Afghanistan Conditions with Taliban/al Qaeda

Posted on January 30, 2015January 30, 2015 by Denise Simon

Has anyone talked to Ashraf Ghani about the Taliban or the 5 detainees released from Guantanamo and handed over to Qatar? What is the near future for Afghanistan with the Talibans’ recent terror attacks? There is and remains a military stalemate between the Taliban and the government of Afghanistan. Perhaps the agreement signed with Afghanistan is a clue.

We conclude that the security environment in Afghanistan will become more challenging after the drawdown of most international forces in 2014, and that the Taliban insurgency will become a greater threat to tan’s stability in the 2015–2018 timeframe than it is now.

The insurgency has been considerably weakened since the surge of U.S. and NATO forces in 2009, but it remains a viable threat to the government of Afghanistan. The coalition’s drawdown will result in a considerable reduction in counterinsurgency and counterterrorism operations by Afghan, U.S., and NATO forces. History suggests that the Taliban will use sanctuaries in Pakistan to regenerate their capabilities as military pressure on the movement declines. In the 2015– 2016 timeframe, we assess that the Taliban are likely to try to keep military pressure on the ANSF in rural areas, expand their control and influence in areas vacated by coalition forces, encircle key cities, conduct high-profile attacks in Kabul and other urban areas, and gain leverage for reconciliation negotiations. In 2016–2018, once the insurgency has had time to recover from the last several years of U.S. and NATO operations, a larger and more intense military effort will become increasingly likely.

We conclude that a small group of al Qaeda members, many of whom have intermarried with local clans and forged ties with Afghan and Pakistani insurgents, remains active in the remote valleys of northeastern Afghanistan. However, as a result of sustained U.S. and Afghan counterterrorism operations, this group of al Qaeda members does not currently pose an imminent threat to the U.S. and Western nations. Further, so long as adequate pressure is maintained via U.S. and Afghan counterterrorism operations, the group is unlikely to regenerate the capability to become a substantial threat in the 2015–2018 timeframe.

We conclude that, in the likely 2015–2018 security environment, the ANSF will require a total security force of about 373,400 personnel in order to pro- vide basic security for the country, and cope with the Taliban insurgency and low-level al Qaeda threat.

***

The United Nations provided a report in December of 2014 that in part reads: The present report provides an update on the situation since the fourth report of the Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team was submitted to the Committee on 30 April 2014 (S/2014/402). The inauguration of the new President of Afghanistan on 29 September marked the first democratic and peaceful transition of executive authority in the history of Afghanistan. This was achieved despite intensive efforts by the Taliban to disrupt the second round of the presidential elections on 14 June 2014. The Taliban also exploited the political uncertainty following the elections until a government of national unity was formed in September 2014. Consequently, 2014 saw a significantly elevated number of Taliban attacks across Afghanistan, marking an increase in their activity.

Although the current fighting season has not yet concluded, the prospects of the Taliban breaking the strategic stalemate look slim despite the almost complete withdrawal of international combat troops. The most intensive military onslaught of the Taliban during the 2014 fighting season resulted in several district centres in the south and the east being overrun, but only briefly, as the government forces proved resilient and were able to recapture them within days. Meanwhile, an intensive Taliban effort to take control of Sangin district in Helmand Province failed.

On the political front, the Taliban leadership remains largely opposed to reconciliation, despite some elements that argue in favour. Hardliners from the “Da Fidayano Mahaz”1 (not listed), the “Tora Bora Mahaz” (not listed) and other affiliates push for renewed military efforts and argue that a campaign of attrition will wear out government forces and institutions over a period of several years. Meanwhile, the pragmatists associated with the Mu’tasim Group argue for a negotiated settlem ent, which they believe could be to the Taliban’s advantage.

Stability in Afghanistan in 2015 and beyond will depend on two essential factors: the sustainability of external economic assistance, which is crucial to supporting the Government of Afghanistan and the national security forces and their continued development, and the persistence of Afghan confidence in government institutions and security forces, which is crucial to maintaining morale.
Regrettably, the Monitoring Team continues to receive a steady — albeit officially unconfirmed — flow of media reports indicating that some listed individuals have become increasingly adept at circumventing the sanctions measures, the travel ban in particular. Continuing to raise awareness with all stakeholders of the central role of the sanctions measures and their implementation as part of the wider political strategy of the international community remains one of the key tasks of the Security Council Committee established pursuant to resolution 1988 (2011) and the Team. *** Al-Qaida associates
There was a distinct increase in the activities and the visibility of Al-Qaida- affiliated entities in Afghanistan in 2014 (see annex II for an overview of the various Al-Qaida entities active in the Afghanistan/Pakistan border region and of how they relate to one another). Although geographically removed from Afghanistan, the recent events in Iraq and the Syrian Arab Republic, specifically the success of the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (ISIL), currently listed as Al-Qaida in Iraq (QE.J.115.04), present a challenge to the Taliban as a movement. In January 2014, the Afghan security forces seized propaganda material originating from an Iraq-based Al-Qaida affiliate in north-eastern Afghanistan. According to official information provided by Afghan officials to the Team, in mid-2014 the Taliban leadership was concerned that the success of ISIL in parts of northern Iraq would draw young people who were potential Taliban recruits to join ISIL in Iraq.

