Refuting Abu Baraa

“We (ISIS) will protect Muslims even if they want to kill us..” – Brief ResponseIgnorance at its peak by Abu Baraa, whom is taken as a source of knowledge for ISIS supporters in the West and can perhaps be even seen as a spokesperson who speaks on their behalf. This tweet (as well as many others) proves how ignorant he is to the reality of a ground and those that take knowledge from him, are just as deep in the pit of ignorance.
This was an old statement by the spokesperson of ISIS, Abu Muhammad al-Adnani, which he made several years ago (before the expansion to Shaam). And we would distribute this video and share it to the slanderers of the Mujahideen, who false accused them of being of those who spill Muslim blood. As those Mujahideen located in Iraq were also al-Qaa’idah, and no heavy deviance was seen like that of which we see today – so their works and speeches would also be made clear to the people. It is to be known such a statement is also easy to make when a group is on the back foot and not powerful, but the true faces are revealed when this group rules over the people and is not in the weakest of positions. The irony of this tweet made by Abu Baraa needs to be addressed.
1. “We will protect Muslims even if they want to kill us..” (The original video further contained al-Adnani saying “And we love them even if they hate us..”
It has been made as a clear position by al-Qaa’idah that ISIS do not represent them, their actions nor their methodology. And that they are not on the path they were on before, despite elements of deviance that may have existed within ISI, as one of their head judges, Abu Sulayman al-Utaybi mentioned. So although during the time this statement was made and it can be understood generally, it is true that the Mujahideen (of al-Qaa’idah do their utmost best to defend and protect the Muslims, to give them victory and that they fight those that oppress them, the Tawagheet and Kuffaar).
However, Abu Baraa’s tweet is implication of this statement being applied today and his intent behind this tweet is evident. That being, IS are those who protect Muslims even if they desire to kill them, contrary to the U.S who claim you are either with them or the enemy (thus being a target) – though this statement itself was specifically made by their old president, George Bush. So as we understand the nature behind this tweet, and as we have come to know the Manhaj of ISIS, it raises many questions.
The methodology of Jama’at ad-Dawlah is one that is known to be one of Takfeer, killing and bloodshed. They make Takfeer on other Mujahideen and Muslims with no proof and evidence, on assumptions and suspicions, and on matters that are not Kufr in itself to begin with. They make the blood, wealth and property Halaal of the other Muslims and they further spill the blood as a result of their Takfeer. The Jihadi leaders and the Shuyookh of the Mujahideen have all addressed them in this regard, and their main deviation which lead to many other devations was a result of their incorrect Takfeer and spilling of Muslim blood without right. So how is it that they protect Muslims, when in reality they accuse Muslims, of disbelief and apostasy and further kill, behead and massacre them in the most harshest of ways?
Where is the “protection of Muslims” that is spoken about here? For indeed their crimes against the Mujahideen are endless! From the killing and torturing of Dr Abu Rayaan of Ahrar ash-Shaam, to the killing of the Ameer of JN in Raqqah, Abu Saa’ad al-Hadhrami, or when they massacred the Shuaytat tribe in Deir Ezzor and described them as apostates due to mere rebellion.. By Allah I ask you, is this the protection of Muslims he implies or rather the unjust killing of Muslims? That which is the greatest sin after Shirk.
It is the thug al-Adnani himself, who states in his “Declaration of Khilafah” announcement, that if anyone seeks to cause Fitnah, spray bullets through his head! .. and it is al-Adnani himself, who mentioned to have no mercy on them (the Taliban)! The Mujahideen of Afghanistan who have been fighting the Crusaders for over a decade..and their Jihad is a noble Jihad.. and it is al-Adnani who said that fighting ISIS, makes one a Kafir whether he knows it or not!? A clear violation of the principles of the Shari’ah and ruling by other than what Allah has revealed… Where exactly is the protection of the blood of the Muslims? Instead, he endorses the spilling of the blood of the Muslims on false grounds! (That they are the legitimate Islamic authority and whoever fights them or opposes them their blood is of no value).. And where exactly is the protection of the honour of a Muslim!? As he makes absurd accusations against the leaders of Jihad like Dr. Ayman and the Mujahideen like the Taliban accusing them of having ties with the Pakistani Intel. Allahu Akbar, is this the “protection of Muslims” that we speak of? And here we spoke of many Muslims and Mujahideen that were killed without a Shar’i right, let alone that none of them specifically wanted to kill them!, as al-Adnani said they would protect the Muslims “even if they want to kill us”. While today, he states that by fighting ISIS, you fall into Kufr.. so to fight them, your blood has no right as you have disbelieved! Though this was never a ground for them to make Takfeer in the first place, as they killed hundreds of Muslims and Mujahideen even when they did not oppose or were “guilty” of fighting ISIS.
2. Abu Baraa further shares the statement of George Bush, who said you are either with us (the USA) or the enemy.. (the terrorists). And the irony of this is as clear as the sun in the day and how it applies to the methodology of ISIS. In fact, they are no different to methodology of the U.S in dealing with the Muslims, that their blood being spilled with such ease, and their adoption of the methodology of the U.S.A – that you are either with them (ISIS) or with the enemy! (the U.S). And we have seen the ignorance of their soldiers and supporters in that which they claim, as they put forth their narrative “There are only 2 camps, Iman (ISIS) and Kufr (The West)” – if you are not supporting the former, you are supporting the latter. This mindset of theirs has been testified to on the ground, and how they perceive themselves to be the pinnacle of the religion, the legitimate Islamic Khilafah, and those that are fighting them, are fighting these elements. 
The people of Jordan used to say.. “You are either with Saddam the Arab or the aggressor America and Israel and other than them..”. One of our Shuyookh said he has always been able to expose the falsehood of having 2 options. Why does he have to be with this group or that group? While someone said to him from the supporters of ISIS.. “You’re either America or with ISIS.” So he said, I’m with the Mujahideen that aren’t with ISIS.. and these Mujahideen are bombed by the West. So why are you limiting me to be either with this group or that group? And the Shaykh mentions he isn’t with ISIS except against the enemies of Islam, and not in their fight against Muslims. 
ISIS divided the ranks of the Mujahideen in many parts of the earth.. ISIS incited and call to attack the Mujahiden of al-Qaa’idah in Yemen, while they are getting droned by America and attacked by the Houthis.. ISIS incited against and killed the Mujahideen of the Taliban, while the American Crusaders are active in fronts against them..
So where is their narrative “That you are either with us (ISIS) or the enemy (the U.S) now !? subhan Allah. 
This post by Abu Baraa is a clear proof that he is ignorant of the reality of the ground, and he speaks on matters of that which he has no clue about. 


