VIDEO: Former Al-Qaeda Leader Says Obama-Aligned Muslim Brotherhood ‘Is One of the Most Dangerous Organizations’

PJ Media, by Patrick Poole, September 8, 2015:

I had the opportunity to escort a U.S. congressional delegation to Egypt last week — we were sponsored by the Cairo-based Center for North Africa and Near East Security Studies.

One of the common themes we heard from senior government officials and experts was the active role of the Muslim Brotherhood in the ongoing terror campaign targeting military, police, and government officials, as well as  in the sabotage of infrastructure. I reported here at PJ Media back in June on the Brotherhood’s escalating violence.

There have been a number of signs this past year indicating that the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt has effectively dropped its non-violent mask, including:

Despite media reports that the group is “divided” over the use of violence, the group has unmistakably made its position clear.

One expert very familiar with the workings and ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood is the founder and former head of Egyptian Islamic Jihad, Sheikh Nabil Naeem. He lived with both Osama bin Laden and current al-Qaeda head Ayman al-Zawahiri, and witnessed the formation of al-Qaeda. In Afghanistan, he served as bin Laden’s personal bodyguard, and was Zawahiri’s long-time “right arm.”

On my last trip to Cairo, my colleague Steve Coughlin and I had the opportunity to interview Sheikh Nabil at his office for more than nine hours over two days.

During that interview we discussed a number of topics, including the trajectory of the global jihadist movement, the development of terrorist organizations in the Sinai, and his experience with EIJ and al-Qaeda until his arrest and eventual rejection of jihadist ideology.


But at the end of our interview with Sheikh Nabil, he began explaining how the Muslim Brotherhood is “one of the most dangerous organizations.”

In response to that statement, I requested that we video record Sheikh Nabil’s response to our questions on this issue as well as his previous statements on the group, which we exclusively present in translation here.

Along the way, he explodes commonly held myths among the Washington, D.C., foreign policy community, including the claim that the Muslim Brotherhood has renounced violence and that there are no connections between the Brotherhood and terror groups in Sinai.

Q: Why do you believe the Muslim Brotherhood is one of the most dangerous organizations?

Nabil: First we accuse the Obama administration of supporting the Muslim Brotherhood to rule Egypt and supporting Morsi’s presidential campaign. Senator McCain also admitted his support to the Muslim Brotherhood and Morsi.

Accordingly, it is not expected from the Obama administration to neither acknowledge Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization nor acknowledge their ties to other terrorist organizations. That would mean the Obama admin and the Democrats acknowledge and support a terrorist group.

But we know that the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist organization and all their confessions are available at the prosecution office. And I can tell you how the prosecution process work because I have been through questioning for 35 years.

If any torture takes place it might happen in the police station, but never the prosecution and they are very careful in regards to the legal procedure. That is why any confessions at the prosecution are called the matter of all evidence.

I personally know ABM are improvised, as well as AQ too. What they use is Muslim Brotherhood money and they admitted this repeatedly.

Q: The Muslim Brotherhood present themselves in the United States as moderate Islam and the only alternative to al-Qaeda. Since you have witnessed the formation of al-Qaeda, do you believe this is true?

Nabil: First the Muslim Brotherhood presented themselves to Mubarak as the alternative to all the takfiri/terrorist groups in Egypt, but the truth is Muslim Brotherhood are the main sponsors of them alland that is the Muslim Brotherhood’s way in promoting themselves as the alternative.

Like they did with Luxor massacre, they sponsored and supported terrorist groups to attack tourism in Egypt. Back in the 1990s Abu Walid, a Muslim Brotherhood leader who used to live in Germany, traveled to Afghanistan and met with Refaie Taha and Ayman Al-Zawahiri to arrange with them what was later known as the Luxor massacre.

At the same time the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt condemned the attack to convince the audience of their moderation.

This is a simple tactic: in order for the Muslim Brotherhood to appear as moderate group, they need the terrorists to commit acts of terrorism so the people would see the difference.

However, knowing the Muslim Brotherhood means knowing they are devil’s allies.

Q: Back in the 1970s the Muslim Brotherhood renounced violence, but we still see other groups ideologically bound to them like Hamas still using violence. What do you believe?

Nabil: The Muslim Brotherhood are double-faced liars, they claim they renounced violence but I will cite a conversation between Ghassan bin Jiddo and Abdul Monem Abul Fotouh that will sum them up.

