Bilal Abdul Kareem Journalist
ISIS spokesman Abu Muhammad Adnani released a statement yesterday that Muslims around the world should thank him for because he made things crystal clear for anyone with eyes to see. Before we begin, it has to be made clear that Adnani is ISIS leader Abu Bakr Baghdadi’s spokesman and cannot be considered as “just another” ISIS member. Therefore it is only reasonable to assume that Adnani’s statements are Baghdadi’s. With that in mind here are 3 brief things that Adnani made clear in his statement and thus gifted the Muslims with around the world.
1. Muslim Blood Around the World Means Nothing to ISIS
In Adnani’s statement he mentioned the following:
“If you can kill a disbelieving American or European - especially the spiteful and filthy French - or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allaah, kill him in any manner or way however it may be. Do not ask for anyone’s advice and do not seek anyone’s verdict. Kill the disbeliever whether he is civilian or military, for they have the same ruling”.
What did we learn from this? This article will not be a theological discussion on the permissibility/impermissibility of this type of order as I don’t believe his statement has entered the realm of Islamic reality to merit such a response. So I will limit the analysis to something else at this time. Let us say that individual Muslims in non Muslim countries begin to carry our Baghdadi’s orders and all of a sudden begin to attack a man here or there, spit in the faces of ordinary citizens (as Adnani said in his statement for Muslims to do to non Muslims), or other things of this nature. Exactly what do you believe the response will be? Is it reasonable to assume that non Muslim citizens of the US, Canada, France etc. will simply wipe away Muslim saliva from their faces and keep walking? Is it reasonable that they will simply stand by and watch as Adnani stated Muslims in the West should do to even civilians: “Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him, or poison him”. I don’t think it is reasonable that non Muslims will not mind seeing their countrymen being treated in this fashion and thus not concern himself with it. I think it is more reasonable that there will be gangs that will assault Muslim women while they go to the market or take their children to school. It is more reasonable to assume that mobs will hold down and smash the faces of practicing Muslims as they come out of mosques in Chicago, London, and Paris. The Muslims in many western countries don’t even amount to 5% of the population. Muslims would become easy targets for any and all and they would be absolutely powerless to defend themselves. Does Baghdadi’s “rule” extend to those lands wherein he can protect the Muslims from almost certain backlash? And why would Adnani say: “Do not ask for anyone’s advice and do not seek anyone’s verdict”, at the tail end of issuing his leader’s order? Shouldn’t Muslims always seek the advice of people of knowledge? Why would he feel threatened by Muslims seeking advice from the Qur’an and Sunnah? Strange.
2. Clues to what may/may not be Motivating ISIS Leadership
Why would Baghdadi/Adnani issue an order that will clearly harm Muslim interests with no discernible possibility for benefits for the Muslims at large? I can only come up with 2 reasons ISIS leadership would push for such a scenario. Either:
1. Both Baghdadi and Adnani are grossly ignorant when it comes to the highly likely scenario that Muslim blood will flow in the streets of non Muslim lands. Maybe they are so disconnected that they think the 1.5% of the American population that are Muslims can protect themselves from the other 98.5% should they implement his orders. Has the “Khalifa” so little regard for the safety of Muslims around the world?
or
2. Perhaps Adnani and Baghdadi have an anti-Islamic agenda. Some may not think this is realistic. “They are just misguided”, some will say. However, let us look at some of the successes they have accomplished over the past year or so:
-Successful in turning their guns on fellow Muslims and halting Mujahideen advances against an Assad regime that was on the brink of collapse in early 2013 by virtually all accounts that were on the ground at that time. Then Baghdadi announced the ISIS entity in Syria and the revolution has been backtracking ever since.
-Successful in avoiding any and all attempts to have grievances with other Islamic factions being settled in a Sharia’ court. This is in spite of calls from an endless list of scholars around the globe for them to do so.
-Successful in unifying the entire planet in calling for international intervention in the Syrian conflict. Barack Obama would not have been able to pull this off without overwhelming evidence of rampant evil that ISIS provided in a big way. Even the best US spin machine couldn’t have produced enough faked videos to be convincing enough bring all these squabbling countries together.
-Successful in displaying the ugliest, bloodiest, most distorted image of Islam that any group has been able to do perhaps in the history of the religion. Even George Bush and Tony Blair did not have this level of success in demonizing jihad and Mujahideen.
While I am not in a position to say that they are/are not agents of some government conspiracy, I am certainly in a position to say that ISIS efforts will probably appear in CIA/MI6 trainee manuals of “How to put down a Just Islamic Struggle” for years to come.
3. ISIS Leadership is Truly Committed. But to what?
As of 00:30 Tuesday September 23, 2014 US airstrikes have started in Syria. Spokesman Rear Adm John Kirby said fighter and bomber jets and Tomahawk missiles were used in the attack. Additionally other anti regime forces who are NOT ISIS are reporting that as of 3:20am their positions have come under attack in Idlib by missiles not seen in the Syrian territories before.
Keep in mind this is the same United States that makes a total mess of every single country it sets it’s foot (or bombs) in. The world had grown so totally weary of it’s aggression, lies, and deception that there is no way any country would have followed them in another coalition. However ample ammunition was provided by ISIS to bring another such “coalition of the willing” back to Muslim lands. Is Baghdadi sincere to the Muslims yet grossly ignorant and inept as a leader or is he something else? It is perhaps that he is so awful as a leader that he simply can’t see that he is being used like a tool in the hands of those who would harm Muslims lands.
Conclusion
I will not engage in a conspiracy theory but anyone with any intelligence can see what has been happening to Muslim interests since the announcement of ISIS in Syria 18 months ago. I know people will continue to blame me for “helping” non Muslims against Muslims by speaking out against ISIS. Journalism places the realities at the feet of the people so they can make intelligent and informed decisions. After all is said and done there are some who would still support Baghdadi no matter what. I remember a statement a friend of mine used to say: “Bilal, you can’t wake up someone who’s pretending to be sleeping”.
