ISIS Exposed: Beheadings, Slavery, and the Hellish Reality of Radical Islam (31 page)

For starters, any rally that spotlighted the menace that Islamic terrorism—not “violent extremism”—posed to the world didn’t pass the president’s “Islam is peace/the terrorists are not Muslims” test. Obama had spent years assuring us that al Qaeda was decimated, that Iraq was pacified, and that the world was, in his words, “less violent” and more stable, safe, tolerant, and peaceful than it has ever been.
²⁹
He had even given a speech at the National Defense University in May 2013 declaring that the “Global War on Terror” was essentially over.
³⁰
Besides, it was his second term—meaning he only had a short time left to focus on domestic issues and complete the task of “fundamentally transforming the United States of America,” something he vowed to do before being elected in 2008.
³¹
Then along came the ISIS juggernaut, a resurgent al Qaeda, and a steady wave of deadly jihadist attacks on Western soil. All of a sudden, it was painfully clear that the president had been wrong all along. The Islamic terrorist threat was not receding—it was metastasizing in every corner of the globe, thanks in part to his policies. And he had no coherent strategy—and worse, no desire—to lead the fight against it. In other words, forget Paris.

“I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution.”

Coming from the Muslim head of state of the most populous and influential Arab nation, the words were nothing less than earth shattering. On January 1, 2015, at a prestigious, high profile venue that some have called the “Muslim Vatican,” Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi gave one of the most courageous and visionary speeches in recent memory. The event at Cairo’s famed al-Azhar University commemorated the birthday of Islam’s prophet Mohammed. Al-Sisi used the occasion to directly challenge Egypt’s top Islamic authorities, who were in attendance, to lead what the civilized world (including some secular Muslims) has been calling for ever since 9/11—a reformation of Islam:

          
I am referring here to the religious clerics. We have to think hard about what we are facing—and I have, in fact, addressed this topic a couple of times before. It’s inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire umma [Islamic world] to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world. Impossible!

                
That thinking—I am not saying “religion” but “thinking”—that corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the centuries, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible, is antagonizing the entire world. It’s antagonizing the entire world!

                
Is it possible that 1.6 billion people [Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants—that is 7 billion—so that they themselves may live? Impossible!

                
I am saying these words here at Al Azhar, before this assembly of scholars and ulema—Allah Almighty be witness to your truth on Judgment Day concerning that which I’m talking about now.

                
All this that I am telling you, you cannot feel it if you remain trapped within this mindset. You need to step outside
of yourselves to be able to observe it and reflect on it from a more enlightened perspective.

                
I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move . . . because this umma is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost—and it is being lost by our own hands.
³²

Finally. A prominent Muslim leader, caretaker of what is arguably the most prominent Muslim nation, stands up and tells the unvarnished truth about the state of his religion. And he does so in front of a roomful of powerful imams and Islamic religious scholars at al-Azhar University, considered the most influential educational institution in the Muslim world (and a hotbed of anti-Western and anti-Semitic thought).

Islam expert Raymond Ibrahim, an Egyptian-American Coptic Christian, explained the significance of al-Sisi’s statements: “. . . one must appreciate how refreshing it is for a top political leader in the heart of the Islamic world to make such candid admissions that his Western counterparts dare not even think let alone speak. And bear in mind, Sisi has much to lose as opposed to Western politicians. Calls by the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamists that he is an apostate are sure to grow more aggressive now.”
³³

To label someone an “apostate” in the Islamic world is to mark him for death. Al-Sisi, a practicing Muslim, knows this. He has already drawn the eternal ire of Egypt’s Islamists for his sweeping crackdown on the Muslim Brotherhood. But that hasn’t stopped him from smashing the Brotherhood, working closely with Israel, cracking down on Hamas’s smuggling tunnels along the Gaza-Egypt border, and calling for the aforementioned Islamic reformation. Just days after his groundbreaking speech at al-Azhar, al-Sisi again made history—and angered Islamists everywhere—by becoming the first Egyptian president to attend mass at
a Coptic Christian church. His appearance alongside the Coptic Pope came as Egypt’s Copts were celebrating their Christmas Eve. Al-Sisi told the congregation, “It’s important for the world to see this scene, which reflects true Egyptian unity, and to confirm that we’re all Egyptians, first and foremost. We truly love each other without discrimination, because this is the Egyptian truth.”
³⁴

Sounds like the kind of Muslim leader the West has been waiting for, right? Bold, reasonable, and forthright. Yet the mainstream media in the United States virtually ignored al-Sisi’s al-Azhar speech for days. And the Obama administration, instead of holding up al-Sisi’s statements as a model for Muslims everywhere to emulate, had not a word to say about it, at least publicly. Because the Obama White House does not like al-Sisi one bit. It balked when al-Sisi led a popular coup against Mohammed Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood regime in July 2013—despite the fact that Morsi was clearly taking the country in a disastrous Islamist direction, and that some thirty million Egyptians were in the streets demanding his ouster. And the administration has decried al-Sisi’s subsequent harsh crackdown on the Brotherhood, which has seen the Islamist movement crippled in its Egyptian birthplace thanks to mass arrests and trials of its members by the al-Sisi government.

