Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP) has now officially taken responsibility for the attack on the offices of Charlie Hebdo in Paris last Friday, but denied any involvement in the subsequent attack on the kosher supermarket in Paris.
In a 12-minute video recording, titled “Vengeance for the Prophet,” released by AQAP’s media outlet al Malahim, Sheikh Nasr bin Ali Alanesi said, “We in the Organization of Qa’idatul Jihad in the Arabian Peninsula claim responsibility for this operation as a vengeance for the Messenger of Allah. We clarify to the ummah [the Muslim world] that the one who chose the target, laid the plan and financed the operation, is the leadership of the organization. We did it in compliance with the Command of Allah and supporting His Messenger – peace be upon him.” Alanesi added that “the arrangement” for the operation was “made by” Anwar al Awlaki, the US-born radical cleric who was killed in a US drone strike in September 2011. Awlaki “threatens the West both in his life and after his martyrdom,” he added. Alanesi did not clarify what exact role Awlaki played in planning the attack.
[Update: When asked for more details about Awlaki’s alleged role in the Paris attack, an AQAP source told The Intercept that Awlaki’s role was as the “coordinator between [the AQAP] leadership and the Kouachi brothers.” That still does not resolve the particulars, but the AQAP source would not confirm that Awlaki was personally directing the plot, which was conducted more than three years after Awlaki’s death, saying only that it was a directed by AQAP’s leadership.]
Alanesi warned that the Paris attack marked “a new turning point in the history of confrontation,” adding:
“It has its consequences. Let us not let the disbelievers be more united in their disbelief and insulting the prophets than us in supporting our religion and Prophet. Those are our brothers. They were generous with their lives in supporting our Prophet peace be upon him. So what are we going to do, o Muslim ummah?
Let us support our Prophet, religion and ummah. Each one as per his capability and specialty. This is the Sunnah of Allah that does not change; a confrontation between truth and false until the Day of Judgment. Rise up o Muslim youth in support of your prophet. Be generous with your lives like your predecessors did. Take vengeance for the Muslim blood that is spilled, the honors that are defiled, the Quran that is torn.”
Soon after the massacre last Friday, an AQAP source provided a series of messages taking responsibility for the attacks. Historically, the group has released such claims through its own networks and social media channels. Now that this has happened, it seems very likely AQAP played a role in the attacks. The extent of that role remains unclear.
Read the full AQAP claim of responsibility in English
For in-depth analysis of AQAP, Anwar al Awlaki and the Paris attacks, see our previous coverage here and here.
I have not formed an opinion or done much reading, but my hobby is the human face. The two young men pictured are followers, not leaders. Not that bright nor willful.
Patsies. They would require much shepherding toward goals.
Great stuff as always this morning on DN!, though I’ve always thought of you as more rebel and less storm trooper…
More proof that the CIA controls AL Qaeda. The Paris attacks are clearly another false flag of the Gladio style. The fact that it is being covered and presented here as reality is saddening. I thought the Intercept was supposed to be our great savior from MSM? What happened guys? Did it cost a lot for Omidyar to buy your integrity? Or is this rag just another CIA ministry of truth operation?
Worthwhile!
Europe’s terror attacks: The blowback from Western intervention
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/01/17/pers-j17.html
jeremy–
much appreciated that you took the time to flesh out what we think we know from what others are just putting out there as fact. i find the timing of the attacks–two days after Hollande stated that France should end the sanctions against Russia–to be very curious. and the whole ‘je suis charlie’ thing feels manufactured. looking over bbc’s description of the incident itself, it was humorous that the attackers at first went to the wrong address (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30708237). it made little sense that after the horrific murder of 12 people (and got away), the attackers then proceed to rob a convenience store (where they were then killed). doesn’t seem likely that after getting away from a massacre that one would then go out and rob a convenience store. it seems as though the two events were unrelated. i wonder whether the Hebdo attackers were the same as those who robbed the convenience store, and what evidence there is that shows that, indeed, they were the same individuals. thanks again for your analysis of this bizarre and internationally transforming event.