Some people say that the current American, Western and apostate focus on the threat of the “caliphate” and the coalition the enemies have formed against it shows that it is on the right path!

Then Lebanese Hezbollah, the Iranian and Syrian regimes and Saddam Hussein and his Ba’athists are or were on the right path as well, because all of them have been focuses of American and Western coalitions at one time or another!

Similarly, the Armed Islamic Group  (GIA) in Algeria, which everyone now agrees deviated from the religion and became a corrupt and murderous Takfeeri group in the mid 1990s, was also on the right path as well, because Western and Arab security services and intelligence agencies kept it on the list of banned terrorist organizations even after its deviation and continued to target its members and supporters wherever it found them and break up their cells until its notorious and bloody ameer Antar Zouabri was hunted down and killed by Algerian police in February 2002. This despite the fact that at the same time the West and its Arab proxies were cracking down on the GIA, it was also at war with the sincere Mujahideen who would later form the nucleus of Qa’eda al-Jihad in the Islamic

The fact is, the present American-led coalition is more a Crusade against the Muslims and Mujahideen of Iraq and Syria and their uprisings against Western-backed tyrannies than it is a Crusade against the Islamic State group. But even if we accept that the Crusader coalition’s real target is the Islamic State group, that doesn’t exonerate it or prove that it’s on the right path, because America and the West target whoever they believe poses a threat to their interests, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, right or wrong, Mujahideen or mafias; and not only that, they sometimes exaggerate the threat posed by some groups in order to achieve certain objectives (like using the alleged threat to influence domestic opinion and justify military interventions which could not otherwise be justified); and that is why judging people and groups solely on the basis of the extent of hostility and antagonism
our enemies demonstrate towards them is a mistake; in fact, as far as I can tell, it is a contemporary bid’ah (innovation) which has no basis in the Quran, Sunnah or words of the scholars; and those who use it as a standard or measure will eventually
face a host of unanswerable questions and inevitable conclusions which they will have great difficulty answering or explaining away.

The only acceptable standard for differentiating between right and wrong and determining who is on the truth and who is not is knowledge of Shari’ah, and it is only when this knowledge is weak, lacking or absent that people resort to these made-up criterions and benchmarks. And when it comes to evaluating and judging the would-be “caliphate” and those who lead it, it suffices us that— as far as I know—no respected and acknowledged senior ‘aalim (man of knowledge) on earth has demonstrated sympathy for the stances and policies we criticize them for, and that the only people who have come to the defense of the caliphate’s leadership and stood by it—following the appearance and confirmation of its deviation and in spite of the gravity of its sins and errors—are low-ranking and junior students of knowledge and/or anonymous “Shaykhs” whom we only know about from their writings on the Internet.

[Page 59-60, Resurgence]