Ayman Zawahiri and Egypt: A Trip Through Time

(Ayman Zawahiri)

(Raymond Ibrahim, an expert on al-Qaeda and author of The Al Qaeda Reader, is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum. via algemeiner.com) Around 1985, current al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri fled his homeland of Egypt, presumably never to return. From his early beginnings as a teenage leader of a small jihadi cell devoted to overthrowing Egyptian regimes (first Nasser’s then Sadat’s) until he merged forces with Osama bin Laden, expanding his objectives to include targeting the United States of America, Zawahiri never forgot his original objective: transforming Egypt into an Islamist state that upholds and enforces the totality of Sharia law, and that works towards the resurrection of a global caliphate.
This vision is on its way to being fulfilled. With Islamist political victories, culminating with a Muslim Brotherhood president, Muhammad Morsi, Egypt is taking the first major steps to becoming the sort of state Zawahiri wished to see. Zawahiri regularly congratulates Egypt’s Islamists—most recently the attacks on the U.S. embassy in Cairo—urging them to continue Islamizing the Middle East’s most strategic nation.
He sent a lengthy communiqué during the Egyptian revolution in February 2011, for example, titled “Messages of Hope and Glad Tidings to our People in Egypt.” In it, he reiterated themes widely popularized by al-Qaeda, including: secular regimes are the enemies of Islam; democracy is a sham; Sharia must be instituted; the U.S. and the “Zionist enemy” are the true source behind all of the Islamic world’s ills.
Zawahiri continues to push these themes. Late last month, he sent messages criticizing Morsi, especially for not helping “the jihad to liberate Palestine;” called for the kidnapping of Westerners, especially Americans—which the U.S. embassy in Cairo took seriously enough to issue a warning to Americans; and further incited Egypt’s Muslims to wage jihad against America because of the YouTube Muhammad movie.
In short, a symbiotic relationship exists between the country of Egypt and the Egyptian Zawahiri: the country helped shape the man, and the man is fixated on influencing the country, his homeland. Accordingly, an examination of Zawahiri’s early years and experiences in Egypt—a case study of sorts—provides context for understanding Zawahiri, the undisputed leader of the world’s most notorious Islamic terrorist organization and helps explain how Egypt got where it is today. The two phenomena go hand-in-hand.
In this report, we will explore several questions, including: What happened in Egypt to turn this once “shy” and “studious” schoolboy who abhorred physical sports as “inhumane” towards jihad? What happened to turn many Egyptians to jihad, or at least radical Islam? What is Zawahiri’s relationship to the Muslim Brotherhood and the Salafis—Egypt’s two dominant Islamist political players? Did the 9/11 strikes on America, orchestrated by Zawahiri and al-Qaeda, help or hinder the Islamists of Egypt?

