It has been several months since we began to hear of the horrible and disgusting group that claims it is Islamic and calls itself the strange name of ISIS, moving from one Arab or non-Arab country to another, and killing, torturing and destroying under the pretext of upholding Islam and establishing what they call an Islamic caliphate.
What kind of Islamic or non-Islamic state is that which is based on murder, looting and torture? What ethical or political values does this group want to establish and convince the people of? What kind of mental disease has afflected those Arabs and the Europeans who join them, thinking they are somehow doing good for Islam and for the people, or even for themselves? How can they believe that such a caliphate could be established today and that the other countries of the would would allow it?
These unimaginable questions were raised when we started hearing the news about this group cutting off heads, displacing Christians and killing Kurds here and there.
I read yesterday in a British newspaper that two young Canadians had set off bombs, killing innocent people in the Canadian capital of Ottawa, a city famous for its security and tranquility. The Canadian prime minister said he had evidence suggesting that this was the work of terrorists. Other sources said that the two Canadians had recently converted to Islam and joined ISIS, and that they did so because Canada joined the United States in the recent campaign against ISIS in Iraq.
Yet it is not clear if the United States and Canada are really serious in their campaign against ISIS, for they strike for a day and then stop for a few days.
On one occasion, the United States says the elimination of ISIS will take several years, and on another it says it can fight ISIS in Iraq but not in Syria.
I wonder why? Why cannot the largest military force in the world eliminate a group that was born yesterday in Iraq and in Syria as well? Why is the United States striking the group from the air and not on the ground, although it had engaged in ground battles in other places before? Those air strikes kill innocent people as well and prolong an operation that could have been finished quickly.
I am so confused that I decided to read the news headlines only and spare myself the details about that disgusting group.
But the other day I read in full an interview in Al-Masry Al-Youm with the former Egyptian ambassador to Afghanistan and Iraq. It was published in a full page under the title of “ISIS, an American product.” I found his analysis of the events that are taking place in the region quite logical, including his assessment of Al-Qaeda, which he said was also an American product to expel the Soviets from Afghanistan and at the same time tarnish the image of Islam.
I always believed Bin Laden was an American product. The way he was killed a few steps from the headquarters of the Pakistani intelligence that are in close coordination with the CIA, the throwing of his body into the sea and the filming of the whole operation all seemed to me as a first class movie that deserves an award, not as an attempt to eradicate terrorism.
Now ISIS is invented for the United States and Israel to achieve certain goals. And God knows how long this ugly series that disturbs the lives of people everyday will last.
What is the best way to deal with such camouflage? Should we continue to follow the news in the papers and on TV? Should not the media stop covering these absurdities and lies and start searching for the truth in depth and publish it without fear?
I remember the British newspapers more than 50 years ago when I was studying in England. They were more aggressive in their analyses and they had a stronger sense of responsibility towards the readers.
But then we began to hear about the media emperors buying independent newspapers and imposing editorial policies that do not cross lines drawn by supreme security or political bodies.
Since then, newspapers just publish news without real analysis, leaving their readers bewildered.
Edited translation from Al-Masry Al-Youm