The brothers were not killed in a convenience store in Paris!
Is this the Al Qaeda who hates apostates but only kills other Muslims…99% of the time, and helps out the USSA / Israel in a roundabout way? Or the other one that “hates us for our freedoms?”
I’m so confused…
if scahill says so, it must be so, right?
Jeremy when will someone of your standing write up a piece on why the 2006 Lancet report that stated that at that point 650,000 Iraqi people had been killed as a direct result of the invasion. Why is it that at a time when the US can see a fly on the back of a camels ass with drones that there is not a real count of Iraqi lives lost. Why not a thoroughly written piece on the dead, injured and millions displaced in Iraq? Please…can you apply your in depth reporting to a full report on the Lancet, Iraq Body Count and the Pentagon report about how many deaths, injuries etc there have been in Iraq
It has been pretty firmly established that Al Quade is a CIA creation so…doesn’t that mean that the CIA is responsible?
No, the CIA did not “create” Al Qaeda.
The CIA’s association is that they funded elements of the Mujahideen during the Russian-Afghan war and some fighters later joined or collaborated with AQ and the Taliban. But the vast majority of AQ was foreign Arabs (OBL), primarily funded by Saudi Arabia. Granted, Saudi Arabia received U.S. funding, but the U.S. and the CIA did not create AQ.
Some required reading:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA%E2%80%93al-Qaeda_controversy
Better to read Peter Dale Scott, ‘The Road to 9/11′.
Or watch documentary, ‘The Power of Nightmares’.
Or read Robin Cook’s statements.
Or read Nafeez Ahmed, ‘The War on Freedom’
Or study the BCCI scandal
Or read Sybil Edmonds’ testimony.
Or watch ‘Counter-Intelligence’ by Scott Noble.
All these things need to be considered above and beyond a Wiki page. The history of Al Qaida has the CIA written all over it.
Am I expected to purchase or find the text necessary to substantiate your point? Seems a bit unfair but okay. Using Google books, I picked the first item on your list:
Peter Dale Scott, The Road to 9/11. I searched for all instances of the CIA and found this:
It goes on to talk about William Casey backing an ISI plan to recruit and train militants and that more than 100,000 Islamic militants were trained in Pakistan, in camps overseen by CIA and MI6, “with the SAS training future al-Qaida and Taliban fighters in bomb-making and other black arts.” This was called Operation Cyclone.
I can see that this author has credibility. He uses extensive footnotes and cites reliable people, including Steve Coll, author of Ghost Wars. Here’s the problem though – nowhere does he support the claim that the CIA created al Qaeda. He doesn’t even seem to be convinced that they funded AQ.
You are 0/1
I went to the wikipedia page for the BBC Documentary, the Power of Nightmares.
So this documentary isn’t claiming the CIA created al Qaeda. It is claiming that prosecutors conjured up the concept of AQ to bolster the U.S. national security apparatus and that the Bush administration used it to scare us. The latter part may contain truth but as Peter Bergen reported,
So you’re 0/2, but I’ll give you this – both of those two items seem very interesting, so thanks!
Also, I am not solely reliant on a single Wikipedia page. I’ve read Ghost Wars and the Looming Tower, which provide highly detailed accounts of the formation of AQ. Neither of those books attributed creation of AQ to the CIA but that they may have funded groups containing fighters that later joined AQ and the Taliban.
@Nate
False dilemmas aside (‘create’??) , here are a few lines from the start of Chapter 9 of Scott’s book as an encouragement to read it more fully (and in that, to supplement the version put forward by establishment insiders like Coll):
‘The extraordinary cover-up concerning the United State’s relationship to the 9/11 plot is the denouement of this book. But it is inseparable from the extraordinary cover-up preceding 9/11, with respect to one of the plot’s central figures: Ali Abdelsaoud Mohamed. In the last chapter we looked at Mohamed as a man who was important in Al Qaeda and personally close to Osama Bin Laden. He was also intimate and important to U.S. intelligence, although one would never guess this from the 9/11 Commission Report. Finally, he was the principle trainer for the terrorists who bombed the World Trade Centre in 1993 and destroyed it eight years later.
