Jihadi Rhetoric: Tiresome but Deadly

1404691474000-JENKINSI just spent the better part of the day reading and listening to sermons by the leaders and jihadis of the new “caliphate” in Mesopotamia, the Islamic State (formerly “Islamic State of Iraq and Syria”).

I did so in the vain hopes of learning something “new.”

But it was absolute déjà vu—taking me back to a decade ago, when I was reading and translating the Arabic writings and speeches of al-Qaeda leaders Osama bin Laden and Ayman Zawahiri, as collated in The Al Qaeda Reader.

Now as then, it’s the same Koran verses; the same hadiths of Islamic prophet Muhammad waging and praising jihad; the same threats of hellfire for the munafiqun (hypocrites or lukewarm Muslims); the same carnal rewards in the now or hereafter for those who join the “caravan” of jihad.

Consider for instance the following opening words of a recently released short video from the Islamic State titled, “There is No Life Without Jihad”:

If you wish to know the way to glory and power, to goodness, security and joy, you must learn that there are no rights without jihad, no justice without jihad, no dignity without jihad, no security without jihad, no future without jihad, no life without jihad, no life without jihad.

After this rather hackneyed opening, one Abu Muthana, a jihadi from Britain, appears quoting some more of the usual Koran verses, hadiths, and ulema, in this case, Imam Qurtubi, who wrote that “jihad gives life.”  Finally he summarizes the goal of the jihad—in case anyone is still not sure—namely, to fight until “the law [Sharia] of Allah is implemented and the caliphate restored.”

To reiterate, there is little new or original in the videos and communiques from the Islamic State.  Just static Islamism.

If one turns to the speeches of other Islamic and jihadi groups around the world—from the African groups such as Boko Haram (Nigeria) and al-Shabaab (Somalia), to Asian groups such as Abu Sayyaf (Philippines) and the Islamic Movement (Uzbekistan)—it’s the same thing, same themes, same scriptures, same quotations, same exhortations, same condemnations.  Only their temporal circumstances and vicissitudes of victory or defeat differ.

While the Western mentality, so used to seeing and hearing about the “latest” or “newest” fad, may deem the Islamist approach as static or insipid, it is, quite the contrary, immensely effective for its purposes, and thus dangerous.

Consider: It’s the same exact message—of supremacism, hate, and violence, capped off with divine sanctioning—repeated over and over again, from a myriad of sources and organizations, all of which claim authority.

One can think of few better ways to brainwash and indoctrinate young and impressionable minds—to the point that they eagerly embrace death, including through suicide (AKA “martyrdom operations”).

Nor is this message of jihad, conquest, and death-to-the-infidel, limited to the verbiage that transpires among terrorist organizations; instead, this sort of rhetoric has spread far and wide, thanks to modern technology—including the Internet and social media—and the rich Gulf States, chief among them Saudi Arabia, which have seen to it that the jihadi books and passages being quoted are available to all and sundry.

Indeed, and has been demonstrated repeatedly, such jihadi rhetoric is regularly used in mosques all throughout Europe and America—explaining why an inordinate amount of jihadis in Syria and Iraq, such as Abu Muthana,  the aforementioned “Brit,” are in fact from the West.

If the West, in the name of “religious freedom,” is still too fretful to monitor and ban such sermons, in Egypt—a Muslim nation in the heart of the Islamic world—the post Muslim Brotherhood government has come to understand the necessity of outlawing “certain” kinds of sermons and preachers from the mosques, specifically, those about jihad against infidels and apostates.

Of course, such a move sounds extremely “anti-freedom” to the liberal mentality; the New York Times bemoaned it, without considering that such a clampdown on sermon topics actually combats terrorism and saves human lives.  For example, the overwhelming majority of attacks on Egypt’s Christian Copts occur on Friday—the one day of the week Muslims congregate in mosques to hear sermons.

Ultimately, however, such a move from Egypt—an Islamic nation—is an indicator of just how problematic unregulated (i.e., jihadi) sermons can be: if “moderate” Muslims are fearful from the repercussions of “radicalized” sermons, shouldn’t we “infidels” be even more wary of them?

In the end, there’s good news and bad news in all this: the good news is that one need not be familiar with the constant communiques, videos, and messages emanating from this or that jihadi group—for they are all recycled, all the same.  To hear one, is to  hear them all.

The bad news is that, due to the severe lack of common sense and censorship in the form of political correctness that plagues the West, the rhetoric of jihad and its unvarying message of hate remains wholly unintelligible.

If the jihadis, like parrots, are forever repeating each other—and compelling other parrots to join them—Western leaders and politicians, like ostriches, are forever sticking their heads in the sand, lest they acknowledge the cacophony of hate surrounding them, and us.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • David

    “like ostriches, are forever sticking their heads in the sand,”
    Actually that’s a myth. Ostriches lean down with their heads to swallow pebbles that their gizzards use to mash up food or to rest their neck muscles. When ostriches are confronted with a predator they either run away or attack with their powerful legs and sharp feet.

