To watch the discussion, please visit the link below:
http://frontlineclub.com/events/2011/01/first-wednesday-inside-al-qaeda.html
First Wednesday: Inside Al-Qaeda
Our 2011 events get off to a flying start with a look at the inner workings of the extremist network Al-Qaeda.
Paddy O'Connell of BBC Radio 4's Broadcasting House will be hosting our First Wednesday discussion of the year. With an expert panel we will be examining how the operation works.
Where is it geographically strongest? What form does the organisation take and what tactics does it employ? How has it evolved and how will it evolve in the future?
To address these questions, joining us will be:
Dr Maha Azzam, Associate Fellow, Chatham House.
Investigative journalist and Al-Qaeda expert Camille Tawil. Tawil has covered Islamic militant groups for Al-Hayat Arabic daily in London since the early 1990s and is the author of The Armed Islamic Movement in Algeria - from the FIS to the GIA and Brothers in Arms - the Story of al-Qaeda and the Arab jihadists.
Deepak Tripathi, historian, journalist, researcher and author of Breeding Ground: Afghanistan and the Origins of Islamist Terrorism and Overcoming the Bush Legacy in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Noman Benotman, a senior analyst at Quilliam. He was previously a leader of the jihadist Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) and an associate of senior al-Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Sudan. In September 2010, he published an open letter to his former colleague Osama bin Laden calling on him to abandon violence.
Join us in the New Year for a lively public meeting which will mix the views of the experts and commentators with contributions from our audience.
Paddy O'Connell of BBC Radio 4's Broadcasting House will be hosting our First Wednesday discussion of the year. With an expert panel we will be examining how the operation works.
Where is it geographically strongest? What form does the organisation take and what tactics does it employ? How has it evolved and how will it evolve in the future?
To address these questions, joining us will be:
Dr Maha Azzam, Associate Fellow, Chatham House.
Investigative journalist and Al-Qaeda expert Camille Tawil. Tawil has covered Islamic militant groups for Al-Hayat Arabic daily in London since the early 1990s and is the author of The Armed Islamic Movement in Algeria - from the FIS to the GIA and Brothers in Arms - the Story of al-Qaeda and the Arab jihadists.
Deepak Tripathi, historian, journalist, researcher and author of Breeding Ground: Afghanistan and the Origins of Islamist Terrorism and Overcoming the Bush Legacy in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Noman Benotman, a senior analyst at Quilliam. He was previously a leader of the jihadist Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) and an associate of senior al-Qaeda leaders in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Sudan. In September 2010, he published an open letter to his former colleague Osama bin Laden calling on him to abandon violence.
Join us in the New Year for a lively public meeting which will mix the views of the experts and commentators with contributions from our audience.
3 comments:
Dear Mr. Tawil,
I'm a 20 years old French student who is currently studying History at Nanterre University.
First,I'd like to thank you for your writings, I really enjoy reading them.
I have not read "Brothers in arms" yet, but sure thing I will order it soon!
Now, I'd like to make some comments on what Numan bin Uthamn claims in "The other face of al Qaeda". Although this series really impressed me in terms of both infos and analysis, part of what bin Uthman said has made me pretty skeptical.
Indeed, bin Uthman says that al Qa'ida didn't expect the US invasion of Afghanistan and rather thought that the US administration would respond to 9/11 attacks with only few hundreds cruise missiles.
But that differs completely from all things I've read about 9/11 aims from al Qa'ida itself.
For instance, Abu'l Walid al Misri writings explain very well that there was a wide-spread feeling among the Arab Afghan community that the war was coming well before 9/11. The jihadi milieu in Afghanistan expected this conflict.
I'm sure you already know the episode where Abu'l Walid clashes with both Usama bin Ladin and Ayman al Zawahiri about the decision to carry out large-scale operations against the US.
In this episode, the two al Qa'ida leaders argue that a war is inevitable with the US so there is no reason to stop the coming operations. They consider them as kind of "pre-emptive" attacks.
There are many more writings on this issue like Sayf al Adil's explanation of the 9/11 aims or As-Sahab release « Knowledge is for acting upon » where bin Ladin says: « We are about to move, with Allah's permission, to a number of places. And the nature of the conditions after the strike will require of you things easy for those for whom Allah makes it easy ». This statement was made before 9/11 attacks and it's clear that bin Ladin was fully aware that Afghanistan will be invaded.
I could keep going because there are many other evidence that completely contradict what Numan bin Uthman claims. And by evidence I mean first-hand account like his, not inaccurate reports from ill-informed journalists.
All of these point to the fact al Qa'ida knew the war was going to happen. They prepared for such a big retaliation. In fact, they even hoped for it since they considered US troops as cowards.
So what is your stance towards this bin Uthman's claim? It's not like he doesn't know what he's talking about since he was in contact and lived with these jihadis and hence, was a key witness of this period.
On the other hand, he is the only figure of that calibre to claim such a thing. Besides, he is now an opponent of al Qa'ida ideology so maybe he added some false facts to his story in order to weaken al Qa'ida credibility.
Or maybe that at the time of the meeting, al Qa'ida wasn't expecting a massive retaliation from the US. But that just doesn't fit with 9/11 aims.
It would be very nice of you if I could have your take on my comments and maybe even bin Uthman's.
Here is my e mail: Jackson.kvn@gmail.com
Best,
Kévin.