Mohamed, who worked at times for FBI, CIA and the U.S. Army, was in the 1980’s a sergeant on active duty with the Fifth U.S. Special Forces at Fort Bragg.
……
Only in 2006 did the American public learn that he trained Al Qaeda terrorists in how to hijack airliners, including “how to smuggle boxcutters onto airplanes”.
…..
U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald, who had negotiated a plea bargain with Mohamed, testified at some length about him to the 9/11 Comission:
‘Ali Mohamed… trained most of most of Al Qaeda’s top leadership – including Bin Laden and Zawahiri- and most of Al Qaeda’s top trainers. Mohamed taught surveillance, counter surveillance, assassinations, kidnappings, codes, ciphers, and other intelligence techniques. Mohamed surveilled the American embassy in Nairobi in 1993…..’ ‘
So it goes a bit further than ‘funding’.
@Myers:
I feel like the conversational goalpost, so to say, is being moved. But aside from that, Mohamed trained Bin Laden and company in the 1980s and early 1990s and was a double agent, something you did not note in your quotations. This is critical as you have to distinguish between his CIA/FBI/Military roles and what he was doing covertly for militants in Afghanistan, Sudan and elsewhere as part of his deception.
So to put this in chronological order. Mohamed trained Bin Laden, Zawahari, and others, was instructed to spy on the U.S. to find targets in retaliation to Somalia, and became a U.S. citizen. He was recruited by the FBI, CIA, and U.S. Army for purposes that aren’t very clear, while continuing to train militants into the early 1990s. He is then indicted. At what point does this implicate the CIA? Once this guy told Egyptians he was working for U.S. intelligence, it seems the CIA dropped him like dirty laundry.
@Nate
‘At what point does this implicate the CIA?’
I don’t understand what you are not seeing here; you write that US intelligence agencies funded Al Qaeda terrorists, you agree that a US intelligence asset Mohamed trained the terrorists, if we consider Michael Springman’s testimony that some of the 911 terrorists got their visas from the CIA field office situated within the US consulate in Jeddah, or that some of them trained at airports known for their long historical connections to CIA activities (Venice FL)…..and so on, or am I ‘moving the goalposts’ again..?
Here is Scott’s concluding remark from the chapter on Mohamed:
‘It is time to confront the reality that these [US intelligence] agencies themselves, by there own sponsorship and protection of terrorist, have aggravated the greatest threats to out national security.’
We’re so far away from the original argument about the CIA “creating” Al Qaeda, that it’s hard to tell what we’re even arguing anymore. It’s turned into a discussion of the CIA’s level of interaction with AQ and AQ-associated militants.
No. as I originally said: “The CIA’s association is that they funded elements of the Mujahideen during the Russian-Afghan war and some fighters later joined or collaborated with AQ and the Taliban.”
Also, there’s direct funding (above) and indirect funding (US > Saudis > Wahabbi Extremists)
Obama admin has now killed more people with drone strikes than died in 9/11.
http://online.flipbuilder.com/asew/rpwt/
Yes, the CIA did create Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda means the Base as in The DataBASE. It was a database of fighters who would go to Afghanistan and fight the Soviet forces. Osama bin Laden was a bag man, a pass through for Saudi money and American weapons to fund and supply the Mujahideen. The Arabs weren’t big on databases in the late 1970s and early 1980s. RDBMS Databases are an American invention.
This allegation comes from a single person and is refuted by many, nor is there any evidence. If you want to hang your hat on that shaky rack, knock yourself out.
Ok. Let’s assume this is true. This is an act of war. The French should give the country harboring these people an ultimatum.