    • Adolphus

      That’s right, but it is used as a proverb, which isn’t bound to natural accuracy. It’s the image that matters. But I’m also glad that the mythical part of it is recognized.

  • wileyvet

    While I have been studying up on Islam, I often find myself very weary at the insanity that makes up this doctrine. While I plod along with my sources, I become almost nauseated at what I am finding out. Therefore I can only research for so long and then must take a break from it for days at a time, because Islam is so mindnumbingly atrocious. One now understands what a lifetime of inculcation in Islam does to people and serious dysfunction in all aspects of life and society is the end result of 14 centuries of the abomination called Islam.

    • sofiarconlon

      as Thelma
      explained I cannot believe that a stay at home mom can make $7420 in four weeks
      on the internet . more info here C­a­s­h­f­i­g­.­C­O­M­

      • Aubryn

        spam. You should pay for your advertising instead of stealing the space. You must be a democrat.

  • Ellen_L

    At what point does free speech border on incitement to violence? One is not allowed to shout fire in a crowded room. When is one not allowed to threaten or call for violence? Are there laws about this? Conspiracy maybe?

    • Harry_the_Horrible

      Free speech is free speech until the shooting starts or the bombs go off.
      Then it is time to pay the price.

      • Ellen_L

        I agree that shooting is a definite red line. Yes, I am afraid of thought crime as well. But I was looking for a more general principle to stop it before it reaches that point. It may well be that to call for violence can be treated as disturbing the peace or conspiracy but maybe someone can tell me how the law can handle it without trying to control one’s thinking. The question occurred to me and I wondered if anyone has a answer or maybe it is a question we as a community need to discuss.

  • Pete

    I figured the following. The Baathists and local Sunni would get tired of ISIS and throw them out sooner or later. The Iranians would steam roll ISIS from Samara to Mosul. ISIS was overextended.

    Playing possum before catching your enemy unawares is not going to work if they kill too many of your people.

    The Iranians had better play harder. ISIS has a world wide pool of manpower to draw on.

    Islamic State rounds up ex-Baathists to eliminate potential rivals in Iraq’s Mosul


    • Drakken

      Ahh sorry to burst your bubble but, the Iranians are running around all over Iraq and ISIS is pecking at the edges of Jordan if no already inside the border,and the Jordanians are extremely nervous, if Iran gets free reign, Israel won’t sit this one out no matter what Obummer says. This is going to get a lot bloodier.

      • Pete

        How many troops do the Iranians have in Syria? I thought they were not engaged so much in combat as in training and advising.

        Personally, I think the Iranians have the manpower and the budget to push from Baghdad to Mosul and take Mosul. I do not know why they have not so far. But it has only been 6 or 7 weeks. Maybe they are still lining things up.

        Yes, I believe ISIS is already in Jordan. Obama, Kerry, the public will learn this to their dismay. Jordan is like a person who thinks their healthy but finds out that they not only have cancer but that it has metastasized.

      • Pete

        “This is going to get a lot bloodier.”

        I figured. You are not telling me anything. I did not say or intimate otherwise.

        “the Iranians are running around all over Iraq

        I know there are Iranians on the ground in Iraq, but I do not know so much as how many or where (SALUTE).

        You were or still are on the ground. You would know better than I. If you are willing to talk, I am willing to listen.

  • Sal

    “If the West, in the name of “religious freedom,” is still too fretful to monitor and ban such sermons, ”

    Many if us want to ban such sermons, but the Democrats including former Class President himself, William Jefferson Clinton (Born William Jefferson Blythe III and whose stepdad was a rich owner of a car dealership a top 5% or better)

  • Rick

    The word Jihad doesn’t express the true meaning. RAPING AND KILLING FOR GOD doesn’t sound nearly as romantic as waging Jihad in the cause of Allah, but the meaning sure seems the same. If “the religion of peace and love” preached this message in the Mosques, maybe people would understand it better.

    But, then again, the Islamist and the left would figure out some way to demonize this definition and label anyone repeating this interpretation as an Islamophobe.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Why are you guys calling what are actually mainstream orthodox Muslims so-called Islamic radicals? Is citing Koranic verses and hadiths of Muhammad waging and praising jihad somehow radical inside the Islamic totalitarian world? Are you claiming that all those mainstream orthodox Muslim migrants that are in the process of taking over Europe and planning to do the same over here in America are somehow moderates relative to Islamic radicals, and therefore we should all open up our doors even more to even greater mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage? Because that’s the message I’m getting.