Background
Little about Zawahiri’s upbringing suggests that he would become the world’s most notorious jihadi, partially responsible for the deaths of thousands of innocents in the September 11 attacks and elsewhere. People who knew him stress that Zawahiri came from a “prestigious” and “aristocratic” background (in Egypt, “aristocrats” have traditionally been among the most liberal and secular). His father Muhammad was a professor of pharmacology; his mother, Umayma, came from a politically active family. Ayman had four siblings; he (and his twin sister) were the eldest. Born in the Egyptian capital, Cairo, on June 19, 1951, Zawahiri, as a BBC report puts it, “came from a respectable middle-class family of doctors and scholars. His grandfather, Rabia al-Zawahiri, was the grand imam of al-Azhar, the centre of Sunni Islamic learning in the Middle East, while one of his uncles was the first secretary-general of the Arab League.”
According to the Islamist Montasser al-Zayyat, author of the Arabic book, Al Zawahiri: As I Knew Him (translated in English as The Road to Al Qaeda: the Story of Bin Laden’s Right-Hand Man), Zawahiri was “an avid reader” who “loved literature and poetry.” He “believed that sports, especially boxing and wrestling, were inhumane…. people thought he was very tender and softhearted…. nothing in his youthful good nature suggested that he was to become the second most wanted man in the world…. He has always been humble, never interested in seizing the limelight of the leadership.”
Even so, he exhibited signs of a strong and determined character, as “there was nothing weak about the personality of the child Zawahiri. On the contrary, he did not like any opinion to be imposed on him. He was happy to discuss any issue that was difficult for him to understand until it was made clear, but he did not argue for the sake of argument. He always listened politely, without giving anyone the chance to control him.”
For all his love of literature and poetry, which Islamists often portray as running counter to Muslim faith, Zawahiri exhibited a notable form of piety from youth. “Ayman al-Zawahiri was born into a religious Muslim family,” al-Zayyat wrote. “Following the example of his family, he not only performed the prayers at the correct times, but he did so in the mosque…. He always made sure that he performed the morning prayers [at sunrise] with a group in the mosque, even during the coldest winters. He attended several classes of Koran interpretation, fiqh [Islamic jurisprudence] and Koran recitation at the mosque.”
Otherwise, he appeared to lead a normal, privileged lifestyle. Like his family, he followed a prestigious career path. Zawahiri joined the Faculty of Medicine at Cairo University, graduating in 1974 with the highest possible marks. He then earned a Master’s degree in surgery from the same university in 1978. He went on to receive a PhD in surgery from a Pakistani university, during his stay in Peshawar, when he was aiding the mujahidin against the Soviets. People who know Zawahiri say that the only relationship he had with a woman was with his wife, Azza, whom he married in 1979, and who held a degree in philosophy. She and three of Zawahiri’s six children were killed in an air strike on Afghanistan by U.S. forces in late 2001.
Death of a Martyr
The initial influence on Zawahiri’s radicalization appears to have come from his uncle Mahfouz, an opponent to the secular regime and Islamist in his own right, who was arrested in a militant round up in 1945, following the assassination of Prime Minister Ahmed Mahfouz. In reference to this event, Zawahiri’s uncle even boasted: “I myself was going to do what Ayman has done,” according to Lawrence Wright’s The Looming Tower: Al Qaeda and the Road to 9/11.
Though Mahfouz was likely the first to introduce young Ayman to the political scene of radical Islam, no one appears to have had an impact on Zawahiri’s development as much as Uncle Mahfouz’s mentor and Arabic teacher, Sayyid Qutb—often referred to as the “godfather” of modern jihad. Qutb, then the Muslim Brotherhood’s premiere theoretician of jihad, has arguably played the greatest role in articulating the Islamist/jihadi worldview in the modern era, so much so that Zawahiri and others regularly quote his voluminous writings in their own work.
According to the 9/11 Commission Report, “Three basic themes emerge from Qutb’s writings. First, he claimed that the world was beset with barbarism, licentiousness, and unbelief (a condition he called jahiliyya, the religious term for the period of ignorance prior to the revelations given to the Prophet Mohammed). Qutb argued that humans can choose only between Islam and jahiliyya. Second, he warned that more people, including Muslims, were attracted to jahiliyya and its material comforts than to his view of Islam; jahiliyya could therefore triumph over Islam. Third, no middle ground exists in what Qutb conceived as a struggle between God and Satan. All Muslims—as he defined them—therefore must take up arms in this fight. Any Muslim who rejects his ideas is just one more nonbeliever worthy of destruction.”
Qutb’s primary target—and subsequently Zawahiri’s—was the Egyptian regime, which he accused of being enforcers of jahiliyya, obstructing the totality of Sharia. Because Qutb was so effective at fomenting Islamist animosity for the regime, President Gamal Abdel Nasser had him imprisoned and eventually executed in 1966. That act that only succeeded in helping propagate Qutb’s importance to the jihadi movement, which came to see him as a “martyr” (a shahid, the highest honor for a Muslim), turning his already popular writings into “eternal classics” for Islamists everywhere.
As Zayyat observes, “In Zawahiri’s eyes, Sayyid Qutb’s words struck young Muslims more deeply than those of his contemporaries because his words eventually led to his execution. Thus, those words provided the blueprint for his long and glorious lifetime, and eventually led to its end…. His teaching gave rise to the formation of the nucleus of the contemporary jihadi movements in Egypt.”
It is no coincidence, then, that Zawahiri founded his first jihadi cell in 1966 – the year of Qutb’s execution – when he was only 15-years-old. Embracing Qutb’s teachings—that jihad is the only answer, that talk, diplomacy, and negotiations only serve the infidel enemy’s purposes—his cell originally had a handful of members. Zawahiri eventually merged it with other small cells to form Egyptian Islamic Jihad, becoming one of its leaders. Zawahiri sought to recruit military officers and accumulate weapons, waiting for the right moment to launch a coup against the regime; or, in Zawahiri’s own words as later recorded by an interrogator, “to establish an Islamic government …. a government that rules according to the Sharia of Allah Almighty.”
Humiliation of Defeat
A year following the establishment of Zawahiri’s cell, another event took place that further paved the way to jihad: the ignominious defeat of Egypt by Israel in the 1967 war. Until then, Arab nationalism, spearheaded by Nasser, was the dominant ideology, not just in Egypt, but the entire Arab world. What began with much euphoria and conviction—that the Arab world, unified under Arab nationalism and headed by Nasser would crush Israel, only to lose disastrously in a week—morphed into disillusionment and disaffection, especially among Egyptians. It was then that the slogan “Islam is the solution” spread like wildfire, winning over many to the cause.
At the time of the 1967 war, the future al-Qaeda leader was 16 years old. Like many young people at the time, he was somewhat traumatized by Egypt’s defeat—a defeat which, 34 years later, he would gloat upon in his 2001 book Fursan Taht Rayat al-Nabbi, (“Knights Under the Banner of the Prophet”):
“The unfolding events impacted the course of the jihadi movements in Egypt, namely, the 1967 defeat and the ensuing symbolic collapse of Gamal Abdel Nasser, who was portrayed to the public by his followers as the everlasting invincible symbol. The jihadi movements realized that wormwoods had eaten at this icon, and that it had become fragile. The 1967 defeat shook the earth under this idol until it fell on its face, causing a severe shock to its disciples, and frightening its subjects. The jihadi movements grew stronger and stronger as they realized that their avowed enemy was little more than a statue to be worshipped, constructed through propaganda, and through the oppression of unarmed innocents. The direct influence of the 1967 defeat was that a large number of people, especially youths, returned to their original identity: that of members of an Islamic civilization.”
This theme—that the “enemies of Islam” – first the secular dictators, followed by the USSR and then the U.S., were “paper tigers” whose bark was worse than their bite—would come to permeate the writings of al-Qaeda and other jihadists. For instance, in March 2012, in response to President Obama’s plans to cut Pentagon spending, Zawahiri said, “The biggest factor that forced America to reduce its defence budget is Allah’s help to the mujahideen [or jihadis] to harm the evil empire of our time [the U.S.],” adding that American overtures to the Afghan Taliban for possible reconciliation was further evidence of U.S. defeat.
The 1973 war between Egypt and Israel appears to have had a lesser impact on Zawahiri, who by then had already confirmed his worldview. Moreover, it was during the 1970s that he was especially busy with “normal” life—earning two advanced university degrees (one in 1974, another in 1978), getting married, and starting a family. Even so, the subsequent peace treaty that the Egyptian President Anwar Sadat signed with Israel incensed many Islamists in Egypt, including Zawahiri, who saw it as a great betrayal to the Islamic Nation, or Umma, prompting jihadis to act now instead of later.
Accordingly, Sadat was targeted for assassination; the time had come for a military coup, which was Islamic Jihad’s ultimate goal. But the plan was derailed when authorities learned of it in February, 1981. Sadat ordered the roundup of more than 1,500 Islamists, including many Islamic Jihad members (though he missed a cell in the military led by Lieutenant Khalid Islambouli, who succeeded in assassinating Sadat during a military parade later that same year).
Prison Torture
Zawahiri was among the thousands of Islamists rounded up after Sadat’s assassination, leading to one of the most talked-of episodes of Zawahiri’s life: his prison experience. He was interrogated and found guilty of possessing firearms, serving three years in prison. During that time, he was among many who were tortured in Egyptian prisons.
Much has been made of Zawahiri’s prison-time torture. (It is curious to note that when Egyptian officials called to investigate the officers accused of torturing the Islamist inmates, Zawahiri did not file a case against the authorities, though many others did, and though he bothered to witness to the torture of other members.) Several writers, beginning with al-Zayyat, suggest that along with the dual-impact of the martyrdom of Qutb and the 1967 defeat, this event had an especially traumatic effect on Zawahiri’s subsequent development and radicalization.
Still, one should not give this experience more due than it deserves. Zawahiri was an ardent jihadi well over a decade before he was imprisoned and tortured; the overly paradigmatic explanation of humiliation-as-precursor-to-violence so popular in Western thinking is unnecessary here.
On the other hand, in the vein of “that which does not kill you makes you stronger,” it seems that Zawahiri’s prison experience hardened him and made his already notorious stubbornness and determination that much more unshakeable. In short, if his prison experience did not initiate his jihadi inclinations, it likely exacerbated it.
Moreover, being “found out”—had an indirect impact on his radicalization. After he was released, and knowing that he was being watched by the authorities, he was compelled to quit his native Egypt, meeting other Arabic-speaking Islamists abroad. He met Osama bin Laden as early as 1986 in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. That led him to relocate to the Afghan theater of jihad, where the final coalescing of his global jihad worldview culminated.
Shifting Strategy
During his time in Egypt, Zawahiri was a staunch proponent of jihad—believing that no real change or progress can be achieved without armed struggle. This never changed. However, his strategic goal of toppling the Egyptian regime grew more ambitious over time, especially after the Afghan war experience and partnership with bin Laden.
In Egypt, Zawahiri’s goal was clear: overthrowing the regime and implementing an Islamic government. The enemy was internal, the secular Hosni Mubarak regime, that took over after Sadat’s death. In Zawahiri’s thinking, one could consider fighting the far or external enemy until he had beaten the near one. (This is the famous “near/far enemy” dichotomy Islamists have written much on.)
Accordingly, until the late 1990s Zawahiri rarely mentioned what are today the mainstays of Islamist discontent, such as the Arab/Israel conflict, or other matters outside Egypt’s borders. In fact, in a 1995 article titled “The Way to Jerusalem Passes Through Cairo” published in Al-Mujahidin, Zawahiri even wrote that “Jerusalem will not be opened [conquered] until the battles in Egypt and Algeria have been won and until Cairo has been opened.” This is not to say that Zawahiri did not always see Israel as the enemy. Rather, he deemed it pointless to fight it directly when one could have the entire might of Egypt’s military by simply overthrowing the regime—precisely the situation today.
Then, in 1998, Zawahiri surprised many of Egypt’s Islamists by forming the International Islamic Front for Jihad on the Jews and Crusaders, under bin Laden’s leadership. It issued a fatwa calling on Muslims “to kill the Americans and their allies–civilians and military, an individual obligation incumbent upon every Muslim who can do it and in any country—this until the Aqsa Mosque [Jerusalem] and the Holy Mosque [Mecca] are liberated from their grip.” Until then all of Zawahiri’s associates believed that his primary focus was Egypt, overthrowing the regime—not the Arab-Israeli conflict and the United States.
Zawahiri’s “Mistake”?
It is for all these reasons that many of Egypt’s Islamists, beginning with the Muslim Brotherhood, saw al-Qaeda’s 9/11 attacks, partially masterminded by Zawahiri, as a severe setback to their movement. The attacks awoke the U.S. and the West, setting off the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan, and also giving many Arab regimes – including Mubarak’s – free reign to suppress all Islamists. Those regimes happily took advantage. As al-Zayyat, Zawahiri’s biographer, wrote:
“The poorly conceived decision to launch the attacks of September 11created many victims of a war of which they did not choose to be a part…. Bin Laden and Zawahiri’s behavior [9/11] was met with a lot of criticism from many Islamists in Egypt and abroad…. In the post-September 11 world, no countries can afford to be accused of harboring the enemies of the United States. No one ever imagined that a Western European country would extradite Islamists who live on its lands. Before that, Islamists had always thought that arriving in a European city and applying for political asylum was enough to acquire permanent resident status. After September 11, 2001, everything changed…. Even the Muslim Brotherhood was affected by the American campaign, which targeted everything Islamic.”
In retrospect, the “mistake of 9/11″ may have indirectly helped empower Islamists: by bringing unwanted Western attention to the Middle East, it also made popular the argument that democracy would solve all the ills of the Middle East. Many Western observers who previously had little knowledge of the Islamic world, were surprised to discover post 9/11 that dictatorial regimes ran the Muslim world. This led to the simplistic argument that Islamists were simply lashing out because they were suppressed. Failing to understand that these dictatorships were the only thing between full-blown Islamist regimes like Iran, many deemed democracy a panacea, beginning with U.S. President George W. Bush, who invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, partially to “spread” and in the name of democracy.
With the so-called “Arab spring” that began in 2011, the Obama administration has followed this logic more aggressively by throwing the U.S’s longtime allies like Egypt’s Mubarak, under the bus in the name of democracy—a democracy that has been dominated by the Muslim Brotherhood, which, as has been mentioned, shares the same ultimate goals of Zawahiri and other jihadists. Recent events—including unprecedented attacks on U.S. embassies in Egypt and Libya, ironically, the two nations the U.S. especially intervened in to pave the way for Islamist domination—only confirm this.
Zawahiri and the Muslim Brotherhood
While Zawahiri’s early decades in Egypt are mostly remembered in the context of the above—prestigious and academic background, clandestine radicalization, jihad, prison, followed by fleeing the country—the al-Qaeda leader has a long history with other Islamists groups in Egypt, such as the Muslim Brotherhood. Since the “Arab Spring” and ousting of longtime President Hosni Mubarak, it has been the Brotherhood who have, not only dominated Egyptian politics, but have a member, Muhammad Morsi, as Egypt’s first elected president.
Zawahiri joined the Brotherhood when he was only 14, then abandoned it to form his own cell less than two years later after Qutb’s execution. A proponent of the slogan “jihad alone,” Zawahiri soon became critical of the Brotherhood’s pragmatic strategies, and wrote an entire book in 1991 arguing against their nonviolent approach.
Titled Al Hissad Al Murr, or “The Bitter Harvest,” Zawahiri argued that the Brotherhood “takes advantage of the Muslim youths’ fervor by bringing them into the fold only to store them in a refrigerator. Then, they steer their onetime passionate, Islamic zeal for jihad to conferences and elections…. And not only have the Brothers been idle from fulfilling their duty of fighting to the death, but they have gone as far as to describe the infidel governments as legitimate, and have joined ranks with them in the ignorant style of governing, that is, democracies, elections, and parliaments.”
It is perhaps ironic that, for all his scathing remarks against them, time has revealed that the Muslim Brotherhood’s strategy of slowly infiltrating society from a grassroots approach has been more effective than Zawahiri’s and al-Qaeda’s jihadi terror. The Brotherhood’s patience and perseverance, by playing the political game, formally disavowing violence and jihad—all of which earned the ire of Zawahiri and others—have turned it into a legitimate player. Yet this does not make the Brotherhood’s goals any less troubling. For instance, according to a January 2012 Al Masry Al Youm report, Brotherhood leader Muhammad Badie stated that the group’s grand goal is the return of a “rightly guided caliphate and finally mastership of the world“—precisely what Zawahiri and al-Qaeda seek to achieve. Half a year later, in July 2012, Safwat Hegazy, a popular preacher and Brotherhood member, boasted that the Brotherhood will be “masters of the world, one of these days.”
Zawahiri and Egypt Today
In light of the Egyptian revolution that accomplished what Zawahiri had tried to accomplish for decades—overthrow the regime—what relevance does the al-Qaeda leader have for the Egyptian populace today? The best way to answer this question is in the context of Salafism—the popular Islamist movement in Egypt and elsewhere that is grounded in the teachings and patterns of early Islam, beginning with the days of Islam’s Prophet Muhammad and under the first four “righteously guided” caliphs.
As a Salafist organization, al-Qaeda is very popular with Salafis. Its current leader, the Egyptian Zawahiri, is especially popular—a “hero” in every sense of the word—with Egyptian Salafis. Considering that the Salafis won some 25 percent of votes in recent elections, one may infer that at least a quarter or of Egypt’s population looks favorably on Zawahiri. In fact, some important Salafis are on record saying they would like to see Zawahiri return to his native Egypt. Aboud al-Zomor, for instance, the Egyptian Islamic Jihad leader who was implicated for the assassination of Sadat, but who has now been released and is even a leading member of the new Egyptian parliament, has called for the return of Zawahiri to Egypt, “with his head held high and in safety.”
Zawahiri’s brother, Muhammad, is also an influential Islamist in Egypt, affiliated with the Salafis and Al Gamaa Al Islamiyya. He led a mass Islamist demonstration last spring with typical jihadi slogans. He also was among those threatening the U.S. embassy in Cairo to release the Blind Sheikh—the true reason behind the September attack, not a movie—or else be “burned down to the ground.” When asked in a recent interview with CNN if he is in touch with his al-Qaeda leader brother, Muhammad only smiled and said “of course not.”
Under Zawahiri’s leadership, al-Qaeda has made inroads on Egyptian territory. For example, several recent attacks in Sinai—such as the attacks on the Egypt-Israel natural-gas pipeline—were in fact conducted by a new group pledging allegiance to al-Qaeda. Zawahiri publicly congratulated them for destroying the pipelines, and the organization itself has pledged its loyalty to Zawahiri. More recently, al-Qaeda in the Sinai has been blamed for attacking and evicting Christian minorities living there.
This highlights the fact that groups like the Brotherhood and the Salafis have the same goals—establishment of a government that upholds Sharia law—though they differ as to achieve this. Salafis like al-Qaeda tend to agree that jihad is the solution. Yet, given the Brotherhood’s success using peaceful means—co-opting the language of democracy and running in elections—many Salafis are now “playing politics” even though many of them are also on record saying that, once in power, they will enforce Islamic law and abolish democracy.
It is not clear where Zawahiri stands regarding Egypt. Because of his deep roots there, Egypt undoubtedly holds a special place for Zawahiri. But as the leader of a global jihadi network, he cannot afford to appear biased to Egypt—hence why he addresses the politics of other nations, Pakistan for example, and themes like the Arab-Israeli conflict, with equal or more attention.
Likewise, there are different accounts regarding his personality traits and how they would comport with Egypt’s current state. For example, whereas his biographer described young Zawahiri as averse to the limelight and open to others’ opinions, most contemporary characterizations of Zawahiri suggest he is intractable and domineering—a product, perhaps, of some four decades of jihadi activities, as well as the aforementioned experiences. While the personality traits attributed to him in youth would certainly aid him in influencing Egyptian Islamist politics, those attributed to him now would not.
He has been away too long, and others have stepped in. Either way, to many Islamists around the world, Egypt in particular, Zawahiri is a hero—one of the few men to successfully strike the “great enemy,” America. Such near legendary status will always see to it that Ayman Zawahiri—and the Salafi ideology al-Qaeda helped popularize—remain popular among Egypt’s Islamists.