Ghassan said you (the Muslim Brotherhood) claim that you renounced violence and you said that you don’t topple regimes, although you used violence with Abdul Nasser in Egypt and when Hamas and Fatah had a disagreement, Hamas committed the Gabalya massacre and their mufti, Youssef Al-Astal, endorsed killing Fatah members and Hamas killed 700 of them in a single day.

It is their deeds versus their words, which would you believe?

The Muslim Brotherhood are terrorists and they killed too many people, even after June 30 and I myself witnessed the Al-Itehadia massacre when they killed 13 innocent citizens — one of them a child because he was carrying Sisi’s poster. They shot him in the back of his head.

Even Ibn Khaldoun Center that is sponsored by the U.S. released a report about the Rabia sit-in and documented about 44 cases of Muslim Brotherhood torturing innocent citizens, 33 of which died of torture.

Q: We are trying to declare the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. What do you believe the Americans should know?

Nabil: I would advise the Americans to read books written by the Muslim Brotherhood about themselves. Dots on Letters by Ahmed Adel Kamal where he proudly documented the Muslim Brotherhood terror attacks calling them jihad. The other book is by Mahmoud Al-Sabbagh called The Truth About the Secret Organization where he listed all the facts about the Muslim Brotherhood militias and how they were used to attack the opposition.

For the present times, Americans should monitor the Muslim Brotherhood and what they do in Syria, Egypt, Libya and everywhere they are.


I will be reporting more from Egypt later this week.

Rep. Louie Gohmert’s Challenge to America

1005437_10201441479741920_1894926056_nBy :

It is not often one hears a member of the U.S. House of Representatives refer to the building of a global Caliphate in the Middle East — something which both Christians and non-Islamist Muslims in that part of the world take very seriously. The idea of a coming global Caliphate is hardly even on the radar for most members of Congress. But in his House floor speech broadcast on C-SPAN last Friday, July 19, 2013, U.S. Representative Louis Gohmert (TX-01) did just that.


Speaking for almost an hour, Gohmert warned that we were witnessing “the rise of a new Ottoman Empire in the Middle East, which, unfortunately, the Obama Administration has helped jumpstart.” He also declared that the rising of the people of Egypt against a radical Islamist Muslim Brotherhood government has caused the “grand scheme of building a great Caliphate” to run into a “huge problem.” The Texas Republican called for the United States government to once again be seen as supporting and defending those seeking true freedom and democracy.

Congressman Gohmert contrasted the so-called Arab Spring with the current “major, incredible, earthshaking revolution going on in Egypt.”  He assessed frankly the Obama Administration’s promotion of the Arab “Spring” and contrasted this with how the United States government and most of the mainstream media now appear to be at odds with those resisting the domination of radical Islam. In addition, Gohmert, who is Vice Chair of the House Judiciary subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security, connected the dots between the Obama Administration’s foreign policy, United States national security, and the increasing persecution of Christians, Jews, and other religious minorities in Islam-dominated parts of the world.

According to foreign policy and terrorism expert Dr. Walid Phares, one House observer called Gohmert’s speech “the most powerful speech in the defense of reformers, democracy seekers, seculars, Christian Copts, and Muslim moderates in Egypt in the history of the US Congress, to date.”  But the congressman’s speech was even more than that. It was a defense of reformers in Egypt and beyond, and it was an education in foreign policy for those who have ears to hear.

Speaking of Libya, Gohmert said that it seemed clear that Ghadafi had stopped supporting terrorism after the U.S. took out Saddam Hussein in 2003. Libya, Algeria, and Mali were actually focused on combating Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) terrorism in the Sahel region. Gohmert recollected how they were told that the U.S. has “no national security interest in Libya” by then Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, but that President Obama decided, with the support of 57 Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) states, as well as NATO states that get oil from Libya, to use U.S. assets to take out Ghadafi.

“Consistency is very important in foreign policy, and yet we don’t seem to be very consistent in using our military powers to oust Ghadafi after he had had a ‘conversion experience’ and was doing what he could to help us fight terrorism,” said Gohmert. This was especially troubling after there was intelligence that Al Qaeda was backing rebels. “We knew that there were radical Islamists trying to drive Ghadafi out,” Gohmert continued, “and this administration did not pause long enough to get an answer to the question: ‘If we drive Ghadafi out, would we be more safe in America or less safe?’” Benghazi appears to have answered that question.

