In this audio, Shaykh Aadil Mansoor answers this objection very nicely, maashaa'Allaah and it highlights yet another time, that the Hajaawirah are not honest people and their fanatical ghuluww leads them to blatant contradictions in reasoning. The Shaykh (hafidhahullaah) was asked:
Do al-Fawzan and the Muftee know what those besides them from the scholars know about him? Arguing (trying to demonstrate evidence) by way of this is arguing without proof, it is arguing without proof. Until one of stubborn (rebellious) fanatics of his from Algeria, he affirmed, when it is mentioned to them that he (al-Hajuri) received (and met) the senior and stubborn ones from Ahl al-Bid'ah [referring to al-Ma'ribee and al-Halabee, two innovators]. They said (in response) that it is not binding from his meeting with the stubborn, rebellious amongst Ahl al-Bid'ah who came to visit him or console him or meet with him, it is not binding that he has announced a reconciliation with them and being pleased with what they are upon (and so on) to the end of it...
So when it is not binding from him receiving (and meeting) with the heads of Ahl al-Bid'ah that there is concurrence and acceptance from him with them and their pleasure with him, then how can we use the very same (type of) visit to the Scholars of the Sunnah (as evidence) that they see him to be upon a good path.
Either this is a contradiction and confusion. Or a visit to a person, a person, scholar, and his receiving that person, is an evidence that he makes tawtheeq of him and praises him. Thus, we consider everyone whom he receives (to visit) him, and from them are the heads of misguidance, or when he meets him and sits with, speaks with him, whether that meeting and sitting is in San'aa or it is a meeting and sitting in Riyaadh .... [cut in audio]... his receiving of all of those from whose misguidance is known and he was the one speaking about them, then this does not entail praise of them.
So how can you use the reception of al-Hajuri by those scholars who do not know what others know, you consider that as demonstrable proof and a tazkiyah (commendation)? In reality, if only the questioner had mentioned the doubt. Because there are from the doubts that which is considered (an actual) doubt and confuses and which practically requires unveiling and clarifying. But as for the likes of these actions... and how beautiful was that with which Umar bin Abd al-Aziz argued against the Kharijites, it is reported by al-Haafidh Ibn Abd al-Barr (rahimahullaah) in his book "Jaami' Bayaan al-Ilm wa Fadlihi" and with a chain of narration in which there is no harm, if Allaah wills. So he (Umar bin Abd al-Aziz) said to them when they sought him out, they said to him that so long as you are abiding by justice and upon a good way, then we shall (still) not accept from you until you curse and revile the people of your household, the Amawis who preceded you in rule. Because you opposed (their way) in traversing the path, so from the requirements of you opposing them in the path is that you free youself from them and that you curse them. Otherwise we will free ourselves from you. So he (Umar bin Abd al-Aziz) said to them, "I ask you, is the deen of Allaah one or two or three?" They said, "Rather, the deen of Allaah is one." So he said, "Good," and then he cited examples for them whose mention will lengthen the time right now, and he debated them at length.
He said to them (in summary), "Is it sufficient for you that you excuse so and so and so and so and they have both differed in their politics..." until he cam to (mention) of some of the sectsof the Kharijites such as the followers of Naafi' bin al-Azraq and others. So he said to them, "They came to you from Kufah and on the way, they killed al-Kabbaab bin al-Arat (the Companion) and they tore open the stomach of his slave-girl, and they also entered upon Banee so and so, killing their men and women and placed their children into containers of boiling (water)and entered upon so and so and they continued travelling (and doing such deeds) until they came to you, meaning another sect from the sects of the Kharijites, in such and such a place. And that other sect did not hold it (permissible) to shed this blood, and they did not perform such a thing. Is there room for those two sects to excuse each other (in the difference of their ways)?" They said, "Yes." He said, "And is there room for you to be pleased with the two sects alonsgide their difference in (their) politics and and the way taken (by both) groups?" They said, "Yes." He said, "Glorified by Allaah! There is room for some of them to not free themselves of others, and they have differed in the position towards the blood and (its) shedding? And there is room for you to ally with both parties despite the difference in their way? And yet there is no room for me to not free myself from the people of my house (my relatives) and I have differed with them in the path (they took)? Verily, the deen is one."
So, (coming to the point) either the reception by al-Fawzaan, the Muftee and al-Abbaad, may Allaah grant them success and benefit Islaam and the Muslims through them, (of al-Hajuri) is a reception of praise and commendation of him and a refutation of the speech of whoever spoke against him and established the proofs against him and explained what is with him (of errors) [in which case] then likewise, (it has to be so) for his (al-Hajuri's) reception of those (innovators, al-Ma'ribee and al-Halabee). And if they said, "No it is not binding from his reception of Abu al-Hasan and others, it is not binding that he praises them or that he recants from making tabdee' of them or declaring them astray or from all of what he said about them in his cassettes." Then we say, likewise, it is not binding (in the other case), this is with the difference that he (al-Hajuri) knows (full well) of their innovations, he made tabdee' of them (declared them innovators) by their names and spoke against them at length, for what comes close to 12 years, both him and his students. And as for al-Fawzaan and al-Muftee, do they both know with respect to al-Hajuri what they consider to be innovation and believe to be an innovation?"
This is an affair, and this is (abundantly) clear. The deen of Allaah is one, so fear Allaah. And the second affair is that Shaykh al-Fawzaan was asked in a place, I do not recall, in the past or recently, I heard an audio clip, some of the brothers played it to me and within it he said, "We do not know everyone whom we give salaam to and meet with, whoever comes to give salaams to us, we give salaams to him." And Allaah knows best.
Articles
Pay note to the following, it should not be missed: Al-Hajuri has spoken on the misguidance of al-Ma'ribee and al-Halabee and he knows they are from the heads of 