You’d think a U.S. president would consider the weakening of the Muslim Brotherhood—an anti-American, anti-Semitic organization that spawned al Qaeda, Hamas, and the entire modern jihadist movement—a good thing. The Obama White House, however, has made clear that it is deeply unhappy with al-Sisi’s moves against the Brotherhood, to the point that it suspended much-needed military aid to Egypt—aid that would have been used, no doubt, to bolster the Egyptian military’s fight against terrorism on its soil, including the jihadist hotbed of Sinai.
³⁵
As of this writing, it appeared that the aid would be restored by Congress.
³⁶
But the damage to the U.S.-Egypt relationship has been done. I’ve spent time with Egyptian officials who are perplexed by the Obama administration’s continued defense of the Muslim Brotherhood. Why, they wonder, is President Obama
going to the mat for a caliphate-craving organization that hates America and whose ideology has inspired terrorism throughout the world? It’s tough to find an answer. Rest assured, without the creation of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt in 1928, there would be no ISIS today. And while al-Sisi may not be a Western-style democrat, he’s clearly the best option, by far, in a chaotic Egypt, and a man with whom the West—and Israel—can do business.

Still, one gets the distinct feeling that the Obama administration would be thrilled to see Mohammed Morsi—who, as of this writing, was awaiting trial in Egypt for murder and other charges—back in power.
³⁷
As I documented extensively in my 2013 book,
The Brotherhood,
the Obama administration has been advised by radical Islamist organizations including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which have been tied to the Muslim Brotherhood by federal prosecutors.
³⁸
In November 2014, CAIR, along with another U.S-based Brotherhood front, the Muslim American Society, were named terrorist organizations by the United Arab Emirates, ostensibly for their ties to the Brotherhood (which the UAE also designated as a terror organization).
³⁹
The Obama administration, predictably, decried the move and pressured the UAE to reverse it.
⁴⁰
After all, it doesn’t look good for the president when Islamic groups whose members have been frequent visitors to the White House are branded terrorist organizations—and by a Muslim nation, to boot.
⁴¹

Then there are Turkey and Qatar, the world’s two biggest backers of the Muslim Brotherhood—and, incidentally, two of the Obama administration’s closest allies in the Middle East. Turkey’s Islamist president (formerly prime minister) Recep Tayyip Erdogan has demanded that Morsi be put back in power—no surprise, given that Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) is essentially the Turkish Muslim Brotherhood.
⁴²
And prior to Morsi’s ouster, Qatar was seen as the Brotherhood’s biggest cheerleader and backer in the region. Both Turkey and Qatar have also been staunch supporters of the Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch,
Hamas. Qatar has been the terror group’s main financier and played host to its political leadership
⁴³
while Turkey has given safe haven to top Hamas operative Salah al-Arouri—who has allegedly directed Hamas terror attacks against Israeli civilians from his Turkish safe haven.
⁴⁴

As of this writing, there are signs that Qatar, which has seen the Muslim Brotherhood movement severely weakened throughout the region since 2013, may be changing its tune and distancing itself from the Brothers while attempting a rapprochement with its Gulf neighbors and al-Sisi’s Egypt.
⁴⁵
How a potential Qatari realignment will turn out remains to be seen. What is clear, however, is that Turkey remains unrepentant and continues to openly embrace Hamas.
⁴⁶

But Hamas isn’t the only reason a bipartisan group of two dozen members of the U.S. Congress have called for Turkey and Qatar to be sanctioned over support for terrorism.
⁴⁷
Both countries have also poured untold amounts of money (and in Turkey’s case, arms) into Syria to help rebel groups fighting against the Assad regime. Some of the reported recipients of that Turkish and Qatari assistance are terrorist groups—the al Qaeda–affiliated al-Nusra Front chief among them.
⁴⁸
And ISIS may also be benefiting. According to the
Wall Street Journal,
“The U.S. Treasury [Department] . . . has increasingly voiced concerns about the alleged flow of Qatari money to Mideast militants, including Islamic State, Nusra Front and al Qaeda. . . . The Obama administration hasn’t publicly charged Qatar’s government of directly making these payments, but rather says it has been lax in regulating the finances of Qatari nationals, charities and Islamic organizations. Treasury officials allege one wealthy Qatari businessman late last year transferred $2 million to a senior Islamic State commander in Syria who was in charge of recruiting foreign fighters.”
⁴⁹

Nevertheless, “The Obama administration has made Qatar one of its closest diplomatic partners” in the Middle East.”
⁵⁰
Ditto for Turkey, which, along with Qatar, was the Obama administration’s preferred mediator (despite Israel’s strenuous objections and Turkey’s clear pro-Hamas sympathies) to broker a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas during the summer
of 2014.
⁵¹
To say that Turkey, a NATO member, is also playing a problematic role in the fight against ISIS would be an understatement. An extensive November 2014 report by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies called “Bordering on Terrorism: Turkey’s Syria Policy and the Rise of the Islamic State” laid out the ugly details:

          
The IS [Islamic State] crisis has put Turkey and the U.S. on a collision course. Turkey refuses to allow the coalition to launch military strikes from its soil. Its military also merely looked on while IS besieged the Kurdish town of Kobani, just across its border. Turkey negotiated directly with IS in the summer of 2013 to release 49 Turks held by the terrorist group. In return, Ankara reportedly secured the release of 180 IS fighters, many of whom returned to the battlefield. Meanwhile, the border continues to serve as a transit point for the illegal sale of oil, the transfer of weapons, and the flow of foreign fighters. Inside Turkey, IS has also established cells for recruiting militants and other logistical operations. All of this has raised questions about Turkey’s value as an American ally, and its place in the NATO alliance.
⁵²