They should introduce a resolution at the UN Security Council demanding the immediate extradition of the perpetrators, if not to France, then to the world court in the Hague. Hand over the these people (produce a list of suspects and why they are suspected) for trial or a State of War will exist between France and the harboring country. Charge them with Crimes against the peace and any other charges that apply.
In other words, use the international system of justice.
Wanna see just how the One God thingy and Jewish folk REALLY got started
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7iQRFP_e90
Wait are you punking us? Is this really an entry to the Worlds Wackiest Beard Contest. Because that is one wacky looking dude. Too bad he kills people who draw cartoons because otherwise he could totally get his own show on Comedy Central.
I’m guessing Chris Hayes’ producers worked really hard to limit conversation to AQAP, as opposed to the wide-open opportunities Alex Wagner provided.
And yet in one short sentence, concerning relative threats to America, you managed to indict NRA policies and crazy white people shooting up schools.
Good stuff, thank you!
-Al-Qaeda must be the most obvious American puppets-. Does anyone even still believe they are Self-Motivated and Anti-West?
-Followed closely in second place (in obviousness) is:…ISIS, with all their Drama Productions. (Besides, how lucky is their geographical location, huh!)
-A distant third place…would be the Muppet Show.
You know what, I might be wrong, but it just seems obvious to me. Either way, we’ll see who REALLY benefits from it eventually.
Also, a group like “Hammas” they are just Palestinian Freedom Fighters.
Same with the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, also just Freedom Fighters
(I notice the Western Media sometimes (no, almost always) blurs the line between these Freedom-fighters, and groups like ISIS, or Al Qaeda)
So if he’s still coordinating after death? It sounds like Awlaki is a new prophet. Mohammed said he was the last prophet. This connection to heaven is strong. I know they’re running low on virgins now that Osama is there. Time to strap some more bombs on little girls. Also, at least for a while, when they execute virgin females the Mullahs should not order the girls raped first if their virgins. You know, to insure they go down instead of up. Maybe they do go to heaven but it’s either let them up there or stop awarding 70 virgins for suicide terror missions. Economics 101.
Interestingly, weirdly, out of the two-faced mouth of the Zionist-supporting establishment itself:
*Joe Biden: Terrorism is no ‘existential threat’ to US*
“Let me say it again: We face no existential threat — none — to our way of life or our ultimate security,” Biden said. “You are twice as likely to be struck by lightning as you are to be affected by a terrorist event in the United States.”
http://thehill.com/policy/international/219659-biden-terrorism-no-existential-threat-to-us
It’s good to see Jeremy Scahill’s informed and thoughtful reporting on this matter, his uncompromised professional credibility continues to demonstrate the importance of succinct factual information to an informed public understanding; THE//INTERCEPT is made better by his presence!
“Work is love made visible.” KG
As Usual,
EA
Wow, you should be his publicist!
We are supposed to believe Al Qaeda in the arabian penn. chats on the phone with ‘The Intercept’ in order to relate how their witness protection plan member anwar al awaki , son of a famuous yemeni member of government, just before his death (no body found) decided to plan an attack in paris
And the semi retarded kosher market shooter how did he get all that money and all those weapons across the border from Bulgaria (AP)? And then upload a video with his odn death from police footage?
and all these deranged terrorists are self organizing, like the red brigades ?
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/1999/420/in1.htm
preposterous.
OT–nice, vigorous push back against the discredited mainstream media fear machine on cnn following Greenwald’s critique on democracy now.
the intercept really looks like they’re out for blood this year. good. thanks.
Well said and I agree.
Jeremy on Monday:
He might not have been THE leader of AQAP (who even said this?), but Awlaki clearly had a leadership role. Whether he had the title of “head of external operations,” or some type of “Deputy” is not as relevant as the actual role he had. The video supports Obama’s assertion that Awlaki was indeed in a high level leadership position. Alenesi says:
The background video then pans through old footage of a group of people and focuses on Awlaki. Alenesi continues naming Zawahari(?), Bin Laden, and then Awlaki:
Rewind to Jeremy on Monday:
A lot has changed in two days.
