Good Morning,

One of the rarest occasions when Hamad Bin Jassim Al Thani, the current prime minister of Qatar, was seen nervous, was on the 9^th of March 2024 in the famous British think-tank Chatham House; when he answered my question about the contradictory presence of both Al Qaida and the US military bases in his country. Hamad denied any presence of any terrorist groups in Qatar, and showed a full engagement of his government in the war against terrorism. I was congratulated for my question by several politicians from the Gulf countries including the current Foreign Minister of Bahrain who was in 2024 Ambassador in London.

At that time, both the Saudi and the Bahraini governments were inciting the US administration against Qatar and its eldest daughter Al Jazeera; Hamad Bin jassim himself recognized this in a leaked recording between him and Gaddafi. The first “free Arab TV channel” as it self-proclaims was continuously accused by both the American government and Media to be the spokesman of Osama Bin Laden.

The Channel headquarters in Doha were allegedly about to be bombed by the US aircrafts, and its office in Baghdad was attacked by the US army in 2024 causing the death of its correspondent Tariq Ayoub. Two of its journalists (Tayseer Allouni and Sami Al-Haj) were detained in Spain and Guantanamo Bay, where they were accused of membership of Al Qaida.

But on the other hand, Wadah Khanfar a member of the Muslim Brotherhood was appointed Chief Executive Officer of Aljazeera, after the good work which he carried out to promote the image of the US army in Iraq, when he was a correspondent in Iraqi Kurdistan.

Later on, Wikileaks published meeting minutes between him and US intelligence officers where they were reviewing the work which he has done to improve the Image of the US army in Aljazeera.

Yousri Fouda, a former Aljazeera’s investigative journalist, was accused of having facilitated the task of the US army to arrest the leaders of Al Qaeda Khaled Al-Sheikh and Ramzi bin al-Shibh a short time after an interview which he conducted with them. Some media reports accused the ruler of Qatar to be the informer who helped the CIA to track the two dangerous men.

This political schizophrenia is not something new in the Arabian countries; Qatar today, like Saudi Arabia during the Afghani war, is a good example of the cohabitation between the cat and the mouse.  

In an interview with the Saudi Channel Al Arabiya, Najeeb Al Nuaimi, a former Qatari minister of justice, showed a “partial support” to Al Qaida and predicted future negotiations between the United States and what is seen today as a terrorist group. I personally met Najeeb once in a meeting organized about a decade ago in London, by Yaser Al Serri, a former member of the Egyptian Tanzeem Al Jihad (which Ayman Al Zawahiri and Omar Abdurrahman headed before). I have been told by a credible Jihadi source that this meeting was financed by the former Qatari minister.

I have continuously monitored cyber activities of someone called Walid El Sharkawy for pure academic and journalistic purposes; Waleed, who was recently filmed by a BBC hidden camera, is according to Mary O’Sullivan his ex-wife, a former employee of Aljazeera. He was, as I witnessed myself, an active writer in Al Qaida websites promoting violence against civilians and showing enthusiastic support to Al Qaida. From his council flat in Kentish Town (London), which I visited several years ago, and with his plenty of nicknames, Waleed, was an active member of a cyber-terrorist cell; but unlike Younes Tsouli, Babar Ahmad or Minh Quang Pham, Waleed was never jailed for terrorism.

There were serious allegations that Waleed was an SIS/MI5 recruit who worked also for some Arab Intelligence services including those of Qatar and the Emirates which he visited several times. Having met him in person, I can confirm two things: first, his activities were so obvious that there was no single chance that he would be out of the British intelligence sight, second, his main concern when he was writing about the situation in Iraq was to encourage an internal war between the Shia and the Sunni instead of a war against the occupier; Waleed, by the way, was an admin in a Paltalk room (an American chat software) promoting anti Shia feelings and financed by businessmen from the Gulf.

Promoting sectarianism and infiltrating Cyber-Jihadi groups was a long term task which many intelligence services in the world performed, I am convinced today that the most efficient of all of them were the Saudi and the Jordanian intelligence. Human intelligence was the main reason behind this success, but for Saudi Arabia in particular there was another factor, Saudi Arabia remains the center of decision making within Wahabism; even anti Saudi Jihadists were not able to free themselves from their intellectual dependence to the Saudis. They can insult the Saudi government as much as they want, but the fact is that they are always inspired by Bin Baz, Bin Jibrin and of course Ibn Abdelwahab, who were Al Saud scholars.

Unlike Saddam Hussein who succeeded with his media and intelligence to counter-attack the Saudi propaganda machine in 1991, by showing Al Saud religious spheres as pro-American and thereafter gaining support from millions of Arabs and Muslims even within the Salafi movements, Gaddafi failed recently to resist the long term Salafi and Ikhwani campaign against him, and even had to seek the help of Saudi scholars to appease his opponents. Naively, his children Saiful Islam and Al Saadi attempted to recruit Saudi clerics who cannot have loyalty to anyone but to Al Saud in order to neutralize the Islamist movement in the events of 17 February. Libyans tried to use what they considered as “good Salafists” to fight whom they thought were “bad Salafists”, but forgot that this game can be played by Saudi Arabia only.