Although this did not happen, apparently because of how difficult it is to travel to Iraq, the Monitoring Team has received a steady stream of as yet unconfirmed reports and press articles pointing to the existence of direct contacts between individuals associated with the Taliban and individuals associated with ISIL. For example, it has been reported in several Afghan media articles that the current ISIL leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, listed as Ibrahim Awwad Ibrahim Ali al-Badri al-Samarrai (QI.A.299.11), lived in Kabul during the Taliban regime and cooperated closely with Al-Qaida groups in Afghanistan at the time.28 In addition, Taliban splinter groups such as the Da Fidayano Mahaz and the Tora Bora Mahaz continue to regularly report on and glorify ISIL activities on their websites.29 The Team will continue to monitor this situation and report to the Committee once it is able to present an official confirmation.

Currently, two prominent supporters of ISIL from the Afghan Taliban — Mawlavi Abdul Rahim Muslimdost (not listed), who is a leader of the “Jama’at al Da’wa ila al-Qur’an wa Ahl al-Hadith” (not listed) in Kunar Province, and Mawlavi Abdul Qahir (not listed) — have endorsed the leader of ISIL, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.30 Most other leaders of the Jama’at al Da’wa ila al-Qur’an wa Ahl al-Hadith had sworn allegiance to Mullah Omar’s “Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan” in 2010.31

The Tora Bora Mahaz is a militant group operating in Nangarhar Province, Afghanistan, that is reportedly under the operational control of the Taliban and its leader Anwar al-Haqq Mujahid (not listed), son of Yunus Khalis (not listed), who served as a Taliban shadow provincial governor. The group has primarily been attacking government forces in Nangarhar Province (see S/2014/402, para. 21). It publishes a magazine, Tora Bora, and maintains a website, on which it regularly cross-posts videos produced by ISIL.

At the individual level, some Arab nationals affiliated with Al-Qaida in the Afghanistan/Pakistan border area remain in touch with those who left for Iraq and the Syrian Arab Republic. When in July a drone strike killed six Al-Qaida-affiliated individuals in North Waziristan, Abdul Mohsen Abdallah Ibrahim al Charekh (QI.A.324.14) — currently serving with the Al-Nusrah Front for the People of the Levant (QE.A.137.14) — expressed grief over the loss of his friends.

A militant group calling itself “Al-Tawhid Battalion in Khorasan” (not listed) pledged allegiance to ISIL. The Abtalul Islam Media Foundation posted a statement from the group using its Twitter account on 21 September 2014. In the message, the leader of the Al-Tawhid Battalion, Abu Bakr al-Kabuli (not listed), pledged loyalty to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and asked him if the group should fight in Khorasan or wait to join the ranks of ISIL, whether in Iraq, the Syrian Arab Republic, Afghanistan or Pakistan.33 The position of Gulbuddin Hekmatyar (QI.H.88.03), the leader of the Hizb-I- Islami Gulbuddin, concerning the political situation in Afghanistan remains contradictory. On the one hand, he is seeking an enhanced political role for Hizb-I- Islami Gulbuddin in post-NATO Afghanistan. Some leading members of his party are involved in intense negotiations with the President, Ashraf Ghani Ahmadzai, and with Abdullah Abdullah to explore options for future cooperation that include the possibility of joining the new Government.34 Hekmatyar has also supported the holding of an intra-Afghan dialogue without foreign interference.35 On the other hand, Hekmatyar has criticized the signing by Afghanistan of a bilateral security agreement with the United States and claimed that a continued foreign presence means nothing but war. He has also lashed out at Iran (Islamic Republic of) and Pakistan for supporting the deal.

The Reason for Boehner’s Invitation to Netanyahu

Posted on January 30, 2015January 30, 2015 by Denise Simon

Having some clarity about future threats that include nuclear weapons, ICBM’s and genocide is clearly required. If it has to be the voice of Benjamin Netanyahu, then so be it as the threats against Israel are shared by allied countries to the United States.

Why Netanyahu, The Churchill Of Our Time, Must Speak Before Congress

It is fitting and proper–indeed essential for our very security–that Speaker John Boehner has extended an invitation to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu to address Congress on Iran and its efforts to develop nuclear weapons and the missiles to deliver them anywhere in the world. The invitation has bipartisan support because many members on both sides of the aisle recognize the fundamental threat to world peace that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose. Like Winston Churchill in the 1930s with Nazi Germany, Netanyahu has been sounding the alarm about Iran’s ominous nuclear and terrorist activities.