FBI Agent in Petraeus Case Under Scrutiny

Why is the Media sharing all the juicy details of a CIA sex affair, but failed to say anything about a Gay man who got sodomized by Muslims before an election? The progressives are turning this into tabloid in an attempt to obscure really serious security threats to people. We sent a gay man as an ambassador to meet with a known terrorist group that kills gay people. We did not send any backup or security when requests were made. Now that there are these weird sex angles they are reporting on it, but they did not give the public the information they needed to choose proper leaders for the next four years. so the media tells you that the FBI agent sent a shirtless pic of himself to a woman he was supposed to be protecting, but you don't doubt the integrity of the FBI? You don't think this whole episode was to kill the career of a general who would spill the beans on an incompetent presidency? The media is trying to make this complicated, but keep your eye on the ball. The presidency did nothing to protect their ambassador. Hillary Clinton had a preference for gay muscle in a country run by a terrorist group. The media wants to turn this into a joke, but these people are running our country!The FBI knew, as early as May, of the harassing emails sent by Petraeus' paramour Paula Broadwell to social planner Jill Kelley, event coordinator at MacDill Air Force Base, where Central Command, which Petraeus headed, is based. The probe commenced at that point and led to full knowledge of the affair by late summer.  The timing of the Petraeus resignation is curious — just days after the presidential election and days before he was scheduled to testify before Congress, under oath, regarding the Sept. 11 terrorist attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Chris Stevens. CIA Deputy Director Michael Morrell is expected to testify in his place. lawmakers want to hear from Petraeus.  the woman Broadwell thought was competing for Petraeus effection was Lebanese and highly questionable as a person. The media previously made her into some kind of hero. I suspect that Broadwell had good reason to fear this woman would be a competitor. Petraeus had interests in middle eastern women... which explains the Arabist bent of his tenure as head of our troops and at the CIA

(WSJ)A State Department official's complaints about email stalking launched the months-long criminal inquiry that led to a woman romantically linked to former Gen. David Petraeus and to his abrupt resignation Friday as CIA chief. Photo: REUTERS.
WASHINGTON—A federal agent who launched the investigation that ultimately led to the resignation of Central Intelligence Agency chief David Petraeus was barred from taking part in the case over the summer due to superiors' concerns that he had become personally involved in the case, according to officials familiar with the probe.

New details about how the Federal Bureau of Investigation handled the case suggest that even as the bureau delved into Mr. Petraeus's personal life, the agency struggled with questionable conduct by one of its own—including allegedly sending shirtless photos of himself to a woman involved in the case.

Associated Press

Jill Kelley leaves her house Monday.

FBI officials declined to identify the agent, who is now under investigation by the Office of Professional Responsibility, the internal-affairs arm of the FBI, according to two officials familiar with the matter.

The revelations address how the investigation first began and ultimately led to Mr. Petraeus's downfall as director of the CIA. The new developments also raise questions about the role played by the FBI and the adequacy of notification to administration and congressional leaders about the scandal.

The FBI agent who started the case was a friend of Jill Kelley, the Tampa woman who received harassing, anonymous emails that led to the probe, according to officials. Ms. Kelley, a volunteer who organizes social events for military personnel in the Tampa area, complained in May about the emails to a friend who is an FBI agent. That agent referred it to a cyber crimes unit, which opened an investigation.

However, supervisors soon became concerned that the initial agent might have grown obsessed with the matter, and prohibited him from any role in the investigation, according to the officials.

The FBI officials found that he had sent shirtless pictures of himself to Ms. Kelley, according to the people familiar with the probe.

The Charlotte Observer/Associated Press

Paula Broadwell, at the center of the Petraeus case, poses with her biography of the former CIA Chief in January.

That same agent, after being barred from the case, contacted a member of Congress, Washington Republican David Reichert, because he was concerned senior FBI officials were going to sweep the matter under the rug, the officials said. That information was relayed to top congressional officials, who notified FBI headquarters in Washington.

By that point, FBI agents had determined the harassing emails had been sent by Paula Broadwell, who had written a biography of Mr. Petraeus's military command.

Investigators had also determined that Ms. Broadwell had been having an affair with Mr. Petraeus, and that the emails suggested Ms. Broadwell was suspicious of Ms. Kelley's attention to Mr. Petraeus, officials said.

The accusatory emails, according to officials, were sent anonymously to an account shared by Ms. Kelley and her husband. Ms. Broadwell allegedly used a variety of email addresses to send the harassing messages to Ms. Kelley, officials said.

