on the United States and saying it is the "duty" of Muslims to participate in the mission to apprehend the terrorists.
The primary purpose of the fatwa, released at a news conference yesterday in Washington, is to reassure Muslim soldiers in the American armed forces that they are permitted to fight other Muslims and Muslim countries to combat terrorism.
The fatwa was issued in response to a request by Capt. Abdul-Rasheed Muhammad, a Muslim chaplain in the United States Army, who sought guidance for Muslim military personnel uneasy about being deployed in the operation against Afghanistan.
But several Muslim experts said the fatwa could have a broad impact beyond the United States by providing religious justification for Muslim nations to cooperate with the American military effort. Many Muslim counties have minimized the American presence within their borders or over their skies.
Fatwas are not binding, but this one is likely to have strong credibility throughout the Islamic world because among its five authors is a prominent scholar based in Qatar whose word is revered by many Muslims, both moderates and militants.
That scholar, Sheik Yusuf al-Qaradawi, is regarded as an independent voice, unlike the many Islamic muftis and theologians who have been appointed by some Muslim governments. Far from pro-Western, Sheik Qaradawi has been a spiritual adviser to Muslim Brotherhood militants in Egypt, has harshly criticized the United States for supporting Israel and has condoned Palestinian suicide bombers.
"This fatwa is very significant. Yusuf Qaradawi is probably the most well-known legal authority in the whole Muslim world today," said Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, founder of the American Sufi Muslim Association, and an authority in Islamic jurisprudence. "The armed forces of other countries now have behind them a legal standing in the eyes of a noted legal authority to be part of the coalition against terrorism."
The fatwa, written in Arabic and translated into four pages of English, says: "We find it necessary to apprehend the true perpetrators of these crimes, as well as those who aid and abet them through incitement, financing or other support. They must be brought to justice in an impartial court of law and punish them appropriately, so that it could act as deterrent to them and to others like them who easily slay the lives of innocents, destroy properties and terrorize people. Hence, it's a duty on Muslims to participate in this effort with all possible means."
The fatwa condemns the terrorist attack, saying that "all Muslims ought to be united against all those who terrorize innocents," because the death of noncombatants is a clear violation of Islamic law.
The fatwa notes that American military action may also result in the death of innocent people, but that a Muslim soldier must "perform his duty in this fight despite the feeling of uneasiness of `fighting without discriminating.' " As a soldier, "he has no choice but to follow orders, otherwise his allegiance and loyalty to his country could be in doubt."
The fatwa was issued on Sept. 27 but not released until yesterday because it was being shown to other Muslim jurists in this country and overseas, said Dr. Taha Jabir Alalwani, chairman of the Fiqh Council of North America, a group of Muslim scholars.
The fatwa is surprising because it appears to contradict other recent statements from Mr. Qaradawi.
In an interview on Sept. 16, on Al Jazeera television, the Arabic-language network based in Qatar, Mr. Qaradawi said, "A Muslim is forbidden from entering into an alliance with a non-Muslim against another Muslim." He called on Muslims to "fight the American military if we can, and if we cannot, we should fight the U.S. economically and politically."
It is not clear why Mr. Qaradawi has appeared to change his position.
The other authors of the fatwa include Haytham al-Khayyat, a scholar in Syria, and three Egyptian scholars who have also criticized American policy in Muslim countries: Tariq al-Bishri, a retired jurist, Muhammad S. al-Awa, a professor of law, and Fahmi Houaydi, a newspaper columnist.
It is too early to tell how the fatwa will be greeted in either the Muslim world, or among Muslims in the United States. Fatwas can be disseminated through speeches in mosques, Web sites and media coverage.
Not everyone welcomed this fatwa. Qaseem A. Uqdah, executive director of the American Muslim Armed Forces and Veterans Affairs Council, said he was outraged that such a fatwa was even sought.
Mr. Uqdah said the fatwa was a political statement of no help to enlisted Muslims, and should never have been sought because the scholars could have come to a completely different conclusion.
"Now you have opened a door for people to question, is this right or wrong," he said. "You'll have controversy looming about us just when we don't need that."
For Education And Discussion Only. Not For Commercial Use.
The fatwa was issued in response to a request by Capt. Abdul-Rasheed Muhammad, a Muslim chaplain in the United States Army, who sought guidance for Muslim military personnel uneasy about being deployed in the operation against Afghanistan.
I thought the miltary took an oath to preserve, protect and defend this country. I thought that the orders of the commander in chief, as represented by their immediate superiors was the only orders they are to obey.
I would summarily discharge any Muslim military man who is taking his orders from a Muslim leader. I guess I'm naive. We are in deep trouble if this goes unnoticed and uncontradicted.
I would summarily discharge any Muslim military man who is taking his orders from a Muslim leader. I guess I'm naive. We are in deep trouble if this goes unnoticed and uncontradicted.
Well, it's more complicated than that. Sometimes immoral orders are given and it could conceivably be a religious duty to conscientiously object. In all such cases that I can imagine in the United States Armed Forces, however, an order sufficiently immoral that it would be sinful to obey it is also sufficiently unlawful that there would be no duty to obey it. If the regulations and military code are such that you can imagine being given a lawful order that contradicts your religious moral imperatives, then you shouldn't go into the armed forces in the first place. In particular, a Muslim who believes that it is against Islam to ally with non-Muslims against other Muslims should not join the army of a non-Muslim country!
Still, a Muslim who did NOT believe this when he joined up but is now being told it by all sorts of mullahs and imams can indeed benefit from this fatwa, so I don't have a problem with it.
Possibly, just possibly, Qaradawi believes the terrorists are not Muslim but simply claim Islam as a pretext for their ambitions. If I understand this, though, a Muslim is not allowed to say another is not a Muslim if the other states he is a Muslim.
That's a long sentence, but I think they could get it into a fatwa. I wonder when they will issue it?
The real source of 'terrorism' are found in the words of the Koran. All of this is just diabolical 'spin'. When members of the worlds largest religion enter the presence of their 'higher power' five times a day and then rise up to drive the infidels out of the middle-east what does that tell you about Allah?
Another brief comment here. From what I've heard, bin Laden's fatwas don't count for diddly squat, because he isn't the real article in terms of Muslim theological credentials. THESE guys, apparently, have genuine authority.
Translation: we've got a REAL fatwa, and bin Laden's isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
Like I said, this is good news.
They well remember the ease in which we routed the pearl of Arab military might in Iraq.
On the other hand, the true believers may gain control and we are all screwed.
knews hound
Precisely -- I really don't care about the so-called "psychological victory" here -- the public request by a US Military Captain, from citizens of a foreign nation, to judge whether US military personnel can fight in this war, is an outrage. If they had any qualms about fighting other muslims, they should have requested immediate discharge as conscientious objectors (i.e. those willing to kill anyone but muslims in the defense of their country.)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.