It’s a message much of Europe and even segments of the US, particularly in the Obama administration, don’t want to hear. The President has made clear his intense dislike of Israel’s prime minister and his refusal to keep quiet about Obama’s desire to conclude a Neville Chamberlain-like deal with Teheran. In a flagrant interference in another country’s election, Obama operatives are working hard in Israel to help bring down the courageous Prime Minister.

Congress needs to hear first-hand the truth about what Iran is doing and the dreadful implications of those activities.

Thanks to US leadership, the ever-harder sanctions imposed over the years had taken a politically damaging toll on the Iranian economy. The mullahs agreed to sit down with the US and Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany to come up with an agreement ostensibly to get Iran to back off its nuclear ambitions. Iran’s agenda was simple: get the sanctions eased, and then with a loophole-ridden treaty, get them removed altogether.

The basic problem is that the Obama administration wants a deal–any deal–with Teheran and the other parties to the talks are willing to go along in order to snag business contracts with Iran, oblivious to the implications of a radical regime that will be in the position to get the Bomb any time it wants.

Appeasers argue that containment will work with a nuclear-armed Iran just as it did with the old Soviet Union during the Cold War and thus there is nothing to really worry about. Israel and other Mideast nations know better.

The Iranian government, despite the immense corruption of many of its leaders, is a revolutionary regime. Its actions over the years demonstrate that the rhetoric of its officials is more than just hot air. Iran is terror central. It bankrolls and provides arms to Hamas, Hezbollah and all sorts of Islamic terrorists organizations. If the US tacitly concedes its resignation to Iran becoming a nuclear power, then other countries will follow suite in creating their own nukes, including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

That kind of proliferation enormously increases the chances of a nuclear war. We saw in 1914 how the then-center of civilization plunged into a catastrophic war. Even during the Cold War, Washington and Moscow went to the brink of a nuclear holocaust during the Cuban Missile Crisis. (President John Kennedy was acutely aware during those fraught days of how events in 1914 ran away from European leaders.) With nukes in so many unstable hands, a disaster is almost a certainty. Moreover, the widespread knowledge of how to make the Bomb will certainly fall into terrorist hands, which is why the US must prevent this nuclear proliferation in the first place.

Ominously Iran has apparently developed an intercontinental ballistic missile that can reach not only Israel but also Europe. It won’t be many years before the mullahs can aim nuclear tipped missiles against the US. No surprise, the current negotiations don’t cover Iranian missile development.

Another factor Obama and his appeasement-minded minions willfully ignore is the existential threat Iran poses to Israel. Given the size of the Jewish state, it has no room for error. A nuclear-armed Iran will put Israeli leaders in a dangerous, hair-trigger situation. Israel is a crucial US ally, strategically and morally. It is the only durable democracy in the Mideast. With only 8 million people, Israel has surpassed the European Union, with a population of over 400 million, in high technology, rivaling Silicon Valley. It was born from the ashes of the Holocaust. The destruction of Israel would mean, ultimately, the end of Western civilization; the moral rot that would permit such an event would be just about impossible to surmount.

It is not only Israel that is appalled by what Iran is up to. When Israel very nearly undertook preemptive action against Teheran in 2012, countries such as Saudi Arabia were remarkably open about their support for Israeli military actions that would destroy or cripple Iran’s nuclear facilities.

President Obama is either oblivious to all this or feels that in his perverted worldview, these things don’t much matter. Iran knows Obama desperately wants an agreement. It figures that the more it refuses to accept Obama’s willingness to surrender, the more concessions he will offer.

And spin to the contrary, an agreement will be a surrender. For all intents and purposes, Iran will be allowed to make a nuclear device any time it wishes. Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry will proclaim that if Teheran goes to make the Bomb, the US will have plenty of time to stop them before the Iranians can actually do it. Nonsense. It is has already crossed a very difficult threshold on uranium enrichment. The mullahs are moving ahead on the plutonium front. Teheran has brazenly blocked the International Atomic Energy Agency from access to its nuclear installations.

Congress is considering legislation proposed by Sen. Robert Menendez (D., NJ) and Sen. Mark Kirk (R., Ill.) that would impose stiff sanctions on Iran if an agreement is not reached by the deadline of June 30. Twice before, negotiation deadlines have been extended. This would effectively tell Iran, put up or shut up. Obama is naturally opposed. He wants nothing that might jeopardize his dangerous course of abject appeasement of an evil regime. The President outrageously dragooned British Prime Minister to play the role of unregistered lobbyist to call Senators to block the Menendez-Kirk bill.