One asked if Ms. Kelley's husband was aware of her actions, according to officials. In another, the anonymous writer claimed to have watched Ms. Kelley touching "him'' provocatively underneath a table, the officials said.

The message was referring to Mr. Petraeus, but that wasn't clear at the time, officials said. A lawyer for Ms. Kelley didn't respond to messages Monday seeking comment, nor did a lawyer for Ms. Broadwell. Neither woman has replied to requests for explanation.

By then, what began as a relatively simple cyberstalking case had ballooned into a national security investigation. Mr. Petraeus and Ms. Broadwell, both of them married, had set up private Gmail accounts to contact each other, according to several officials familiar with the investigation. The FBI at one point was concerned the CIA director's email had been accessed by outsiders.

After agents interviewed Ms. Broadwell, she let them examine her computer, where they found copies of classified documents, according to the officials. Both Mr. Petraeus and Ms. Broadwell denied that he had given her the documents, and FBI officials eventually concluded they had no evidence to suggest otherwise.

Even as the probe of the relationship between Mr. Petraeus and Ms. Broadwell intensified in late summer and early fall, authorities were able to eventually rule out a security breach, though intelligence officials became concerned Mr. Petraeus had left himself exposed to possible blackmail, according to officials.

Finally, a day after the Nov. 6 election, intelligence officials presented their findings to the White House. Mr. Petraeus met with White House officials last Thursday and announced his resignation the following day.

Lawmakers on Capitol Hill have questioned whether Mr. Petraeus needed to resign over the affair, and some have argued that the FBI should have alerted both the White House and Congress much earlier to the potential security implications surrounding Mr. Petraeus.

In a separate twist in the tangled matter of Mr. Petraeus's resignation, the CIA disputed a theory advanced by Ms. Broadwell that insurgents may have attacked the U.S. consulate and a CIA annex in Benghazi, Libya, on Sept. 11 in a bid to free militants being held there by the agency. Ms. Broadwell suggested that rationale for the consulate attack in an address at the University of Denver on Oct. 26.

"I don't know if a lot of you had heard this, but the CIA annex had actually taken a couple of Libyan militia members prisoner and they think the attack on the consulate was an attempt to get these prisoners back," she said then. "It's still being vetted."

A CIA spokesman said there were no militant prisoners there, noting that President Barack Obama ended CIA authority to hold detainees in 2009. "Any suggestion that the agency is still in the detention business is uninformed and baseless," said the spokesperson.

Some critics pointed to Ms. Broadwell's remarks in Denver as an indication that she may have been passing on classified information, leading to speculation that Mr. Petraeus may have been the source. Based on descriptions by U.S. officials, the romantic relationship had ended by then.

In addition, the source of her comment may not have been intelligence information, but news reports. Earlier in her address, she cited findings of a report that day by Fox News. Immediately after, she mentioned the possibility that the CIA had held militants at the site, which the Fox report also mentioned.

The Sept. 11 consulate attack resulted in the deaths of U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans. One person briefed on U.S. intelligence said that reports focused on two main motives for the attack: inspiration from the violent protest that day at the U.S. embassy in Cairo, and the exhortation of al Qaeda leader Ayman al Zawahiri to avenge the death of his second in command. The possibility of attackers trying to free detainees never came up, this person said.

This week, lawmakers are slated to receive a series of closed-door briefings on the FBI investigation that turned up the affair between Mr. Petraeus and Ms. Broadwell. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee has one such briefing scheduled Tuesday. On Wednesday, leaders of the House intelligence committee—Rep. Michael Rogers, a Michigan Republican who chairs the panel and Rep. C.A. Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland, the top Democrat—will be briefed by FBI Deputy Director Sean Joyce and acting CIA director Michael Morell.

Senate intelligence committee staffers are working to schedule similar briefings. On Thursday, both the House and Senate intelligence committees were already slated to receive testimony on Benghazi from top intelligence and law-enforcement officials. The investigation that uncovered the affair is now expected to also be a central issue at those hearings, which won't be public.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.), who chairs the Senate intelligence committee complained Sunday that she and her colleagues should have been told of the Petraeus-Broadwell affair when the FBI discovered it because of national-security concerns.
Write to Devlin Barrett at devlin.barrett@wsj.com, Evan Perez at evan.perez@wsj.com and Siobhan Gorman at siobhan.gorman@wsj.com

doh!

Benghazi: Ambassador Stevens was smuggling with the Muslim Brotherhood, Libyan arms to Syrian rebels

(Harsh Indictment: Benghazi Reveals Obama-Islamist Alliance via Doc)(James Lewis)

The nature of the Benghazi disaster is now clear. Ambassador Stevens was engaged in smuggling sizable quantities of Libyan arms from the destroyed Gaddafi regime to the Syrian rebels, to help overthrow the Assad regime in Syria. Smuggling arms to the so-called "Free Syrian Army" is itself a huge gamble, but Obama has been a gambler with human lives over the last four years, as shown by the tens of thousands of Arabs who have died in the so-called Arab Spring -- which has brought nothing but disaster to the Arab world.

For the last four years, the Obama policy has been to offer aid and comfort violent Islamic radicals in the delusional belief that their loyalty can be bought. We therefore betrayed Hosni Mubarak, our 30-year ally in Egypt, so that the Muslim Brotherhood led by Muhammed Morsi could take over. Obama indeed demanded publicly that Mubarak resign, for reasons that never made any sense at all. Egypt went into a political and economic tailspin, and the Muslim Brotherhood were elected. The Muslim radicals have now purged the only other viable political force, the army and police, to protect their monopoly on power. We have colluded in that betrayal.
In Libya, we betrayed Moammar Gaddafi, who had surrendered his nuclear program to the Bush administration. In Afghanistan, we betrayed the central government set up by the Bush administration and negotiated with the fanatical war sect of the Taliban to take over. The Taliban entered our history when they gave safe haven to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda in the years before 9/11/01 to plan, train, equip, and implement the terrorist attack on the Twin Towers and the Pentagon. The Taliban are our fanatical theological enemy, as shown by their sadistic attempt to assassinate 14-year-old women's rights advocate Malala Yousuf.
Afghanistan has many thousands of Malalas we will never hear about.
Our consistent policy of betrayal of moderate Muslims in favor of radical Islamofascists goes hand-in-hand with our appeasement of the Iranian Khomeinist regime, which is the most America-hating Shiite regime, now facing competition from America-hating Sunni regimes in Egypt and elsewhere. It also fits our cooperation with Turkey's "neo-Ottoman" regime, which has also purged the Turkish army and police to remove modern-minded Turks from power. Egypt and Iran will soon have nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles.
We have therefore followed a single "community disorganizing" policy toward the Muslim world, consisting of betraying moderates to bring theocratic fascists to power. Obama "explained" that policy in a publicized argument with Hillary Clinton at the White House when Mubarak was overthrown. His explanation? Fascist revolutions are "organic," and therefore more stable than moderate revolutions. Obama's fantasy policy runs contrary to U.S. foreign policy since World War I.
The biggest loser in this mad administration has been hundreds of millions women of the Muslim world, who were on a path to modernity and freedom until Obama and Hillary Clinton betrayed them. Today they are shut inside the prisons of sharia law.
The second-biggest loser has been relative stability in a great geographical swath of the Muslim world, from Afghanistan and Pakistan across the Middle East, all the way to Tunisia and Morocco.
The third-biggest loser has been our anti-proliferation policy against the spread of weapons of mass destruction among developing nations. From fighting proliferation, we have turned to aiding it.
Those three Horsemen of the Apocalypse are now out of the barn and riding free.
In Benghazi, al-Qaeda showed that they could not be bought even by our back-stabbing policy. Our Benghazi arms-smuggling base was attacked by elements of AQIM (al-Qaeda in the Maghreb) in an act of betrayal against our fantasy-driven way of doing things. The American betrayer was itself betrayed, and Obama-Hillary could do nothing to defend the Americans under attack at the Benghazi arms-smuggling base, because any public revelation of the truth would rip the cover off our mad actions and focus the hatred of Muslim nations on the United States.
The evidence now shows that Obama was aware of the attack within 55 minutes of the start. It lasted for six or seven hours, and Obama consistently countermanded standing orders to protect Americans under attack in the Africom command area. General Ham may have been fired for following standard U.S. policy to defend American personnel.
In Syria, the Assad regime now has a legitimate basis to convict us of deadly dabbling in the Syrian civil war. Russia and China are likely to take up Assad's cause at the United Nations. They would be right on the facts.
Because the Benghazi attack coincided exactly with the AQ attack on our Cairo Embassy, both on September 11 of this year, this was apparently a central command decision by AQ, presumably ordered by Osama bin Laden's successor, Al Zawahiri, in Pakistan using a video released on the web shortly before those attacks. The message was "al-Qaeda lives!" Everybody who saw the news photos that day got that message. Only Obama is in public denial.
Because the Egyptian regime chose not to defend our embassy, we know that Muhammad Morsi was in cahoots with the AQ attack. Host governments always have the first responsibility to defend accredited embassies. Egypt "forgot" to defend us, and that was the message.
The purpose of the AQ attacks was to embarrass the United States, and to show us to be a paper tiger, precisely the way Ayatollah Khomeini did to Jimmy Carter. AQ also wanted to tear off the cover of the Benghazi arms-smuggling operation, to make us look like a treasonous ally, which, as it turns out, we are. All of our allies around the world, from South Korea and Japan to Israel, Australia, and Norway, must now be reassessing our reliability. One major betrayal of our allies is enough to shatter sixty years of faith in American leadership.
Here is the evidence as published in the Jerusalem Post, in an interview with retired counterintelligence professional Clare Lopez. The credit for the exposing the U.S. arms-smuggling conspiracy that just capsized goes to Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy (SecureFreedom.org) and other alert conservative columnists around the web.

