Pathetic WashPost Dubbed Last Dead Isis Chief an ‘Austere Religious Scholar’

U.S. forces have killed Abu Ibrahim al Qurayshi al-Qurayshi (top ISIS commander), prompting an entirely different response and headline The Washington Post It was a different time than the United States’ pursuit of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. The Trump Era was back in 2017. Post’s obituary offered this shocking and much-mocked headline: “Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi is a religious scholar and spokesman for the Islamic State. He dies aged 48.” The paper changed it after much derision, but the damage was done. 

On Friday, the Post had a very different headline for Qurayshi: “Islamic State’s ‘ghost’ of a leader was plotting comeback when U.S. commandos cornered him.” Post writer Joby Warrick wrote the Baghdadi obit in 2019 and co-wrote (with Souad Mekhennet) this new one.  

Tim Graham made the observation in 2019 that “the…” Post first got the headline right for Baghdadi: “Islamic State terrorist-in-chief.” Then the paper changed it to the pathetic “austere religious scholar.” After being mocked for that, the journalists at the Post finally ended up with “Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, extremist leader of Islamic State, dies at 48.” 

But Warrick can’t blame this on the headline writers at the newspaper because the offending line about the brutal murderer It was the first sentence. 

Many people didn’t know about Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State of Iraq when he took over the reigns in 2010. A strict religious scholar, wire-framed glasses with no apparent aptitude for killing or fighting.

Just four years later Mr. Baghdadi managed to turn his failed movement into one the most famous and popular terrorist groups in modern history. His leadership would see it emerge as the Islamic State. An organization which would take control of entire cities within Syria and Iraq, and be known for its brutality. 

The sub-headline also called Baghdadi a “conservative academic.” It was so bad, the Post’s VP for Communications Kris Coratti Kelly conceded: 

There’s no “austere religious scholar” line in the article on Qurayshi. Instead, we learn that he was “reviled” by critics as a “turncoat.” Here’s the opening paragraphs by Warrick and Mekhennet: 

Captured Islamic State fighters described him as a “ghost,” a mysterious and nearly invisible leader with little practical sway over his weakened terrorist organization. His credentials were questioned by rivals who thought him a fraud and accused him of being a turncoat that ratted on his compatriots while he was in U.S. military jail.

However, Abu Ibrahim al-Hashimi al-Qurayshi (the Islamic State chief) was also known as someone who survived multiple defeats and setbacks. According to U.S. intelligence officials, terrorism experts, he was planning a return, which would include a second act in support of the Islamic terrorist self-declared caliphate, according to U.S. officials. This group had terrorized other regions and parts of the globe until it collapsed three years ago.

Washington Post Headlines are an excellent visual indicator of how far-fetched a media outlet is. For Fidel Castro, the paper touted, “Revolutionary remade Cuba.” The obit gushed that he was “a romantic figure in olive-drab fatigues and combat boots” and a “spiritual beacon for the world’s political far left.” 

Politics is the same. What was the headline of Antonin Scalia, the former Supreme Court Justice? “Supreme Court conservative dismayed liberals.”  As opposed to the late liberal Ruth Bader Ginsburg: “A pioneer devoted to equality.”