Commentary on the latest speech of Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi ‘March Forth whether light or heavy’

By: Dr. Haani Sibaai

Part: 1/3

This is a commentary on the latest speech of Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi tittled ‘March Forth Whether Light or Heavy.’ By Allah as my witness I did not want to comment on his speech, and this is heavy on my shoulders. But this sad situation which this organization has dragged us in made it necessary for me to comment. If he had listened to his leader the Mujahid Dr. Shaykh Ayman Az-Zawahiri and took his advice to stay in Iraq it would have been merciful for him. But sadly many things came to light after that like in the speech ‘This is not our Manhaj’ (by Abu Muhammad Al-Adnani) concerning Takfir, Tafdjeer, and Tafseeq. I do not want to confront them with aggressive words but I speak with all calmness until the truth becomes clear to all supporters. Let them ponder the words of their Caliph, there is no personal enmity between us, the issue is that there is innocent blood spilt and false Takfir made, and the image of Jihad and Islam is being besmeared. This is what made us stand against this extremism and against this state.

If the issue was just an issue about the Caliphate it would be an easy issue. The Tahreeri group (Hizb Tahrir) declared a Caliphate more than 60yrs ago, nevertheless you will not see these problems with them, even though they have mistakes in Aqeedah and Fiqh, but they did not slaughter and kill and make Takfir. This group called for a Caliphate and is still dreaming about a Caliphate, so the issue is not an issue of Caliphate. The issue is that there are problems, deviations in Aqeedah, in Manhaj, in manners, and they fled from these issues with the issue of Bayah and after that the declaring of a Caliphate, and I think if Sh. Ayman remained pleased with them they would not declare a Caliphate. I think this move was out of fear, fear of losing followers. But nevertheless, this is the reality now so we have to talk about it (the Caliphate).

This talk consist of my opinion and it is asked that the other side accepts this opinion, we are talking about our opinion, and my opinion about this speech (of Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi) is that it was recorded to prove he is alive and that he was not killed, so he is responding to the media propaganda that he was killed or wounded. He wants to let his followers know that he is still alive, and this is his right! Know that this is his right, and the right of every leader with responsibility, to comfort his followers. I am just making the remark that his speech came after the media propaganda that he was hit, and couldn't move, and all these claims. This speech came as a reply to this.

That's why he tried to show as much strength as possible in his speech, but I sensed some weakness and sadness in his voice, like his dream was coming to an end and turned into a nightmare, and that the people will quickly wake up from this dream of a Caliphate. His speech was clear, but this was just a detail. Another detail is also calling to the Ummah, to march forth, and that his Caliphate is the spearhead of the war of this Ummah, as if the Ummah will fall if this spearhead falls. And he is still talking about the sings of the end days, and that they will hand over the banner to the Prophet Isaa (Jezus) peace be upon him. They are still living in this illusion. The problem is that they, he and his followers, specify the predicted victory and claim that they will reach this victory with their hands specifically. Like when he says to his followers “A Ummah which has the likes of u will not vanquish” Does the Ummah vanquish? What is this? I will come back to this statement. And with the likes of u? The opposite is true actually, your Caliphate was spreading now it is weakening and loosing.

He is looking for acceptance from the Ummah in this speech, while they use to criticize the Mujahideen for emphasizing the importance of popular acceptance. As if popular acceptance was a innovation; aren’t the people you live amongst Muslims? And now you are appealing to all the Muslims; isn’t this winning over popular acceptance? So that they can protect you and your followers, and so that you call upon the Muslims to make Hijra to you, the place of the Caliphate, the place of safety and Islamic work, etc. this illusion of Bayah you have.. Or that they fight in your territory. This is what we also used to say! Be modest oh leader of the Caliphate, be modest. You are a leader of a fighting group, you are not a Caliphate or state or anything like that, you sold this illusion to yourself and your followers and supporters.

This is the problem, if he acknowledged this he would correct a lot of mistakes, but the problem is that he thinks that he is really a Caliph. And that he has an established state, and he does not call people to live in an established state, under the security and protection which its offers, but to come and fight in order to protect his illusion. We all dream of a Caliphate, who said we don't? We dream about it. But this is not a Caliphate. This is a false Caliphate, extreme in Takfir, which instills terror and fear, slaughter, killings, etc. He talks about these things (apostasy, slaughtering, etc.) while he is addressing the Muslims! Then why threaten them and instill fear? This is a problem. I am talking about the speech in general of course.