Which gets to why Speaker John Boehner was well within his bounds to extend that invitation to Netanyahu. Such a momentous treaty with Iran as desired by Obama must, under the Constitution, be submitted to the US Senate for ratification. Obama has trampled on the Constitution time and again–making laws and changing laws at will–and wants no Congressional involvement precisely because the resultant debate would glaringly show what a dangerously miserable deal he had cut. The ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Robert Menendez, recently declared: “The more I hear from the Administration and its quotes, the more it sounds like talking points that come straight out of Teheran.” When President Obama declared in his State of the Union Address that Iran has “halted the progress of its nuclear program and reduced its stockpile of nuclear material,” the guffaws could be loudly heard from every intelligence agency in the world.

Congress is a separate branch of government. Hearing directly from Netanyahu is well within its prerogatives, especially on a matter as critical as this. By the way back in 2011, Speaker Boehner attempted to coordinate a Netanyahu invitation with the White House. Naturally Obama gave Boehner the back of his hand by ignoring this courtesy.

What to Do About Islamic State’s Cyber Army

Posted on January 30, 2015January 30, 2015 by Denise Simon

Islamic State has taken cyber-terrorism to a whole new plateau. What is the NSA, the Cyber-Command, ODNI or partners do about this electronic war?

ISIS Establishes A Cyber-Alliance With Anti-Israel Hackers

Several pro-ISIS Twitter accounts that promote the terrorist group’s propaganda are collaborating with established anti-Israel hackers in an effort to increase cyber-attacks on behalf of ISIS.

“Terrorists Team for Electronic Jihad” claim of responsibility.

On January 13, the Alazm Center Twitter account, which has over 5,000 followers, called on hackers to contact them. Since then, a group of anti-Israel hackers calling themselves “Terrorists Team for Electronic Jihad” has claimed responsibility for several attacks against Israeli websites on behalf of ISIS.

The group claims to have hacked the website of a security contractor in Israel, a tour organizer and few other Israeli businesses by redirecting visitors to websites featuring the name and flag of ISIS along with the signature of “Terrorists Team for Electronic Jihad.”

“Terrorists Team for Electronic Jihad” claimed responsibility for these attacks in a statement on JustPaste.it, a file sharing site ISIS has been using to publish its statements anonymously. The statement said, “Thanks to God, below is today’s summary of hacking websites which is part of a campaign against Zionist websites” and included a list of individual hackers affiliated with “Terrorists Team for Electronic Jihad.”

Videos of the hacks were also made available on Aljyyosh (“the armies” in Arabic), an online forum for Arab hackers that have claimed responsibility for stealing personal information belonging to American Jews and Israelis. The videos show the hacked websites defaced with ISIS flags and the logo of the “Terrorists Team for Electronic Jihad” along with a song that begins with, “Report our greetings to Abu Bakir [ISIS’ leader].”

Several of the names listed in that statement have previously taken part in other cyber-attacks against Israeli websites on behalf of groups in North Africa such as Al Falaga, a Tunisian hacker group that participated in a large-scale cyber-attack on Israel on Holocaust Remembrance Day in 2013.

Another ISIS Twitter account, Mo7_AbuAzzamNM, which has over 1,000 followers and identifies itself as the “Hacker of the Caliphate State,” posted other statements praising the hacking of “Zionist websites” and sharing links to the statement by “Terrorists Team for Electronic Jihad.” On January 16, Mo7_AbuAzzamNM Tweeted “America has drones, but we have cyber experience. Oh mule of the Jews [Obama], the coming days will show you.”

Prior to their apparent collaboration with ISIS, “Terrorists Team for Electronic Jihad” posted a video on YouTube on November 29, 2014, declaring its allegiance to the Islamic State. The video showed a masked man reading a message in Arabic saying, “We the Terrorists Team for Electronic Jihad declare our support for the Islamic State in Iraq and Levantine with all our force and capabilities.” It is possible that the video attracted the attention of ISIS, and led to the more recent collective efforts.

“Terrorists Team for Electronic Jihad” also operates a Facebook page and a Twitter account that have included messages in support of ISIS. “May allah bless the #ISIS,” read one post on October 8.

Another prominent hacker group that has targeted Jewish, Israeli and American websites called AnonGhost is also showing increasing interest in ISIS. A Twitter account of Mauritania Attacker, the presumed leader of AnonGhost posted several comments in the past few days related to cyber-attacks in the name of ISIS and shared a video claiming to show ISIS how to avoid being monitored by the CIA.

Cyber-attacks on behalf of ISIS have increased over the past several months. In addition to the hacking of Twitter and YouTube accounts affiliated with U.S. Central Command, Jewish institutions, universities and other websites and been targeted as well.

*** How effective is Islamic State’s cyber army?

Although it is already force to be reckoned with, the presence of the Islamic State on Twitter is not as strong as it might seem.