Gohmert warned of similar inconsistency in actions being contemplated in Syria. The congressman revealed that “it looked like initially these were not al Qaeda backed rebels in Syria, and if we had acted quickly enough, and had someone who did not vote ‘present,’ we could have helped rebels who were not al Qaeda rebels.” But the situation has degenerated, Gohmert lamented. “You have a tyrant leader on one hand, and you have radical Islamists – most of whom would like to destroy the United States as well – challenging him,” he declared. “Where in the world is the interest in spilling American blood or treasure in getting into Syria?” he demanded.

Returning to Egypt, Gohmert described President Morsi’s overreaches of power, the brutality towards the Copts and other Christians, and the drafting of an Islamic constitution in November 2012 that was boycotted by the Christians and liberal secularists alike. These led to the pro-democracy and freedom groupTamarud’s petition for Morsi to step down and for new elections to be held. Ensuring that Egyptian revolution statistics will be enshrined in the congressional record, Gohmert told how that petition garnered over 22 million signatures and noted the 33 million protesters at one demonstration. He exclaimed, “There has never been a demonstration of as many as 20 million people! But the people of Egypt rose up. They recognized that radical Islamists in charge of their country were not a good thing, even if the leaders of our country in the Executive Branch could not see the obvious.”

Gohmert also described the Egyptian people’s anger that their revolution was being described as a “military coup” and that “they were furious at how CNN seemed to take the side of the Muslim Brotherhood over and over.” Gohmert wanted the American people to know what really is happening in Egypt and its significance and so returned to the looming danger of a global Caliphate and how the “major, incredible, earthshaking revolution,” of moderate Muslims, Coptic Christians, and liberal secularists who oppose radical Islam “rose up in greater numbers than has ever arisen anywhere in the world in the whole history of mankind.” And in contrast to anything that U.S. foreign policy was doing, because of “these incredible, freedom-desiring Egyptians,” said Gohmert, “this grand scheme of building a great Caliphate, a new Ottoman Empire, ran into a huge problem.” The American people need to recognize, and be encouraged, not by the Arab winter that was originally called an Arab “Spring,” but by “the true Spring that is now happening in Egypt as moderate Muslims and Coptic Christians and caring secularists have arisen together and said ‘No!’ to radical Islam,” he said.

Gohmert displayed photographs showing the millions and millions of people who demonstrated for freedom. There were also examples of posters denouncing Morsi, the Muslim Brotherhood, radical Islam, and, thanks to U.S. foreign policy, posters condemning not just CNN, but President Obama and U.S. Ambassador to Egypt, Anne Patterson, as Muslim Brotherhood supporters and labeling Patterson the “New Supreme Guide of the Muslim Brotherhood.” Gohmert said that he did not support the signs nor think that they were correct, but that it was important to know what the people of Egypt’s perceptions are about the United States government, based upon our actions. “Of course, the United States government does not support terrorism,” he remonstrated, but “this nation, this Administration, has supported terrorists in Libya, in Egypt, and is now trying to get support for terrorists in Syria,” so it is understandable that Egyptians would accuse us of supporting terrorism.

Read more at Front Page

On Mistaking Mohamed Mursi For His Mask

by Raymond Stock
Foreign Policy Research Institute
February 2013

“You know, when it comes to Egypt, I think, had it not been for the leadership we showed, you might have seen a different outcome there.” — President Barack Obama, “60 Minutes,” January 27, 2013

imagesCA6KQ9BHWith President Mohamed Mursi’s proclamation of a “new republic” on December 26, after the passage of a Constitution that turns Egypt into an Islamist-ruled, pseudo-democratic state, the “January 25th Revolution” came to a predictably disastrous (if still unstable) terminus. As momentous for world history as the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran (should it hold), it represents the formal—if not the final—victory for the Muslim Brotherhood (MB) in its 84-year struggle for power in the land of its birth. Indeed, 2012 will likely be remembered as the year that Islamists made the greatest gains in their quest for a new caliphate in the region. And without a drastic change of course by Washington, 2013 might surpass it by far in progress toward the same, seemingly inexorable end.