Page Printed from: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2012/11/benghazi_reveals_obama-isl...

Bin Laden was ‘one-eyed:’ Qaeda leader Zawahiri.

Bin Laden was ‘one-eyed:’ Qaeda leader Zawahiri.(AA).Al-Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahiri resurfaced for the second time in a month on Wednesday in an online video on the life of his late predecessor Osama bin Laden who he said was blind in one eye. In the almost hour-long video, the third in a series entitled “Days with the Imam,” Zawahiri narrates stories about bin Laden who was killed by elite U.S. Navy SEALS in May 2011 at his compound in the town of Abbottabad, Pakistan. Dressed in a white thawb cloak and turban, Zawahiri revealed “for those who do not know” that Saudi-born bin Laden was left blind in the right eye after an accident in his youth.
He also said bin Laden was a former member of the Saudi branch of the Muslim Brotherhood before being evicted for insisting on jihad against the Soviet Union in Afghanistan in the 1980s. Bin Laden travelled to Pakistan to deliver cash aid to the jihadists in Peshawar but defied orders from the Brotherhood and joined the armed struggle, Zawahiri said. Zawahiri’s latest video posted on a jihadist forum appeared to be around two months old as he offered greetings to Muslims for the start of the fasting month of Ramadan which ended on August 20.Read the full story here.

via mfs-theothernews.com

Muhammad Al-Zawahiri, Brother Of Al-Qaeda Leader, Proposes 10-Year 'Hudna' To The West.

Muhammad Al-Zawahiri, Brother Of Al-Qaeda Leader, Proposes 10-Year 'Hudna' To The West.(Memri).Hmmm.....To use a historical term " NUTS"!

via mfs-theothernews.com

YID With LID: My Former Political Science Professor Is Being Held By Al-Qaeda

(Yid With Lid) In late 1974 I was in the process of selecting which college to attend. My choices were very One choice was staying home to attend Nassau Community College (this was appealing because Nassau was a commuter school so my parents would have to buy me a car) or go away to school. But I decided to forgo the car for the opportunity to get out of the house and go away to college.
Why is any of this relevant to the news of Dr. Weinstein?  The College I chose was the State University of New York College of Oswego, as a political science major, Dr. Weinstein was not only one of my favorite professors but as I was president of the Hillel (officially called the Jewish Student Union) I worked closely with Dr Weinstein who was our faculty adviser.
According to a recorded message by terrorist leader Ayman al-Zawahiri 

"I tell the captive soldiers of Al Qaeda and the Taliban and our female prisoners held in the prisons of the crusaders and their collaborators, we have not forgotten you and in order to free you we have taken hostage the Jewish American Warren Weinstein," al-Zawahiri said in the 30-minute tape, demanding the release of high-profile terrorists as ransom.esponsibility for the August kidnapping of an American aid worker in Pakistan and refused to release the 70-year-old man until a list of demands are met."

It was Dr, Weinstein who first taught me what liberalism did to City University.  He talked of studying with Hans J. Morgenthau at Brooklyn College when it was know as the "Poor Man's Harvard." Once NY City decided College was a God-given right, and everyone was allowed into the school no matter what their grades were, Dr. Weinstein said the school quickly became a sub-standard school.
I remember how Dr. Weinstein gave me advice when a Palestinian colleague, Dr Faiz Abu-Jabbar verbally attacked me in class when I didn't accept his anti-Israel rhetoric as truth. And Warren Weinstein was the guy who would invite students over to his house when they were stuck in Oswego for the Jewish holidays.

Warren Weinstein was taken by armed men from his house in the eastern city of Lahore on Aug. 13.

He'd been working on a project in areas where Pakistani troops were battling Islamists and was just days away from returning home when he was abducted. Dr. Weinstein is reportedly in poor health. J.E. Austin Associates, the company he worked for, provided a detailed list of medications that it implored the kidnappers to give him.

The State Department acknowledged that it's aware of the crisis and is in contact with Weinstein's family in the U.S.

"The United States condemns kidnappings of any kind and we call for the immediate release of the individual and the prosecution of those responsible," said spokeswoman Joanne Moore.

In August, the CS Monitor spoke with several Pakistanis who had worked with Weinstein to enhance Pakistan’s dairy and gem trades.

“I am really shocked to hear” of his kidnapping, said Ehtesham Ullah Khan, a gemologist who knew Weinstein. “He was a very nice person and, to me, he made many friends as compared to no enemies.”
Mr. Khan explained how Weinstein helped him set up scholarships for Pakistanis living in tribal areas to study the gem trade. Twenty students received US scholarships and now have jobs or have started their own businesses, he said.
Weinstein's work also included importing dairy chillers to boost the productivity of Pakistan’s milk industry. His company boasted that the dairy development work resulting in $63 million in new investment to Pakistan, at least 2,150 new jobs, and a 25 percent boost in producer productivity.
“He helped the university in the establishment of dairy facilities, negotiating with colleagues in the Netherlands,” said Dr. Muhammad Abdullah, chair of livestock at the University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences in Lahore. “We had quite a professional interaction with him.”

To most people who read the reports of Warren Weinstein's capture, he is an anonymous aid worker kidnapped by the bad guys.  For me, he is a good man who helped to spark my interest in politics which continues through today. He helped to teach me to think and to ask the right questions, and he helped me to get through a year and a half of college life in an school that was not very friendly to Jewish students.
Please join me in praying for his good health for his quick release back into the loving arms of his family.

Mubarak Deceived Israel as Muhammad Deceived Infidels?

In light of ousted president Hosni Mubarak's ongoing trial, Western readers may be surprised to learn who some of Mubarak's staunchest defenders are: Salafi Muslims, that is, those Muslims who practice the 7th century Islam of Muhammad, often referred to as "radicals." Sheikh Mahmoud Amer, leader of Ansar al-Sunna in Damanhur, recently appeared on the Egyptian news program Life Today arguing that, according to Sharia, it is illegal to try Mubarak, whose dealings with Israel—specifically the charge that he sold gas to it at cheap rates—were similar to prophet Muhammad's dealing with infidel enemies. I translate the most relevant excerpt: He [Hosni Mubarak] was the imam [Muslim leader]; all his actions have their circumstances. Regarding this gas issue you're talking about, whoever said that exporting gas to enemy combatants, Jews or otherwise, is impermissible? Who among the Muslim jurists [fuqaha] said this? The prophet himself died while his armor was held by a Jew [an infidel enemy] as collateral; and in the Battle of the Trench [627], the prophet negotiated with one of the polytheist tribes [enemies] to give them dates, Medina's main source of income, just so they would quit the war—because "war is deceit"; he negotiated for this purpose . Nor did divine inspiration [Allah] come down to censure him for his actions, had such actions violated Sharia. So, show me one jurist saying that it is impermissible to deal with enemy combatants—I do not say treaty-holders, as there is a treaty between us and the Jews, but I posit that between us and the Jews is war. So who among the classic jurists said that it is impermissible to deal with combatants, buying and selling? Here are the books of jurisprudence… I say the prophet negotiated with the polytheists to give them free dates just to keep their strength at bay at that time [as opposed to Mubarak, who only sold gas cheaply, Muhammad went one step further giving things for free]. So these are political and military matters, and the authority is free to pick whichever he deems most appropriate. Along with stressing Muhammad's attempt to appease Islam's infidel enemies with gifts when the latter were stronger than the Muslims, the sheikh also stressed that Mubarak was the "sultan"—an Arabic-Islamic term of special significance, conveying a certain form of sovereign political and temporal authority in Islam, complete with dispensations unavailable to the average Muslim.
Nor are these arcane notions; al-Qaeda itself has stressed these exact points. When discussing the permissibility for Muslims to deceive infidels, the late Osama bin Laden often alluded to Muhammad's attempt to appease the infidel tribe; and Ayman Zawahiri, al-Qaeda's new leader, quotes Islam's jurists as "unanimously agreeing" that "it is forbidden to overthrow" Muslim rulers, even if they are "cruel and despotic" yet "it is obligatory to wage jihad against" Muslim rulers found to be "apostate infidels" (The Al Qaeda Reader, pgs. 26-27, 121-122, 129 ).
The non-hijabbed, Westernized looking female host, somewhat flustered, retorted: "Excuse me sheikh, but this issue of comparing the actions of our blessed prophet and a former president, I mean, forgive me, but maybe one can't speak on or judge between similar circumstances."
Then Montaser al-Zayyat, an Islamist lawyer who regularly represents jihadists—including, formerly, Zawahiri—chimed in saying he too "found it hard listening to the sheikh," insisting that Mubarak should be condemned for selling gas to "the Zionists, for this is a betrayal of the [Egyptian] people."
Eventually, the debate descended into the usual shouting and yelling, with the sheikh boasting that at least Mubarak was a hero in Egypt's 1973 war with Israel, and asking the hostess and Zayyat, "Where were you on October 6, 1973?... Did you ever shoot a single bullet at a Jew?!"
This leads to the most telling aspect of this whole anecdote: while the two Muslim experts on Sharia argued over many things, there was no disagreement over two points—enmity for Israel and Jews, and the permissibility of using deceit to undermine them.