MOSCOW, January 28 (Sputnik) – The Islamic State, also known as ISIS, relies on as many as 45,000 Twitter accounts to wage its propagandistic and recruitment campaign in social media, according to researcher J.M. Berger.

.M. Berger described the social media campaign by the Islamic State as “highly organized,” adding that the radical Sunni group “uses deceptive tactics and shows a sophisticated understanding of how such networks operate.” However, the Islamic State’s network on Twitter has suffered a heavy blow since then.

As many as 18,000 Twitter accounts affiliated with the militants were suspended in recent months. “ISIS supporters on Twitter are under significant pressure, with the most active and viral users taking the brunt of the suspensions,” Berger told House Committee on Foreign Affairs, probing terrorist propaganda after a deadly attacks in Paris. Testimony in part:

In a forthcoming study on ISIS’s use of Twitter, commissioned by Google Ideas and to be published by the Brookings Institution’s Project on U.S. Relations with the Islamic World, technologist Jonathon Morgan and I set out to develop metrics that could define the size and function of this coordinated effort on Twitter.

While our analysis is not complete, we can confidently estimate that during the autumn of 2014, there were at least 45,000 Twitter accounts used by ISIS supporters. This figure includes accounts that were both created and suspended during the time it took us to collect the data.

We found that the vast majority of ISIS supporters on Twitter, about 73 percent, had fewer than 500 followers each. During that period of time, we found no accounts actively supporting ISIS that possessed more than 50,000 followers, a sharp change from early 2014 when some ISIS users could be found with more than 80,000 followers.

The researcher warned that the Twitter campaign against the Islamic State should continue. Otherwise, the network will reemerge. He also said that although Twitter should suspend accounts of the most active users affiliated with the jihadist group, some low profile accounts could be kept active to be used as an open source for gathering intelligence.

NSC Silent on Russian History of Terror

Posted on January 30, 2015January 30, 2015 by Denise Simon

There was Crimea and now there is Ukraine. But going back decades there was al Qaeda. There are countless Russians that are being silenced but others do speak out on matters of Ukraine hostilities as they relate to Soviet Loyalists. There are few in media that report Russian activities after having performed comprehensive and investigative research. For this reason the National Security Council rarely addresses Russian/Putin objectives, connections and operations. Below are two items referring to Ukraine and al Qaeda.

Russian activist charged with treason after phoning Ukrainian embassy

(Reuters) – Nine months after Russian activist Svetlana Davydova called the Ukrainian embassy in Moscow to warn that Russian soldiers were making their way to Ukraine, an investigator with an order for her arrest showed up at her door.

Her husband, Anatoly Gorlov, said the investigator from the Federal Security Service (FSB), the successor to the Soviet KGB, detained Davydova, a mother of seven living in the western Russian city of Vyazma, on suspicion of treason.

“They… didn’t ask for permission, they just threw themselves on me and rushed into the apartment yelling ‘Quiet!’,” Gorlov told Reuters in his small apartment.

“A man in civilian clothes identified himself as an investigator from the FSB. They asked Sveta ‘Are you Davydova? We are taking you right now!’,” he said.

Ukraine and Western governments accuse Moscow of sending weapons and troops to support a pro-Russian insurgency in eastern Ukraine. Russia denies this. More than 5,000 people have been killed since last April in the conflict, which has worsened sharply this month.

Russian activists, and relatives of soldiers sent to the front lines in Ukraine, are often hesitant to speak out. Soldiers’ rights campaigner Ella Polyakova was declared a ‘foreign agent’ after she gave an interview to Reuters last year about the deaths of Russian soldiers in eastern Ukraine.

Gorlov said papers for his wife’s arrest on Jan. 21 showed she called Ukrainian diplomats after overhearing a soldier’s conversation about troops from a nearby military base being sent to Moscow and from there to Ukraine, where they were being told to wear civilian clothing.

If convicted, she could face between 12 and 20 years in prison.

The Ukrainian embassy in Moscow was unavailable for comment. The FSB and the lawyer assigned to Davydova declined to comment on the case.

Speaking in his green-wallpapered apartment lined with children’s drawings, Gorlov said his wife, who had been active in the Communist Party and was an environmental campaigner, was no spy.

“It’s not a secret,” Gorlov said of the presence of Russian troops in east Ukraine. He has not seen his wife since she was detained.

“I don’t know why they took her away,” he said.

“She possibly might have considered that by calling the Ukrainian embassy, fewer people would die… I know she was not led by any harmful intentions.”

*** Then we must also go back further and consider other historical items as they relate to al Qaeda. There is no denial that Soviet sympathizers maintain an art of propaganda, infiltration, nefarious missions and terror.

Russian FSB and Al-Qaida as Teamwork

Here are some materials which show Russian FSB connections with al-Qaeda.

1. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6163502.stm

He (Aleksander Litvinenko) has told that al-Qaeda number two (now nr 1- CC) Ayman al-Zawahiri was trained by the FSB in Dagestan in the years before the 9/11 attacks.