The prince of Qatar, who claims to be a descendant of Mohammed Bin Abdelwahab, understood very well that only Saudis can play in a Saudi stadium, this is why he opted for the brotherhood movement instead. Hamad Bin Khalifa offers money and a good platform like Aljazeera and the brothers do the rest.

It is absurd to try to show the brotherhood movement as a nonviolent movement, the first generation of Al Qaida (including Ayman Al Zawahiri and Osama Bin Laden) were half Salafi, half brotherhood. After September 11 the Saudi government and the Brotherhood movement kept blaming each other for the escalation of the so-called Islamic terrorism but they were both responsible; the same Kamal Al Hilbawi (a pro-Iranian Ikhwani and a retired Mujahed in Afghanistan) who accused Saudi Arabia to support the Egyptian president Mubarak against his movement, contributed in the British intelligence campaign against Abu Hamza Al Masri who was expelled from his mosque and replaced by a supporter of Hamas called Mohammed Sawalha with the benediction of the Qatari-Egyptian Ikhwani Pope Youssef Al Qaradawi, a man who significantly contributed in the success of the NATO operations in Libya.

“Abu Hamza” Operation is in my opinion the cornerstone of a long term Contemporary partnership between the British government and the brotherhood movement. No one knows exactly if this partnership was a pure Idea of Ken Livingstone the former Mayor of London or of one of the British counter terrorism branches, but it seems that what it begun with a limited action to besiege the Salafi Jihadi movement in “Londonstan” and was about to be aborted after the British decision to ban Qaradawi from revisiting the UK, had ended with a British-American agreement to enlarge such a partnership after the Arab revolutions (called in the west Arab Spring).

Although it is true that no one was expecting these revolutions to happen in 2024, it will be too naïve to expect that western governments did not have a plan B to face any collapse of the regimes of Mubarak, Bin Ali or Saleh. Britain (an influencing force of the American foreign policy) is the country from where many of the current decision makers in Libya, Tunisia, Iraq and even Egypt returned, some of them like Soumaya Al Ghannouchi (the daughter of Rached Al Ghannouchi the Neo-Khomeini of Tunisia and wife of Rafik Abdessalam Bouchlaka the Tunisian foreign minister) or Anas Altakriti (the son of Osama Altakriti the leader of the brotherhood movement and the political partner of the US occupier in Iraq) played a vital role in the British Ikhwani understanding.

The brotherhood movement in Iraq was accused by credible sources to be behind the creation of Al Sahawat anti-Qaida movements, in another kind of partnership with the US ambassador John Negroponte and his first assistant there Robert Ford.

Like the Shia scholar Ayatullah Al Sistani who ordered his followers not to resist the US army in Iraq, Youssef Al Qaradawi succeeded (with the support of pro-Qatari and Saudi Islamists of Libya like Ali As-Sallabi, As-Sadeq Al Ghiriyani and Abdelhakim Belhaj) to neutralize a large part of the Libyan people in the struggle between Gaddafi and the opposition. And he also managed to make from the struggle against the Libyan previous regime a sort of Neo-Jihad similar to the mujahedeen war in Afghanistan.

Unlike Libya where the Saudis preferred to remain a hidden player in the operation of the change of the regime, the Salafi and the brotherhood movements are publically competing today to impose their project of society in the new Syria. While the Brotherhood are attempting to keep quite as long as they can until they could achieve their first goal (toppling the Syrian regime), Adnan Al Arour, a leader of the Salafi movement financed by the Saudi prince Khaled Bin Talal Al Saud has publicly opted for the Saudi way of governance as the best political model for Syria.

On the other hand, NATO part of the unwritten and unspoken agreement was to ignore the existence of hundreds of fighters in Libya and Syria who support Al Qaida, Al Qaida seems to be bad only when it targets NATO’s interests. It is important to mention that London’s Syrian Radical Abu Halima Al Tartousi who wrote the charter of what is called today Al Qaida in the Maghreb and who supported suicide attacks in Saudi Arabia but who also opposed London attacks in July 2024 is in Syria now with the Mujahideen.

NATO members ignored and continue to ignore human right abuses against supporters of the collapsed regimes called by the Neo-Mujahideen: Shabbiha, Baltagya, azlam, fouloul and Tahalib to justify their slaughter; recent massacres of Bani Walid in Libya are a good example.

In parallel with the work which Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya achieved, the western media in the NATO member countries continued to publish and broadcast unverified stories about undocumented and perhaps fictional massacres to justify direct and indirect military offences; the fact that the Libyan and the Syrian regimes are corrupt and tyrannical was not enough to justify a war against them, and there was a need as a result to use Hollywood techniques in order to gain the necessary solidarity.

Western attempts to manipulate Islamism in order to promote anti-communist feelings are similar to the attempts made today to use sectarianism in the struggle with Iran for example, but is it always safe? The murder of the US Ambassador in Libya proves that it is not, many Americans blamed Al Saud for September 11, but are they going to blame the rulers of Qatar for the murder of their ambassador or for any complications in the future caused by underestimating the Neo-danger? I believe they will.

Thank you