Raymond Ibrahim, a widely published Islam-specialist, is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum.

Raymond Ibrahim Hudson New York August 17, 2011 http://www.meforum.org/3016/mubarak-deceived-israel via docstalk.blogspot.com

Al-Zawahiri thanks Ismail Haniya

Ayman al-Zawahiri, nephew of a Nazi collaborator and grandson of the man who helped produce the genocidal antisemitic doctrine in Islamism, now seems to be head of al-Qaida.
In what appears to be his inaugural speech as al-Qaida leader, al-Zawahiri thanked Ismail Haniya, leader of Hamas, for his praising Usama bin Ladin after his death.

via rubinreports.blogspot.com

The Next Bin Laden

Zawahiri betrayed Osama bin Laden: Saudi paper..."We firmly recognize that the umma [nation]of Muhammad is a nation whose destiny is independent of its leaders, no matter how great," said American-born al-Shabaab commander Omar Hammami about the death of Osama bin Laden. For terrorists like Hammami, ending the life of bin Laden hasn't ended the jihad against America.His statements match the mantra echoing across jihadi forums, as branches of al-Qaida and its allies pledge new terror attacks. Although bin Laden may be dead, the jihad lives on

Putting aside the rhetoric, al-Qaida is not an anarchist group, despite the loose connection between its regional branches. As long as al-Qaida lacks a clear central leader, it risks being lost in unending attacks without reason. That's contrary to the group's desire to establish a new Caliphate or at least oust the West from Muslim lands.
Rule by al-Qaida's Shura Council, the consultative body of the Pakistani/Afghani branch, remains a strong possibility in the short term. But in the long term, jihadi groups will look to a single leader or emir, to set policy and direct the organization. If that doesn't happen, the scattered al-Qaida branches that we know today will have little to unify them.
Bin Laden's second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, is widely considered the best positioned to seize the reins. However, U.S. intelligence estimates see him as an unpopular leader who lacks the charisma of bin Laden. "Zawahiri is obviously the presumed successor, but there are strong indications that he is not popular within certain circles of the group," the Washington Post quoted an unnamed senior intelligence figure as saying. "It is, of course, anathema to al-Qaida to hold free and fair elections. If free and fair elections [were conducted], Zawahiri would most likely have a fight on his hands."
Alongside Zawahiri are a cast of other characters. The biographies below point to the most likely candidates, those with the reach and ideology to reunite the organization around a central figure:
Ayman al-Zawahiri
Osama bin Laden's longtime deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri is the most likely candidate to take over al-Qaida, despite his reported unpopularity. Since the beginning, Zawahiri has been an important ideological force in al-Qaida, releasing regular internet videos espousing the organization's mission. He also played a key role in refocusing al-Qaida's efforts away from Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan and towards the "far enemy," the Americans and the Jews.
Zawahiri's jihadist roots trace back to Egypt where he was a founding member of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (EIJ), a radical group committed to overthrowing Egypt's secular government. Zawahiri developed a close relationship with bin Laden during the Soviet-Afghan war and, in 1998, he officially merged EIJ with al-Qaida. In his capacity as second-in-command of al-Qaida, Zawahiri, officials say, was responsible for the planning of 9/11, the bombings of American embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, and the October 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen. The U.S. government has offered a reward of up to $25 million for information leading directly to Zawahiri's apprehension.
There is speculation that al-Qaida has not officially named Zawahiri as its new leader because of doubts surrounding his ability to lead as effectively as his predecessor. Zawahiri has a history "of alienating his colleagues, fighting over dogma, even within the Islamist movement," said journalist Steve Coll, author of Ghost Wars and The Bin Ladens. "And as a communicator, he is less effective. His books are turgid and dogmatic." Zawahiri also is said to lack the charisma and appeal that bin Laden possessed, and is seen as a "divisive" figure within al-Qaida's ranks.
Nevertheless, the Islamic State of Iraq (formerly al-Qaida in Iraq) has already pledged its allegiance to Zawahiri, and a former EIJ member, Tawfiq Hamid, warned against underestimating the probable new leader. "He's much more powerful as a leader – much more organized," Hamid said. "When you listen to him, you can tell clearly that he has the ambition and is dedicated 100 percent to achieve this mission."

Ilyas Kashmiri

Touted as "as the most effective, dangerous and successful guerrilla leader in the world" by intelligence agencies, Pakistani terrorist Ilyas Kashmiri heads the 313 Brigade, the military wing of al-Qaida in Pakistan. He is suspected of involvement in a number of high-profile terrorist attacks including: the 2008 Mumbai terror attacks that resulted in the deaths of 166 people at Mumbai's train station, the Taj Mahal Hotel, and a Jewish center; and a suicide bomb attack on a top secret CIA base in the eastern Afghan province of Khost in December 2009 that killed at least eight Americans. He is also believed to have been the mastermind of a plot to attack the offices of the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in retaliation for the newspaper publishing a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammad in 2005, and a 2010 plot for a series of "Mumbai-style" attacks in European cities.
Kashmiri has been named for his role in the 2008 Mumbai attacks in the terrorism indictment of David Coleman Headley. Court documents contain hints of connections between Kashmiri and al-Qaida and of Kashmiri's desire to launch additional mass casualty terrorist attacks. In his first-ever interview with Asia Times in 2009, Kashmiri voiced his support for al-Qaida's war against the United States and the West, and warned that the 2008 Mumbai attack "was nothing compared to what has already been planned for the future." Kashmiri directs attacks in South Asia, while simultaneously assisting in plots against the West.

Cartoonist Molly Norris
has gone into hiding on the advice of the FBI
after receiving death threats from Islamic extremist
Anwar al-Awlaki.

In the wake of bin Laden's death, Kashmiri "will probably be the operational mastermind and most dangerous," said former CIA officer Bruce Riedel. Kashmiri is considered a dark horse to replace bin Laden because of Zawahiri's unpopularity. However, according to U.S. government sources, Kashmiri may not even seek al-Qaida's leadership. Until now, Kashmiri has acted as more of a behind-the-scenes military commander and has had minimal media exposure. He has also played a small role as an influential ideologue or recruiter.

Born in Yemen, but living much of his life in America, Awlaki has been referred to as "the translator of jihad." He played an active role in over a dozen plots, including the Christmas Day Detroit flight bomb plot and the Fort Hood shootings. In addition, Awlaki's writings and speeches on jihad have influenced jihadi plots in the United States, Britain, Canada, and elsewhere.
Awlaki has a high public profile, especially in comparison to other al-Qaida leaders. He produced a series of popular, English-language recordings throughout his own radicalization process, which remained in circulation well after he embraced jihad. In addition, his blog, use of video conferencing, and email communications, made him the most accessible terrorist leader. This legacy has continued through Inspire magazine, an English-language publication that features Awlaki's latest statements, and keeps him in the jihadi public eye.
Although he is one the most active players in terrorism against Americans, Awlaki has little chance of succeeding bin Laden. His influence among English-speaking jihadists aside, Awlaki is not even the military or spiritual leader of his local branch of al-Qaida, al Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). His encouragement of lone wolf terrorism, which he states should be carried out in a would-be terrorist's home country, also differs from the top-down approach of al-Qaida in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

IPT News
May 13, 2011
via docstalk.blogspot.com

Zawahiri betrayed Osama bin Laden: Saudi paper

Al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden was betrayed by his deputy
Ayman al-Zawahiri who led US forces to his hideout
as the two were involved in an intense power struggle,
a Saudi newspaper has reported.

...WHAT A BITCH...
Ayman al-Zawahiri? The bloke that stops RPG rockets with his barenaked forehead? The one who eats infidel's hearts for breakfast? Nah... but read the rest of the story yourself.via simplyjews.blogspot.com

FBI Counter-Terror Official: Al Qaeda 'Thrives' After Dictators Fall

But who cares? Obama has a vision...

(ABC) On the same day reports emerged of a new al Qaeda video that praised the revolutions sweeping the Arab world, one the U.S.'s top counter-terror officials warned the terror organization "thrives" in the political unrest that follows.

"The governments of Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen have drastically changed in the last six months," FBI Assistant Director of Counter-Terrorism Mark Giuliano said Thursday. "They are now led by transitional or interim governments, military regimes, or democratic alliances with no established track record on counterterrorism efforts. Al Qaeda thrives in such conditions and countries of weak governance and political instability -- countries in which governments may be sympathetic to their campaign of violence."