Litvinenko also denounced the war in Chechnya as a crime, called for Russian troops to be withdrawn, and said compensation should be paid to Chechens.

One of his friends – and one of a number of Russian exiles now settled in Britain – is Akhmed Zakayev, a former Chechen commander living under asylum in London.The two men lived on the same street in London, it has been reported.

2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Litvinenko
Support of terrorism worldwide by the KGB and FSB

Litvinenko stated that “all the bloodiest terrorists of the world” were connected to FSB-KGB, including Carlos “The Jackal” Ramírez, Yassir Arafat, Saddam Hussein, Abdullah Öcalan, Wadie Haddad of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, George Hawi who led the Communist Party of Lebanon, Ezekias Papaioannou from Cyprus, Sean Garland from Ireland and many others. He said that all of them were trained, funded, and provided with weapons, explosives and counterfeit documents in order to carry out terrorist attacks worldwide and that each act of terrorism made by these people was carried out according to the task and under the rigid control of the KGB of the USSR.[61] Litvinenko said that “the center of global terrorism is not in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan or the Chechen Republic. The terrorism infection creeps away worldwide from the cabinets of the Lubyanka Square and the Kremlin”.[62][63]

Alleged Russia-al-Qaeda connection

In a July 2005 interview with the Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita, Litvinenko alleged that Ayman al-Zawahiri, a prominent leader of al-Qaeda, was trained for half a year by the FSB in Dagestan in 1997 and called him “an old agent of the FSB”.[61][64] Litvinenko said that after this training, al-Zawahiri “was transferred to Afghanistan, where he had never been before and where, following the recommendation of his Lubyanka chiefs, he at once … penetrated the milieu of Osama bin Laden and soon became his assistant in Al Qaeda.”[65] Former KGB officer and writer Konstantin Preobrazhenskiy supported this claim and said that Litvinenko “was responsible for securing the secrecy of Al-Zawahiri’s arrival in Russia; he was trained by FSB instructors in Dagestan, Northern Caucasus, in 1996–1997.”.[66 http://www.cicentre.com/404.asp?404;http://cicentre.com:8200/Documents/russia_islam_not_separate.html]
He said: “At that time, Litvinenko was the Head of the Subdivision for Internationally Wanted Terrorists of the First Department of the Operative-Inquiry Directorate of the FSB Anti-Terrorist Department. He was ordered to undertake the delicate mission of securing Al-Zawahiri from unintentional disclosure by the Russian police. Though Al-Zawahiri had been brought to Russia by the FSB using a false passport, it was still possible for the police to learn about his arrival and report to Moscow for verification. Such a process could disclose Al-Zawahiri as an FSB collaborator. In order to prevent this, Litvinenko visited a group of highly placed police officers to notify them in advance.” According to FSB spokesman Sergei Ignatchenko, al-Zawahiri was arrested by Russian authorities in Dagestan in December 1996 and released in May 1997.[67]

On 1 September 2005, al-Zawahiri and Mohammad Sidique Khan claimed responsibility for the attacks for Al Qaeda on a videotape which aired on al-Jazeera.[68]

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayman_al-Zawahiri
Assassinated former FSB agent Alexander Litvinenko alleged, among other things, that during this time, al-Zawahiri was indeed being trained by the FSB,[83] and that he was not the only link between al-Qaeda and the FSB.[84] Former KGB officer and writer Konstantin Preobrazhenskiy supported Litvinenko’s claim and said that Litvinenko “was responsible for securing the secrecy of Al-Zawahiri’s arrival in Russia, who was trained by FSB instructors in Dagestan, Northern Caucasus, in 1996–1997.”[85]

4. http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/regions/london/2005/07/318875.html
Chechenpress , the Department of interviews, 11.07.05

The correspondent: Alexander, who, in your opinion, is the originator of this terrorist attack?

A. Litvinenko: You know, I have spoken about it earlier and I shall say now, that I know only one organization, which has made terrorism the main tool of solving of political problems. It is the Russian special services. The KGB was engaged in terrorism for many years, and, in mass terrorism. At the special department of the KGB they trained terrorists practically from all countries of the world; these courses lasted, as a rule, for a half-year. Specially trained and prepared agents of the KGB organized murders and explosions, including explosions of tankers, captures of passenger air liners, strikes on the diplomatic, state and commercial organizations practically worldwide