    The truth of the matter is the jihadists that comprise ISIS and AQ aren’t any more or any less radical than the millions of Muslims that have migrated to Europe and America for the nefarious purposes of mass Muslim infiltration and demographic conquest. The only difference between ISIS/AQ members and those Muslim migrants is ISIS/AQ members have elected to wage jihad violently and the millions of Muslim migrants to the West have elected to wage jihad non-violently and via stealth and deception. Indeed, they are both striving for the exact same goal, a world where Islam reigns supreme.

    if “moderate” Muslims are fearful from the repercussions of “radicalized” sermons, shouldn’t we “infidels” be even more wary of them?

    Uhm…so-called “moderate” Muslims according to the dictates of Islam aren’t Muslims at all, but instead apostates (ex-Muslims) and blasphemers that must be executed, and I know you know this as much as I do. So why all the funny games? I don’t get it. Some of you guys blow my mind while misleading your reading audience at the same time.

    • Aubryn

      May God bless you for your courage and honesty

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Indeed, and has been demonstrated repeatedly, such jihadi rhetoric is regularly used in mosques all throughout Europe and America—explaining why an inordinate amount of jihadis in Syria and Iraq, such as Abu Muthana, the aforementioned “Brit,” are in fact from the West.

    In other words, it is mainstream orthodox Islam. Hence, call Muslims what they are, which are not radicals but mainstream orthodox Muslims, and because mainstream orthodox Islam calls on all mainstream orthodox Muslims to wage jihad against all infidels in the cause of Allah to ultimately make Islam supreme, then banning and reversing mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage ASAP should be our first and foremost highest priority, because obviously Islamic totalitarian society isn’t compatible with infidel society because of the call to jihad in order to make Islam supreme. Not to mention that waging jihad is also a fundamental holy obligation incumbent upon all Muslims. As a matter of fact, per the dictates of Islam, a Muslim can’t reach the rewards of Allah without waging jihad in one form or another.

  • The March Hare

    “Of course, such a move sounds extremely “anti-freedom” to the liberal mentality; the New York Times bemoaned it without considering that such a clampdown on sermon topics actually combats terrorism and saves human lives”

    Don’t we have laws against inciting a riot? Doesn’t this fall under the same category according to the Supreme Courts 9-0 decision in 1942 Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire?

  • ObamaYoMoma

    in Egypt—a Muslim nation in the heart of the Islamic world

    Not quite. Egypt may be a Muslim majority nation, but it’s not a true Muslim state. A true Muslim state would be a Sharia state, i.e., an Islamic totalitarian hellhole. Fortunately, Morsi was over thrown before that manifestation could ever be brought forth to bear.

    Hence, since the authoritarian Egyptian government is fighting against jihad, they are forced to strictly regulate the mosques. However, Egypt is an authoritarian society and such actions in democratic infidel societies would never fly. Thus, our only solution is to educate the public so that we can eventually ban and reverse mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage before it’s too late.


    Thomas Jefferson, being the 1st President to fight the rag-heads, knew what scum they are.

  • DontMessWithAmerica

    This piece needs wide circulation particularly among all elected politicians. Send it to your representatives, half of whom are totally ignorant about Islam.

    • Aubryn

      I live in Sen Patty Murray land, and her little dog Derek Kilmer is my Rep, they are both ignorant socialists who know nothing about anything but ‘feel’ everything.

  • Walter Sieruk

    Those who engage in the violent and militant jihad for Islam against only Israel but also against all people of Western countries and dangerous and deadly indeed. Nevertheless tow thing should be kept in mind. First, we need in live in fear because of any jihadist threats or be afraid to go to different places or do different thing. For to live in feat would make the Islamic enemy happy. Still, even though we should not live in fear, we should all be aware of our surrounding and be and be on the out look for things that seem not to look quite right. As in “What’s wrong with this picture ?” For example the Tee-shirt vendor in NY, NY, who saw some smoke come out of that park van at Times Square and then let a police officer know about it. As it has been said “If you see something, say something.” To explain this in another way. The wisdom of the words of Thomas Jefferson may apply even more today then in his own time. For Mr. Jefferson stated “Let the eye of vigilance never be closed.”

    • Webb

      You mean, When in doubt, empty the magazine.

  • Walter Sieruk

    The warped vicious and murderous Muslim who are engaged in the Jihad against the West are of a closed mind. In that they aren’t open to listen to or believe that about the folly and falseness of their cause. Likewise, they will speak the truth to us only when it happens to suite their Islamic agenda. They are very disingenuous. This type of mindset is ,in part,shown by Thomas Jefferson when he explained “An enemy generally say and believes what he wishes.”

  • Thu Huyen

    There. I discovered your weblog the use of msn. This is an extremely neatly
    written article. Giày dép cho bé , Đồ sơ sinh , Đồ sơ sinh trọn gói ,

    Đồ chơi bằng gỗ cho bé