Eric Holder, for one:
__________________________________________
Emptywheel
Kitt, I am trying to emphasize the difference between Awlaki being “the leader” or head honcho vs. being “a leader” or part of the leadership structure.
Wuhayshi has been “the leader” for as long as I remember, so my point was that I haven’t heard anybody consider Awlaki the head of AQAP, and hence my question.
As holder says and in support of my main point, Awlaki was “a leader” and that is supported by Alenesi statements.
Scahill has always been an apologist for Al-Awaki. And this week he has been a PR agent for AQP reproducing their vile press release in full, rather than just quoting its essence. The sad part is that he performs this service for free.
Just to be accurate, what evidence that Awlaki had any operational input in this latest attack was presented in this video? Anyone can make statements claiming that someone orchestrated the attack but that is not credible without corroboration.
His statement along along with Cherif Kouachi’s similar claims are both credible evidence and should not just be dismissed as you are trying to do here. I didn’t say it was proof, but strong, actual evidence. Stack this on top of all the other evidence, such as what Abdulmutallab said about Awlaki’s role in the Xmas day ’09 attempt, all the email interactions with the Fort Hood shooter, the views of Harold Koh and Morten Storm. Awlaki may not just be the mere victim that Jeremy makes him out to be.
Answer this, what type of corroboration would suffice?
With all this recent talk of the “underwear bomber” again I’m surprised Kurt Haskell’s name hasn’t come up. Kurt and his wife were on the flight with Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab and witnessed him board the plane without a passport
‘Underwear Bomber was working for the CIA’ Guardian 9/5/12
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/09/underwear-bomber-working-for-cia?CMP=twt_gu
Riiiiight. Suuuuure. Al-Awlaki arranged everything, despite being dead for three years.
And here comes the cognitive dissonance.
I’m guessing you didn’t believe the USG when they said Awlaki was implicated in several plots?
If yes, now you don’t believe it when you hear it from the terrorist organization from which he came? Please explain to me how you make sense of this.
Also, just because you are dead when a plan is carried out, doesn’t mean you weren’t involved in the planning if it occurred years ago. Why these guys waited 3 years is a good question, but the time lapse doesn’t mean the brothers and AQAP lied about interactions with Awlaki.
Sure he did! It went like this: AQAP: “You know any young-ish, unemployed, pissed off, starving Muslim guys who would like some food and an all-expense paid trip to Yemen?” Awlaki: “Why yes, I do”. That’s the “coordinator between [the AQAP] leadership and the Kouachi brothers” role described in Scahill’s article. Voila!
Mr. Scahill..
Since the requested ‘anonymity’ of the // intercept’s source no longer applies, will you now provide the name of said individual?
Much appreciated.
[snip]
‘Arabic-language excerpts from the statement are being circulated widely on Twitter. AQAP has not made any claims of responsibility through its official communication channels. A prominent AQAP cleric released an audio recording today praising the attack, but made no reference to AQAP playing an operational role. [Update: Shortly after The Intercept published this statement, an AQAP official, Bakhsaruf al-Danqaluh, tweeted, in Arabic, the exact paragraphs the AQAP source provided us. This is still not an official AQAP claim of responsibility, but it suggests such a statement may be forthcoming or is being internally debated within the group.]
Earlier in the afternoon, a source within al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula gave The Intercept a separate message praising the attack on Charlie Hebdo. “The lions of Jihad have stood. The followers of Muhammad – peace be upon him – have never forgotten,” the message declared. “Do not look for links or affiliation with Jihadi fronts. It is enough they are Muslims. They are Mujahideen. This is the Jihad of the Ummah. So France, are you ready for more attacks?”
From the Winter 2014 issue of AQAP’s Inspire, a Muslim prays next to a pressure cooker, above an image of a French passport.