Egypt, the largest Arab state, the second largest recipient of U.S. military aid, and our second most important ally in the Middle East, is now in the hands of a hostile regime—an elected one at that—which we continue to treat as a friendly one. Even if the sudden outburst of uncontrolled violence along the Suez Canal since January 26—coupled with escalating political and economic tumult in Cairo and elsewhere—leads to a new military coup, it would likely be managed by the MB from behind the scenes. The irony and the implications are equally devastating. This new reality threatens not only traditional U.S. foreign policy goals of stability in the oil-rich Middle East and security for Israel, but also America’s declared support for democracy in the Arab world. Moreover, the fruits of Islamist “democracy,” should it survive, are catastrophic to the people of Egypt, the region and beyond.

How did all this happen? And what role did the U.S. play?

Excellent piece on the revolution in Egypt and the role Barack Obama has played in it. Read it all at Middle East Forum

Also see Ryan Mauro’s interview of Raymond Stock: Egypt Expert: Morsi Confidently Fooling West at

Raymond Stock

Raymond Stock

Raymond Stock is a Shillman/Ginsburg Writing Fellow at the Middle East Forum and former Visiting Assistant Professor of Arabic and Middle East Studies at Drew University. He has a Ph.D. in Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations from the University of Pennsylvania.Stock lived in Egypt for 20 years and was detained at Cairo Airport in December 2010 and deported back to the U.S. due to his 2009 Foreign Policy Magazine article criticizing then-Egyptian Culture Minister for his policies and anti-Semitism.

He is currently working on a biography of Egyptian Nobel laureate in literature, Naguib Mahfouz.

Raymond Stock: The Arab Spring & Egypt’s Nuclear Weapons Program:

Egypt Begins Descent into Tyranny

By Daniel Greenfield:

Barely two months after taking power, the Muslim Brotherhood has wasted no time in swiftly taking Egypt down the road to a totalitarian state. Its latest target is Al-Dustour, a Christian-owned newspaper, which had condemned President Morsi’s ties to Hamas as a threat to Egyptian national security. Al-Dustour was accused of sedition and stirring up sectarian discord—the latter is code for insulting Islam. Most dangerously, Al-Dustour implied that the Rafah attack had been backed by Morsi’s own Hamas allies to enable him to crack down on the domestic opposition.

Al-Dustour is not the first newspaper to be targeted by the Muslim Brotherhood. The Brotherhood has already used its parliamentary position to name dozens of new editors for Egypt’s major state-owned newspapers, including Al-Ahram. Akhbar Al-Youm, the second-largest newspaper in Egypt, will be run by a descendant of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan al-Bana.

In response to the Islamist hijacking of the Egyptian press, many reporters have spoken out against the move and some have even gone on strike. But the Muslim Brotherhood’s assault on Al-Dustour is a warning that the days of independent newspapers opposed to the regime are numbered. Both Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood have suggested Islamist Turkey as the model for the new Egypt. Now the Muslim Brotherhood is imitating Erdogan’s crackdown on the military as well as his totalitarian control over the Turkish press.

In addition to the Muslim Brotherhood’s assault on the press, one television network, Al Fareen, has already been taken off the air. More are certain to follow. Khaled Salah, the editor of the Youm7 newspaper, was assaulted by Muslim Brotherhood protesters demanding the closure of AlFareen and the arrest of anyone who criticizes Morsi and the Brotherhood.

The Rafah attack by Islamist terrorists plotting to invade Israel that killed 16 Egyptian soldiers has been exploited by the Brotherhood to launch a domestic crackdown on the opposition. The Brotherhood has issued a statement blaming Israel for the attack. But in reality Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood have been the true beneficiaries of the violence.

Morsi has used the attack to sack top Egyptian military leaders including Egypt’s Defense Minister, its Chief of Staff, its head of the General Intelligence Service, its chief of the Presidential Guard and its head of the Republican Guard.  The purge had little to do with making Egypt safer and a great deal to do with Morsi and the Brotherhood seizing the opportunity to displace their only real rivals in the country’s tangled power structure.

The Brotherhood has crowned itself with the “revolutionary” label, describing any attack on its power as an attack on the January 25 Revolution and its martyrs. That familiar use of language emphasizes that Egypt is a revolutionary state and is constantly struggling against seditious and subversive forces. And revolutionary states suppress dissent against revolutionary power through state terror.

Read more at Front Page