Then he talks about the Arabic leaders, I will comments on some things here. We know the falseness of the Arabic leaders and their ruler-ship, before the Caliphate and after it, I mean your Caliphate of course, before all these fighting groups, we know that these Arabic rulers are evil. They are the cause of all the misery in our Ummah. They are traitors, criminals, apostates, they ally with the Crusaders and the enemies of the Ummah. Yes, we know this. You say “Where are they to liberate and rescue such and such..” like “Palestine, Burma, etc.” who are you addressing? They are dead! Are you addressing the dead? Don't address these dead ones. But we will ask a legitimate question: where are the horses of Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi and his armies to liberate Palestine, and Shaam, and Iraq, and Burma, and China, and India, where are your horses? Where are your men? If you are addressing the dead, they are traitors and backstabbers, than how about you? Where are your horses? And this is happening even in your governates (Wilayaat), how is it possible that you establish governates and talk about them. These are your governates, so then they are attacking your ruler-ship! Where are your horses to keep them in check? They stand in your way to liberate the Ummah.

And another question I am saddened to ask about, how is it possible that the children, women and elderly men in Iraq are fleeing to the territories of the Shia Rawafid? Why are they leaving the land of the Caliphate, why are they leaving security and protection, which you talk about? According to you the people are working and living in peace and security, why then are they leaving you in the first place? Why are they fleeing from you if there is an established Caliphate? If there was really a Caliphate with establishment (Tamqeen) and stable placement (istiqraar) they wouldn't flee oh leader of the believers; I mean this sarcastically of course and do not see u as such. Why did they flee to the Rawafid and the atheist Kurds if they found protection and help from you? Why did they flee, ask yourselves this question! Why did Ahl Sunnah flee from you, this is a question to oh Caliph.

Something strange also was that he talked about the coalition in Yemen against the Houthis, he talked about it a lot. This coalition started, imagine, to end the Islamic state (according to him). This is the last thing we would imagine. This coalition led by Saudia Arabia was only started to protect their ruler-ship, when it saw it was threatened. This is the issue, and not to protect or help Ahl Sunnah, or the Mother of the Believers and the Companions (against the Shia who slander them), nothing like that. They stood up to protect their thrones, nothing more, and to place these Houthis in check. These ten states did not participate in this coalition to strike the Islamic State or Caliphate. So this indicates, sorry to say so, that you are daydreaming. I do not know how you saw this, but this is not seen or mentioned by any analyst. I think he is in a tight situation and therefore only wants to strengthen his followers by such words.

I also saw in this party-wit speech clear Iraqi partisanship, he was very prejudice towards his own country people and you could hear this in his speech. Notice, most of his speech was aimed towards and about the people of Iraq. And I will mention to you how many times he spoke about them. We noticed this Iraqi partisanship in most of his speech, but the rest of the supporters (Ansaar) got some greetings here and there and some small praises, but most of the speech was about Baghdad, Anbar, Mosul, Raqqah, Beji, etc. And when he talks about them it is not like he is talking about Iraq, but as if he is talking about whole countries! While he is only talking about Iraq! This is just one country. You have just one country under your wing. Yet you are talking about cities and swathes of land, which are all part of one and the same country. Talking so much about Iraq indicates affliction and distress, that he is really losing many things.

He of course didn't talk about Tirkit and how it was lost and gone, and other loses, not even in the 70% style of Al-Adnani when he talked about losing Kobani “We achieved victory the day the Pentagon considered the recapture of Kobani as a victory after the Mujahideen left it in ruins using up more than 70% of the coalitions strength.” He did not talk about Kobani and the big disaster in Kobani, or Tikir, and Al-Anbar. We also used to think that Al-Anbar was in the hands of Ahl Sunnah but it became clear that it was a war of attacking and retreating, taking and losing, sometimes they took Beji sometimes they lost it, the same goes for other parts as well. It also became clear that Mosul was not fully under their control, just parts of it, only the city, and other parts were taken by the Kurds again. And the district of Sallahudeen was mostly attacking and retreating, but most of it was under control of the Iraqi army of treachery and apostasy.

This then means that you are a guerrilla fighting group, fighting a war of constant attacking and retreating. I am not criticizing this! Every fighting group wages war like this. But you are saying and claiming and emphasizing that you are a Caliphate! And you are fighting for this Caliphate. And you are still insisting on this Caliphate. This will destroy you! Because you are sadly selling illusions to the people and the youth. And when these small youths come and reach you they sadly find this blind disaster.

I also want to point out that he said the Rawafid are dazed and that the Cursaders are exhausted and that the Jews are terrorized. And that they are weaker than yesterday. I do not see this, on the contrary, they are stable now and they are resting, and in the contrary they are in strength. It is sadly your governates that’s shrinking. And it is the Muslim youth who is getting killed and dispersed and bombed in every place.

Translated by: DMIS.

Ps. I do not know if I can finish the rest of the commentary, I can't promise anything. I will do my best inshaAllah.