Dear Mr. Tawil,
I'm a 20 years old French student who is currently studying History at Nanterre University.
First,I'd like to thank you for your writings, I really enjoy reading them.
I have not read "Brothers in arms" yet, but sure thing I will order it soon!
Now, I'd like to make some comments on what Numan bin Uthamn claims in "The other face of al Qaeda". Although this series really impressed me in terms of both infos and analysis, part of what bin Uthman said has made me pretty skeptical.
Indeed, bin Uthman says that al Qa'ida didn't expect the US invasion of Afghanistan and rather thought that the US administration would respond to 9/11 attacks with only few hundreds cruise missiles.
But that differs completely from all things I've read about 9/11 aims from al Qa'ida itself.
For instance, Abu'l Walid al Misri writings explain very well that there was a wide-spread feeling among the Arab Afghan community that the war was coming well before 9/11. The jihadi milieu in Afghanistan expected this conflict.
I'm sure you already know the episode where Abu'l Walid clashes with both Usama bin Ladin and Ayman al Zawahiri about the decision to carry out large-scale operations against the US.
In this episode, the two al Qa'ida leaders argue that a war is inevitable with the US so there is no reason to stop the coming operations. They consider them as kind of "pre-emptive" attacks.
There are many more writings on this issue like Sayf al Adil's explanation of the 9/11 aims or As-Sahab release « Knowledge is for acting upon » where bin Ladin says: « We are about to move, with Allah's permission, to a number of places. And the nature of the conditions after the strike will require of you things easy for those for whom Allah makes it easy ». This statement was made before 9/11 attacks and it's clear that bin Ladin was fully aware that Afghanistan will be invaded.
I could keep going because there are many other evidence that completely contradict what Numan bin Uthman claims. And by evidence I mean first-hand account like his, not inaccurate reports from ill-informed journalists.
All of these point to the fact al Qa'ida knew the war was going to happen. They prepared for such a big retaliation. In fact, they even hoped for it since they considered US troops as cowards.
So what is your stance towards this bin Uthman's claim? It's not like he doesn't know what he's talking about since he was in contact and lived with these jihadis and hence, was a key witness of this period.
On the other hand, he is the only figure of that calibre to claim such a thing. Besides, he is now an opponent of al Qa'ida ideology so maybe he added some false facts to his story in order to weaken al Qa'ida credibility.
Or maybe that at the time of the meeting, al Qa'ida wasn't expecting a massive retaliation from the US. But that just doesn't fit with 9/11 aims.
It would be very nice of you if I could have your take on my comments and maybe even bin Uthman's.
Here is my e mail: Jackson.kvn@gmail.com
Best,
Kévin.
Dear Mr. Tawil,
I'm a 20 years old French student who is currently studying History at Nanterre University.
First,I'd like to thank you for your writings, I really enjoy reading them.
I have not read "Brothers in arms" yet, but sure thing I will order it soon!
Now, I'd like to make some comments on what Numan bin Uthamn claims in "The other face of al Qaeda". Although this series really impressed me in terms of both infos and analysis, part of what bin Uthman said has made me pretty skeptical.
Indeed, bin Uthman says that al Qa'ida didn't expect the US invasion of Afghanistan and rather thought that the US administration would respond to 9/11 attacks with only few hundreds cruise missiles.
But that differs completely from all things I've read about 9/11 aims from al Qa'ida itself.
For instance, Abu'l Walid al Misri writings explain very well that there was a wide-spread feeling among the Arab Afghan community that the war was coming well before 9/11. The jihadi milieu in Afghanistan expected this conflict.
I'm sure you already know the episode where Abu'l Walid clashes with both Usama bin Ladin and Ayman al Zawahiri about the decision to carry out large-scale operations against the US.
In this episode, the two al Qa'ida leaders argue that a war is inevitable with the US so there is no reason to stop the coming operations. They consider them as kind of "pre-emptive" attacks.
There are many more writings on this issue like Sayf al Adil's explanation of the 9/11 aims or As-Sahab release « Knowledge is for acting upon » where bin Ladin says: « We are about to move, with Allah's permission, to a number of places. And the nature of the conditions after the strike will require of you things easy for those for whom Allah makes it easy ». This statement was made before 9/11 attacks and it's clear that bin Ladin was fully aware that Afghanistan will be invaded.
I could keep going because there are many other evidence that completely contradict what Numan bin Uthman claims. And by evidence I mean first-hand account like his, not inaccurate reports from ill-informed journalists.
All of these point to the fact al Qa'ida knew the war was going to happen. They prepared for such a big retaliation. In fact, they even hoped for it since they considered US troops as cowards.
So what is your stance towards this bin Uthman's claim? It's not like he doesn't know what he's talking about since he was in contact and lived with these jihadis and hence, was a key witness of this period.
On the other hand, he is the only figure of that calibre to claim such a thing. Besides, he is now an opponent of al Qa'ida ideology so maybe he added some false facts to his story in order to weaken al Qa'ida credibility.
Or maybe that at the time of the meeting, al Qa'ida wasn't expecting a massive retaliation from the US. But that just doesn't fit with 9/11 aims.
It would be very nice of you if I could have your take on my comments and maybe even bin Uthman's.
Here is my e mail: Jackson.kvn@gmail.com
Best,
Kévin.
Post a Comment