A. Litvinenko: The bloodiest terrorists of the world were or are agents of the KGB-FSB. These are and well-known Carlos Ilyich Ramiros, the nickname “Jackal” (he is condemned for terrorism in France), deceased Yassir Arafat, Saddam Hussein, Adjalan (he is condemned in Turkey), Vadi Haddad, the head of the service of external operations of the Popular front of releasing of Palestine, Hauyi, the head of the communist party of Lebanon, mister Papaionnu from the Cyprus, Sean Garland from Ireland and many others. All of them were trained in the KGB, received money from there, weapon and explosive, counterfeit documents and a communication facility necessary for carrying out of acts of terrorism practically worldwide. The correspondent: You can be objected, that each of the listed figures and the forces, supporting them, were engaged in solving of their own political problems …
A. Litvinenko: Certainly, all these figures and movements headed by them operated under their own slogans, however thus none of them hid especially their “intimate” (we shall say so) communications with the Kremlin and Lubyanka. There is a simple question: whether Russian special services would train and finance those people and those groupings, which were not supervised by Lubyanka and did not serve to the interests of the Kremlin? You understand perfectly, they would not. Each act of terrorism made by these people was carried out according to the task and under the rigid control of the KGB of the USSR . And it is not casual after the disintegration of the USSR and disorder of the KGB terrorism in the world practically came to naught. But this calm lasted only till the time, until security officers seized power in Russia and then everything began anew. After Putin’s assignment to the post of the head of the FSB, in this special service political investigation was revived and those, who in days of the KGB had been engaged in terrorism, were are returned to the service.

The correspondent: Everyone, whom you have named, is “the old staff” of the KGB. Could you bring a fresher example?
A. Litvinenko: Certainly, here it is. The second person in the terrorist organization “Al Qa’eda”, about whom they speak as about the organizer of the series of explosions in London , Aiman al-Zavahiri, is an old agent of the FSB. Being sentenced to death penalty in Egypt for terrorism and searched by the Interpol, Aiman al-Zavahiri in 1998 was in the territory of Dagestan , where for half a year was trained a special preparation at one of the educational bases of the FSB. After the preparation he was transferred to Afghanistan , in which he had never been before and where, following the recommendation of his Lubyanka chiefs, he at once after the arrival penetrated into the surrounding of Ben Laden and soon became his assistant in the “Al Qa’eda”.

The correspondent: Could you hint at least, where from do you have such data?

Litvinenko: I can. During my service in one of the most confidential departments of the FSB, those heads from the UFSB of Dagestan, who directly had worked with Aiman al-Zavahiri, after his successful terrorist preparation and transferring to Afghanistan , were called to Moscow and received high posts.

The correspondent: What can you say concerning the acts of terrorism in London ? From what region and with what forces was this impact directed?

A. Litvinenko: In reply to this question I can declare perfectly definitely, that the center of the global terrorism is not in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan or the Chechen Republic. The terrorism infection creeps away worldwide from the cabinets of the Lubyanka Square and the Kremlin. And until the Russian special services are forbidden, dispersed and condemned, the terrorism will never stop: bombs will blow up, and blood will be shed. Terrorism has no limitation period and those, who were engaged in it, should be found and punished, until they are alive, instead of to award them with the Nobel Prize of the world and not to set up monuments for them. I would like to repeat, that all the terrorists, whom I have named, were supported by the heads of the Soviet and Russian special services – Yury Andropov, Vladimir Putin, Nikolay Patrushev and others. These people are the main terrorists, and their place is not among the heads of the civilized countries, but on a dock. And until we condemn them, the same as in due time they condemned fascist Gestapo, the terrorism on the earth

A Future Coup in Egypt?

Posted on January 30, 2015January 30, 2015 by Denise Simon

Not enough can be said about the Muslim Brotherhood and their wide and global influence in policy. Several countries have listed the Muslim Brotherhood as terror organization including Egypt and Saudi Arabia. So one must ask what information do they have to classify the Muslim Brotherhood as a terror group. Last year, a petition was placed on the White House website to deem the Muslim Brotherhood a terror organization in the United States and after the required number of signatures the White House responded with a ‘no’ stating not enough evidence for that classification. The question again here is why? Given the Holyland Foundation trial and years of evidence, the associated organizations and names were tied to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood.

This brings us to current day where the Muslim Brotherhood is on an aggressive mission to escalate policy and they still have their sites on a power shift once again in Egypt. The Muslim Brotherhood is working diligently to maintain power, recognition, community service, financial stability and legitimacy in Egypt with the full support of the White House and the State Department. The Muslim Brotherhood is getting huge support from academia most of all Georgetown University.

It was Georgetown University that coordinated the recent confab of the Muslim Brotherhood at the State Department as told by the State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki.

A must see video from Georgetown University who has a foreign policy office in Doha, Qatar and it was there that a presentation was made on behalf of the Muslim Brotherhood, explaining the movement politically and diplomatically in Egypt and beyond.

Qatar is also the location where Hamas has moved their headquarters, it is the new location for the Muslim Brotherhood and lastly the location of the Taliban home office, where the 5 Taliban generals released from Guantanamo now reside freely.