Giuliano made the comments at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy just hours before the first reports emerged of the new al Qaeda video, which features separate appearances by al Qaeda's number two commander, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and American-born key commander in al Qaeda in the Arabian Penninsula (AQAP), Anwar al-Awlaki, each praising the recent uprisings. In the hour-plus long video, al-Zawahiri orders Muslims in Egypt to create an Islamic state there and calls for the Arab armies of the Middle East to intervene in Libya to oust dictator Moammar Gadhafi before "Western aid... turns into invasions." More...via eye-on-the-world.blogspot.com

The Muslim Brotherhood in America: Part I: Understanding the Threat

It is now March of 2011. That jihadi attack on the United States is over nine years behind us. The declaration of a global jihad from Iran in 1979 is over 30 years in our rear view mirror. The national security apparatus of the United States has spent hundreds of billions of dollars to “make America safer,” yet we still have not defined our enemy – or even tried. There is no place in the national security structure which has objectively evaluated the threat doctrine of our enemy, and then created a strategic plan for victory for the United States – per U.S. warfighting doctrine. This lack of strategic understanding of the nature of the threat we face is not only costing us lives on the battlefield in wars with no realistically stated objectives, but so long as we drift aimlessly, we cannot win and we allow the enemy to move our boat as he sees fit. That, is the enemy’s strategy. And he is executing with great success.

Does anyone wonder how it is the U.S. military is crushing the enemy on the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan (and elsewhere) daily, yet not winning the strategic war? The United States continues to view the wars (the establishment sees this as several conflicts, not as one global conflict) as kinetic engagements where guns, air power, drones, bombs, and other weapon of war are brought to bear on “Al Qaeda terrorists” and others with whom we are engaged on the many battlefields around the world. At the FBI, the focus is on preventing the next attack. While this is important, “attacks” are not the main focus of effort for this enemy. Local and State Police are also focused on preventing attacks, the physical security of office buildings, critical infrastructure, and the safety of important public figures. When the subject of an investigation is found NOT to be involved in a plot to cause “violence” that case is closed and the investigator goes on to the next one in the stack. This is where we are losing the war. While preventing a school bus bombing or the take-over of a bank by Jihadis should be taken seriously by our law enforcement officers, from the enemy’s perspective, these are tactical engagements, not strategic.

Every brand new intelligence officer in the United States military knows that when the United States evaluates a threat, our doctrine drives us to begin our process with WHO the enemy says he is and with WHAT the enemy says are HIS reasons for acting. That is where the U.S. analytical process begins – per our own doctrine. If we had done this after 9/11, we would not have so much confusion about the enemy we are engaging.
One hundred percent of the enemy we are fighting states he is fighting “Jihad” in the “Cause of Allah” in order to implement Islamic Law (Shariah). Therefore, U.S. analysts must begin here. Does Islamic Law exist? If so, what does it say about “Jihad” and the requirements for Jihad? In fact, authoritative Islamic Law does exist. There are not “a thousand interpretations” as the Muslim Brotherhood advisors tell our leadership. Islamic Law does define “Jihad” and the requirements for Jihad. Islamic Law as defined by those using it to kill us and overthrow our government necessarily becomes the “Stated Enemy Threat Doctrine.” As a 4-star general told me a few months ago when I asked him what he thought about the fact that when Al Qaeda quotes Islamic Law they are always accurately quoting Islamic Law: “Well, if that’s true, it completely changes the nature of the way we are fighting this war.” Exactly.

Our entire national security apparatus is focused (fixed) on the threat of the violent Jihadis – Al Qaeda and the hundreds of other jihadi groups throughout the world engaging U.S and allied troops on the ground around the world.

Our enemy has no intention of defeating us on the battlefield. The kinetic war being waged by organizations like Al Qaeda, Hamas, and the many other jihadi groups is meant to bleed us, fix us in place, and create a strategic distraction while the real war they are fighting is won in the information battlespace. While AQ fixes us in place, the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC) presses the U.S. – and the West at large – into a corner with a stated foreign policy mirroring that of Al Qaeda. Who is the OIC? The OIC is the umbrella organization for every Muslim nation in the world – 57 states (they count Palestine as a state). At the Head of State and King level the OIC seeks to re-establish the global Islamic State (Caliphate) and implement Islamic Law. They have a 10-Year Plan in English on their website that may begin shedding light on who they are and what they intend for the West. In 1993, the OIC served an official treaty to the United Nations called the “Cairo Declaration” stating the OIC defines “Human Rights” as Shariah (Islamic Law) – this is significantly different from the International Declaration of Human Rights. In fact, the reason the International Muslim Brotherhood is calling for the death of Qaddafi is because he is “killing Muslims without right,” a capital crime under Islamic Law, and an act defined as “terrorism” by the OIC – that means the Head of State and King of every Muslim nation in the world has a parallel foreign policy from the one they are discussing with our State Department, and our State Department does not have clue one about it.

The International Muslim Brotherhood, the “vanguard” of the global Islamic Movement, is the leading edge of the enemy’s assault on the United States and the West. The Muslim Brotherhood, like the OIC and Al Qaeda, seeks to re-establish the global Islamic State (Caliphate) and implement Islamic Law (Shariah). You do not need a SCIF or a “secure space” to pull this information up on a classified government system. All of the enemy doctrine can be found on the worldwide web, in books, in speeches, in their training curricula, and coming out of their mouths on a daily basis. We just need to listen. The Muslim Brotherhood’s creed includes the the phrase “…Jihad is our Way, and martyrdom in the way of Allah is our highest aspiration.” The MB assassinated the Egyptian Prime Minister in 1948, and the Egyptian security service killed MB founder Hassan al Banna on the streets of Cairo in 1949. Violence is inherent to MB operations, manifested in the “Special Section.” The “Special work” of the MB is “Military work” – violence and warfare. Hamas was created out of the Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood as the result of international MB meetings. Hamas is a designated terrorist organization. Recordings obtained by the FBI of MB meetings in the U.S. reveal they have had weapons training camps here as early as the mid-1980’s. When the MB says they have “renounced violence” they are – hold onto your hats – lying.

From several major terrorism trials in the United States, and other information, we now know nearly every major Muslim organization in North America is controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) or a derivative group. We know many are support entities for Hamas, and all of the Islamic organizations working with the U.S. government are controlled by the MB. These include: the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), a Hamas support entity; the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Hamas organization; the Muslim Students Associations (MSA); the Muslim American Society (MAS); the Interntional Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT); the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA); the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC); the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), a Hamas support entity; and many other. We also know that the objectives of the MB mirror those of Al Qaeda.

The MB’s doctrine is crystal clear on their objectives. The means for achieving these objectives is to wage a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” – a “grand jihad” – to destroy us from within. They seek to co-opt our leadership in all areas of our society – political, military, intelligence/law enforcement, media, religious. Civilization jihad by our hands. When we see that the Islamic advisor to President Clinton was a Muslim Brother and an Al Qaeda operative currently in federal prison, or that the MB runs the Shariah Compliant Financial programs for the U.S. Department of the Treasury, or that senior policy advisors to Secretary Napolitano are Muslim Brothers, or that the Assistant Director for the FBI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate is an Iranian-born

Muslim, we see that there are catastrophic security issues within the U.S. government and that - just maybe – the MB means what they say.

During this series, we will go into painful detail to identify and describe the primary Muslim Brotherhood organizations in the United States, especially those working with U.S. law enforcement, intelligence, and national security organizations. We will also detail some of the individual within the U.S. system who are aiding and abetting the Muslim Brotherhood, or at least unwittingly assisting them. The utter and complete catastrophic failure of the very agencies charged with protecting us will be detailed over the next several weeks. If facts are upsetting to you, please don’t read.


Mr. Guandolo is a 1989 graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, a former active duty Infantry/Reconnaissance Officer in the United States Marine Corps, and a former Special Agent of the FBI in Washington, D.C. for over 12 years. He currently advises the government on a variety of issues.
The Muslim Brotherhood in America: Part II: MB History & Their Arrival in America

The Muslim Brotherhood in America: Part III--'The Settlement Process'

 

Sadat and Mubarak were against the Muslim Brotherhood

BENTLEY [American journalist]: What, in your opinion, do these people hope to gain from this war [World War One]?

LAWRENCE: They hope to gain their freedom.
BENTLEY: They hope to gain their freedom? There's one [sucker] born every minute!