The source, who demanded anonymity because the group had not yet released an official statement, also told The Intercept..’
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/01/09/alwaki-paris/#comments
@suave donger
>”Moments after The Intercept published these statements, an AQAP official, Bakhsaruf al-Danqaluh tweeted, in Arabic, the exact paragraphs the AQAP source provided us.”
From Scahill’s last (yesterday!) … fwiw.
*note. btw, this guy is not listed in my book on ‘kings and ecclesiastics’ … and I can’t locate ‘AQAP’ on the map!
Remember Douglas Valentine’s critique of ‘Dirty Wars’ and Scahill’s journalistic style and depth (or lack of)?
I found this aswell:
http://www.counterpunch.org/2003/03/08/will-the-real-daniel-ellsberg-please-stand-up/
Ellsberg hung out with some pretty psychopathic murderous scheming assholes in Nam, yet ‘the left’ seem unable to broach this part of his history. Western idolatry.
“..if you keep listening to the news, and focusing on what happens today, and getting all emotionally involved in the latest ‘scandal de jour’, and you keep thinking that time exists only for the moment, and you don’t understand where these things begin, and the backgrounds of the players, and their relationships with each other, you will always continue to be dumbfounded, and confused…..you’ve got to make an effort, to know that these things are planned out years in advance…” Valentine 2013
It is my opinion that “killing for peace”, is like ” f…..g for virginity”. Have I missed something? Does claiming responsibility, excuse barbarism? In the civilised world that I grew up in people were not proud to have MURDERED another human being. Modern day terrorists, trip over each other to own up to killing innocent people. I think that they are taking barbarism to a new level.
There is no winning to be had, JUST SUFFERING.
Well Sheikh Nasr bin Ali Alanesi, I don’t quite know what to say to that. But a few things do come to mind…
1) If you do believe in Islam and Mohammed as the prophet of Peace, then you are a contradiction. Violence begets violence.
2) Listen to the average muslim on the street. You speak for nearly none.
3) If in fact you and your associates are taking responsibility for a mass murder conspiracy across international boundaries -then maybe you should take a look out your window (or cave) for that not so friendly drone. It might be the last thing you see.
4) If you do think that the average muslim will support your existence for lalying this horrific attack at the lap of all muslims -then I can only quote a ‘Far Side’ slide of a duck surrounded by hunters with his lawyer standing next to him: “These are not my people, I cannot help you.” -God willing.
From today’s New York Times Op-Ed by Mustafa Akyol, author of “Islam Without Extremes: A Muslim Case for Liberty”:
“Islam’s Problem With Blasphemy”:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/14/opinion/islams-problem-with-blasphemy.html?_r=0
Thanks Charlene, that article just cured my insomnia.
And then there was this little article in The New York Times today titled, “Newspaper in Israel Scrubs Women From Photo of Paris Unity Rally”:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/14/world/newspaper-in-israel-scrubs-women-from-a-photo-of-paris-unity-rally.html
Charlie Hebdo could make a TRULY funny cartoon out of this article!!!!
I agree with u . People like him calling themselves muslims should be punished . This is wt all mainstream muslims like me believe in, but the key is to disintegrate those whom he is addressing to,,, muslim youth. Reprinting of cartoons is giving different message .Have a look at #whoismuhammad , muslim sensitivities should also be addressed. This tit for tat approach in terms of generalization is not positive on practical grounds
Killing people for peace seems to be the favorite line used by all of the world’s leading hypocrites.
It’s too bad al Qaeda, ISIS, and the leaders of NATO don’t get a room and f##k each other to death.
The world would be a better place without all these predatory lying frauds.
Once everyone who doesn’t think like they do is killed, there will be peace.
nobody taking credit for a few days? hmm, any advantage for us to do so? hmm. ok, put out a statement …
The Charlie Hebdo massacre was Wed Jan 7, not Friday Jan 9. The massacre at the kosher supermarket was Friday Jan 9.