Open Jihad Declared in Egypt Following State Dept. Meeting with Muslim Brotherhood-Aligned Leaders

Muslim Brotherhood call for ‘long, uncompromising jihad’The Muslim Brotherhood called for “a long, uncompromising jihad” in Egypt just days after a delegation of the Islamist group’s key leaders and allies met with the State Department, according to an official statement released this week.

Just days after a delegation that included two top Brotherhood leaders was hosted at the State Department, the organization released an official statement calling on its supporters to “prepare” for jihad, according to an independent translation of the statement first posted on Tuesday.

The State Department meeting was attended by a deputy assistant secretary for democracy, human rights, and labor and other State Department officials.

The Muslim Brotherhood statement also was issued just two days before a major terror attack Thursday in Egypt’s lawless Sinai region that killed at least 25.

“It is incumbent upon everyone to be aware that we are in the process of a new phase, where we summon what is latent in our strength, where we recall the meanings of jihad and prepare ourselves, our wives, our sons, our daughters, and whoever marched on our path to a long, uncompromising jihad, and during this stage we ask for martyrdom,” it states.

Preparation for jihad is a key theme of the Brotherhood’s latest call for jihad.

An image posted with the statement shows two crossing swords and the word “prepare!” between them. Below the swords it reads, “the voice of truth, strength, and freedom.” According to the statement, “that is the motto of the Dawa of the Muslim Brotherhood.”

The statement also invokes the well-known Muslim cleric Imam al-Bana, who founded the Brotherhood and has called for the death of Jews.

“Imam al-Bana prepared the jihad brigades that he sent to Palestine to kill the Zionist usurpers and the second [Supreme] Guide Hassan al-Hudaybi reconstructed the ‘secret apparatus’ to bleed the British occupiers,” the statement says.

The Brotherhood’s renewed call for jihad comes at a time when current Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi is cracking down on the group and imprisoning many of its supporters, who notoriously engaged in violence following the ouster of Brotherhood-ally Mohamed Morsi.

Egypt experts said the timing of this declaration is an embarrassment for the State Department.

“The fact that the Brotherhood issued its call to jihad two days after its meeting at the State Department will be grist for endless anti-American conspiracy theories about a supposed partnership between Washington and the Brotherhood,” said Eric Trager, a fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy (WINEP). “The State Department should have foreseen what an embarrassment this would be.”

One member of that U.S. delegation, a Brotherhood-aligned judge in Egypt, posed for a picture while at Foggy Bottom in which he held up the Islamic group’s notorious four-finger Rabia symbol, according to his Facebook page.

“Now in the U.S. State Department. Your steadfastness impresses everyone,” reads an Arabic caption posted along with the photo.

Other members of that group included Gamal Heshmat, a leading member of the Brotherhood, and Abdel Mawgoud al-Dardery, a Brotherhood member who served as a parliamentarian from Luxor.

When asked on Tuesday evening to comment on the meeting, a State Department official told the Washington Free Beacon, “We meet with representatives from across the political spectrum in Egypt.”

The official declined to elaborate on who may have been hosted or on any details about the timing and substance of any talks.

The meeting was described by a member of the delegation, Maha Azzam as “fruitful,” according to one person who attended a public event in Washington earlier this week hosted by the group.

The call for jihad, while surprising in light of the Brotherhood’s attempts to appear moderate, is part and parcel of organization’s longstanding beliefs, Trager said.

“Muslim Brothers have been committing violent acts for a very long time,” Trager explained. “Under Morsi, Muslim Brothers tortured protesters outside the presidential palace. After Morsi’s ouster, they have frequently attacked security forces and state property. “

“But until now, the official line from the Brotherhood was to support this implicitly by justifying its causes, without justifying the acts themselves,” he added. “ So the Brotherhood’s open call to jihad doesn’t necessarily mean a tactical shift, but a rhetorical one.”

Terrorism expert and national security reporter Patrick Poole said he was struck by the clarity of the Brotherhood’s call.

“It invokes the Muslim Brotherhood’s terrorist past, specifically mentioning the ‘special apparatus’ that waged terror in the 1940s and 1950s until the Nasser government cracked down on the group, as well as the troops sent by founder Hassan al-Banna to fight against Israel in 1948,” he said.

“It concludes saying that the Brotherhood has entered a new stage, warns of a long jihad ahead, and to prepare for martyrdom,” Poole said. “Not sure how much more clear they could be.”

Poole wondered if the call for jihad would convince Brotherhood apologists that the group still backs violence.

“What remains to be seen is how this announcement will be received inside the Beltway, where the vast majority of the ‘experts’ have repeatedly said that the Brotherhood had abandoned its terrorist past, which it is now clearly reviving, and had renounced violence,” Poole said. “Will this development be met with contrition, or silence? And what says the State Department who met with these guys this week?”

The State Department did not respond to a request for comment before press time.