LAWRENCE: They're going to get it, Mr Bentley. I'm going to give it to them.
--From "Lawrence of Arabia"

An Egyptian Christian (Coptic) group has put up a superb six-minute video of a speech by the late (more on why he's dead in a moment) President Anwar al-Sadat about the Muslim Brotherhood. It is very timely.
Sadat makes clear why this group is so radical, dangerous, and inevitably at some point violent. He ought to know.
Some ironies: Of course, Sadat was the leader who let the Brotherhood operate again after two decades of being banned. Even then, in the 1970s and until just about today, it has remained illegal but the group still operated and even ran candidates in elections albeit not under its own name. (Saddam Hussein in Iraq, the Syrian, and Iranian dictatorships didn't let their opponents run under any name, which tells something about the comparative harshness of dictatorships.) I haven't seen a single mention in the Western media as to the reason given by Egyptian governments for keeping the Brotherhood from running candidates in the past. It was this: no party should be allowed to claim a monopoly on "proper" Islam. Remember that point because it is going to be important in future, although the Brotherhood's new party--to make itself less scary--doesn't have the word "Islam" in its name either.The second irony is that Sadat was assassinated by Islamists. It is important to correct an error many have made recently. The terrorists were not Brotherhood people. But many of those terrorists who killed Sadat, joined al-Qaida, or carried out massive terrorism in Egypt in the 1990s (people now being released from prison to renew their activities) are former Brotherhood members. Radicalized and learning Islamist ideology in the Brotherhood they then went on to form or join separate radical Islamist groups.
The Brotherhood has not committed terrorism within Egypt directly (though it has, at times, endorsed terrorist murders of those deemed to be too secular) but it has been the cradle of terrorism in Egypt and even (al-Qaida; Hamas) abroad.
Finally, if you watch the brief film, keep in mind one poor piece of translation. At just before the two-minute mark, Sadat refers to the Brotherhood as viewing governments and societies as pre-Islamic. The significance of this--not explained--is that "pre-Islamic" societies are viewed by Islam as pagan and evil.
While that standpoint is definitely mainstream Islam, political Islamism's has also produced a dangerous concept of its own at variance with traditional Islam: It claims the right to declare pious Muslims as heretics and then kill them. That is precisely what it did to Sadat, who was a very pious Muslim personally, and is the basis for their overthrowing every government (including that of Saudi Arabia) that doesn't meet their interpretation of Islam.
Part of the problem with the Islamists is that even when they deviate from mainstream Islam, their positions may become popular and change Islam as it is practiced by many or most people. Thus, twenty years ago if you had told a mainstream Muslim cleric in the Middle East that suicide bombing was martyrdom he would have thrown you out of his office saying that such an idea was obviously heretical. Today, many mainstream clerics endorse this standpoint.
A legalized, large, and active Muslim Brotherhood (especially if it gains control of the key religious posts in Egypt, Jordan or--through Hamas--among the Palestinians) redefines mainstream Islam in a more extremist and radical direction. Sadat knew that also.
[PS: Note that the Enlightenment and Renaissance began in Europe precisely because very pious Christians there were ready to incorporate pre-Christian Classic Greek and Roman culture and philosophy into their societies. ]

By RubinReports via docstalk.blogspot.com

Let us not forget the assassination of Anwar Sadat, Egyptian Islamic Jihad

The Muslim Brotherhood and its offspring have long been rearranging the deck chairs on the Middle East Titanic. Unfortunately they are trying to sink the rest of the world with them. [Mooserider]
Egyptian Islamic Jihad
Egyptian Islamic Jihad - Egyptian Islamic Jihad (Arabic: الجهاد الإسلامي المصري ý; also formerly called simply Islamic Jihad, الجهاد الإسلامي , "al-Jihad," a"the Jihad Group", "the Jihad Organization," ("tanzeem al Jihad) is a violent Islamist terrorist group dedicated to world Jihad and to overthrow of the Egyptian government, establishment of an Islamic state in Egypt and eventually world domination by Islam in a renewed Caliphate. It was closely allied to, part of, or father to, the Gamaa al Islamiya and shared with it for many years basic ideology, leadership and participation in various terrorist activities. (see here for a detailed account of some of the interrelationships)
The Egyptian Islamic Jihad was founded in 1979 or 1980 by a merger of a group founded by Mohammed Abd al-Salam Farraj in Cairo and a Saidi (Upper Egypt) branch under Karam Zuhdi. In the 80s, the groups may have split apart again, with one branch becoming theGama'a al Islamiya (see here). Ayman Zawahiri is a member or leader of both groups .
The charter or founding manifesto of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad was written by the group's founder Mohammed Abd al-Salam Farraj. It is called "al-Faridah al-Gha'ibah." - the neglected duty. Farraj begins by stating that "Jihad for God's cause...has been neglected by the Ulema of this age." He goes on to expound the interpretation of Jihad as violent struggle (Jihad by the sword) - a duty incumbent on all Muslims. This theology is familiar from the writings of Sayyed Qutb and Hassan al Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. Islamic Jihad can be viewed as nothing more than the continuation of the original Muslim Brotherhood ideology, after the Ikhwan Muslim brotherhood in Egypt had renounced violence.

Islamic Jihad's initial terrorist operation was the murder of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in October 1981. Sadat was ostensibly murdered because he had reneged on his promise to institute Sha'aria law, because he had made peace with Israel and because of his ties with the United States. In fact however, the assassination was to have been the prelude to an Islamic takeover of Egypt, just as previous attempts on the life of Gamal Abdel Nasser had attempted to achieve. The Egyptian police rounded up a great many leaders of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and the Gamaa al Islamiya including Ayman Zawahiri, Farraj, Colonel al Zuhour who apparently had plotted the takeover of the government, Khaled Istambouli who carried out the assassination and roughly 300 others. They were tried in civil and military courts. Farraj, al-Islambouli and his fellow assassins were executed in April 1982, while al-Zumor,

Ayman al-Zawahiri

Ayman al-Zawahiri and others were given lengthy prison sentences. However, al-Zawahiri won an appeal, and was released and subsequently traveled first to Saudi Arabia, and then to Peshawar Pakistan where he and Osama Bin Laden formed a dilletantish group of Arabs who more or less vicariously participated in the struggle against the Soviet backed government in Afghanistan. Zawahiri became actual leader of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad (or "al Jihad") about 1991.
The Egyptian Islamic Jihad had a blind-cell structure, like that of the Leninist Communist party. Members in one cell did not know the identities or activities of those in another, so that if one member were captured they would not be able to endanger more than a few people. However, Egyptian police captured the membership director of EIJ. The database in his computer listed every member's address, aliases, and potential hideouts. Al-Jihad leader al-Zawahiri bitterly lamented "the government newspapers" elation over “the arrest of 800 members of the al-Jihad group without a single shot being fired."
-continues at the above link-

Islamic Jihad Terrorist Ayman Al-Zawahiri

In 1980, al-Zawahiri returned to Cairo where he began work as a recruiter for jihad. After Egypt's President Anwar Sadat was assassinated by a radical group in 1981, al-Zawahiri and other members of the Muslim Brotherhood were arrested. ^[4]. While in prison, he and his fellow jihad friends faced frequent torture under Egypt's inquisition, Intelligence Unit 75. Through interrogation and torture, al-Zawahiri gave information which led to the arrest of other members of the Muslim Brotherhood. In one instance, he was forced to call a suspected terrorist, who Zawari know closely, to tell him to meet him at a location, Egypt's security officials arrested the suspect at the location and placed him in the same prison cell as al-Zawahiri^[5]. Essam al-Qamari, the suspected terrorist and friend of al-Zawahiri, was sentenced to ten years in prison and later shot dead in an attempted escape.
After three years, al-Zawahiri was released from prison and traveled to Saudi Arabia and later to Jeddah, where he claims he first met Osama Bin Laden.^[6] In 1998, the two Jihad leaders announced the joining of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad and al-Qaeda to form the World Islamic Front for the Jihand Against Jews and Crusaders^[7]. In 1998, the United States embassies in Kenya and Tanzaria were destroyed by suicide bombers; the United States later indicted both Ben Laden and al-Zawahiri for the attacks which killed 224 people. In retaliation, the United States lunched cruise missiles, however, both terrorist leaders escaped.
Occasionally appearing on tapes claiming responsibility for attacks on the United States, al-Zawahiri has become the main spokesperson for the terrorist network. al-Zawahiri was sentenced to death by an Egyptian court in 1999 for his role in organizing variety terrorist attacks, and the United States State Department has offered a $25 million award for information leading to his apprehension after the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Centers and Pentagon^[8]. Although information on his location is not well known, al-Zawahiri, who is fluent in English, is suspected of being located in Afghanistan after traveling around Europe looking for refugeCite error: Closing missing for tag.
On November 19, 2008, Al-Zawahiri released a video referring to President-elect Barack Obama as a 'house negro,' and stating that Obama was "the direct opposite of honorable black Americans."^[9]

Muslim Brotherhood ready to use Egyptian army to attack Israel

ArtCreative Design and Custom coding


Mohammed Ghanem one of the Muslim Brotherhood leaders in Egypt called on his country to stop pumping gas to Israel and prepare the Egyptian army to wage war against Israel.In an interview on the Iranian television station al-Alam, Ghanem blamed Israel for supporting President Hosni Mubarak's regime but warned that neither the Egyptian police or army will be able to stop the Muslim Brotherhood.The Muslim Brotherhood is the largest opposition group in the country and criticized Mubarak in the latest parliamentary elections of rigging the votes. While they have not come out vocally in the recent wave of anti-government protests, many believe they are purposely maintain a low profile until the time is right to attempt to take over the government.

For ElBaradei the turnaround happened almost overnight. He was the Brotherhood's front man but...broke with them over the referendum. And now they want to break him.

via Barry Rubin

The only thing surprising to me is that the Islamists have been emboldened so fast. I thought they would be cautious a while longer in their pretense at being moderate and pro-democracy. But revolutionary Islamists quickly become arrogant when people make concessions to them and they conclude that they are strong and victorious. 

via oyetimes.com

and via mooserider123.blogspot.com
image via weaselzippers.us and via ns1763.ca
and via blogs.e-rockford.com