Jump to content

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Quote

https://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2017/11/analysis-cia-releases-massive-trove-of-osama-bin-ladens-files.php

The files provide new details concerning al Qaeda’s relationship with Iran.

One never-before-seen 19-page document contains a senior jihadist’s assessment of the group’s relationship with Iran. The author explains that Iran offered some “Saudi brothers” in al Qaeda “everything they needed,” including “money, arms” and “training in Hezbollah camps in Lebanon, in exchange for striking American interests in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf.” Iranian intelligence facilitated the travel of some operatives with visas, while sheltering others. Abu Hafs al-Mauritani, an influential ideologue prior to 9/11, helped negotiate a safe haven for his jihadi comrades inside Iran. But the author of the file, who is clearly well-connected, indicates that al Qaeda’s men violated the terms of the agreement and Iran eventually cracked down on the Sunni jihadists’ network, detaining some personnel. Still, the author explains that al Qaeda is not at war with Iran and some of their “interests intersect,” especially when it comes to being an “enemy of America.”

Bin Laden’s files show the two sides have had heated disagreements. There has been hostility between the two. Al Qaeda even penned a letter to Ayatollah Khamenei demanding the release of family members held in Iranian custody. Other files show that al Qaeda kidnapped an Iranian diplomat to exchange for its men and women. Bin Laden himself considered plans to counter Iran’s influence throughout the Middle East, which he viewed as pernicious.

However, bin Laden urged caution when it came to threatening Iran. In a previously released letter, bin Laden described Iran as al Qaeda’s “main artery for funds, personnel, and communication.” And despite their differences, Iran continued to provide crucial support for al Qaeda’s operations.

In a series of designations and other official statements issued since July 2011, the US Treasury and State Departments have repeatedly targeted al Qaeda’s “core facilitation pipeline” inside Iran. Sources familiar with the intelligence used to justify those designations say they are based, in part, on the Abbottabad files. It is likely that still more revelations concerning al Qaeda’s relationship with Iran remain to be found in the cache made available today.

 

Quote

https://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/2017/07/state-department-iran-continues-to-host-al-qaedas-core-facilitation-pipeline.php

Since July 2011, the US Treasury and State Departments have repeatedly stated that the Iranian regime allows al Qaeda to maintain a key facilitation network on its soil. This formerly clandestine network is the result of a specific “agreement” between the Iranian government and al Qaeda’s leadership.

On July 19, the State Department once again pointed to the relationship. “Since at least 2009,” State’s Country Reports on Terrorism 2016 reads, “Iran has allowed AQ facilitators to operate a core facilitation pipeline through the country, enabling AQ to move funds and fighters to South Asia and Syria.”

Iran also “remained unwilling to bring to justice senior al-Qa’ida (AQ) members it continued to detain and has refused to publicly identify the members in its custody,” Foggy Bottom said, echoing language found in previous reports.

In its terrorism reports for 2015 and 2014, the State Department implied that al Qaeda’s Iran-based network was a thing of the past, saying the Iranian government “previously allowed AQ facilitators to operate.” But Country Reports on Terrorism 2016, released last week, subtly revised that language.

It is often assumed that the two sides can’t cooperate because of theological differences. However, the relationship has been repeatedly documented by official sources, such as the 9/11 Commission, US courts, intelligence agencies and various others. At times, al Qaeda itself has conceded that there is a level of collusion, despite the group’s blistering anti-Iranian rhetoric. A key al Qaeda defector offered his own explanation of the arrangement in a newsletter published by the Islamic State. After the Islamic State and al Qaeda became bitter rivals, the so-called caliphate even accused al Qaeda of prohibiting terrorist attacks inside Iran.

A document presumably authored by Osama bin Laden in 2007 refers to Iran as al Qaeda’s “main artery for funds, personnel, and communication.” That same letter referred to the “hostages” held by Iran, meaning those al Qaeda figures who were held in some form of detention and not allowed to freely operate. Bin Laden was not against attacking Iran in principle; he simply did not think the costs of such action were worth it.

Iran’s relationship with al Qaeda has survived for years, despite numerous disagreements and conflicts between the two. For instance, one file recovered in bin Laden’s Abbottabad lair shows that he was troubled by Iran’s attempt to expand across the Middle East and he conceived of a plan to combat the Shiite jihadists’ growing footprint. Al Qaeda has also kidnapped Iranian diplomats in order force hostage exchanges. Several high-level al Qaeda leaders were reportedly released as part of one such exchange in 2015, although their status beforehand inside Iran was murky.

Most importantly, the two sides are clearly at odds in Syria and Yemen, where they have fought each other and affiliated proxies for several years.

Yet, throughout all of this, Iran has allowed al Qaeda to maintain a key facilitation hub.

In July 2016, for instance, the US Treasury Department sanctioned three senior al Qaeda leaders “located in Iran.” One of them, Faisal Jassim Mohammed Al Amri Al Khalidi (a.k.a. Abu Hamza al Khalidi), has served as al Qaeda’s “Military Commission Chief” — meaning he was one of the most important figures in the group’s international network. Al Khalidi was identified in Osama bin Laden’s files as part of a “new generation” of leadership al Qaeda groomed to replace their fallen comrades. As Treasury’s July 2016 designations made clear, some of al Qaeda’s most important men continued to operate inside Iran. [See FDD’s Long War Journal report, Treasury designates 3 senior al Qaeda members in Iran.]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Gaius I. Caesar said:

@Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī I don't know, seems a bit fishy. What is the purpose of Iran supporting Al Qaeda, if it is true?

Iran and Al Qaeda have two different political aims and agendas it's impossible that Iran would support Al Qaeda only a Wahhabis would think something like that even though Al Qaeda itself is Wahhabi in origin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Mishael said:

Iran and Al Qaeda have two different political aims and agendas it's impossible that Iran would support Al Qaeda only a Wahhabis would think something like that even though Al Qaeda itself is Wahhabi in origin.

Exactly, doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a bunch of lies. I bet that the CIA would use this to build up a justification to invade the Islamic republic of Iran just like Iraq's "Weapons of mass destruction" Does anyone else cringe when that ugly plastic U.S. president reads an Israeli script calling for war with Iran?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, monad said:

you are quoting the CIA and consider it to be factual :hahaha:

[EDIT]

I've reported this post and I hope for your sake you aren't trying to be racist.

Edited by Hameedeh
Removing inappropriate language from the quote. If you report something and it is removed, why are you quoting it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ibn Munir, its funny you dont believe my theories yet you believe this one. It doesn't surprise me though given your stances on issues. I really think you need to expand your awareness more in politics. It goes hand in hand with shiism. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Mishael said:

This is off topic but do you guys think Abdel Karim Qassem was the greatest leader of modern Iraq who united all ethnici groups in Iraq cause I do.

From my family, I only hear good about him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Dhulfikar said:

From my family, I only hear good about him.

My great grandmother was a Iraqi from Kuwait but I never met her or have ever been to Iraq myself. But I myself like him and I'm assuming your from a Kurdish family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mishael said:

My great grandmother was a Iraqi from Kuwait but I never met her or have ever been to Iraq myself. But I myself like him and I'm assuming your from a Kurdish family.

I'm actually Arab, my father side comes from Iran, so there is some mix there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, kirtc said:

Ibn Munir, its funny you dont believe my theories yet you believe this one. It doesn't surprise me though given your stances on issues. I really think you need to expand your awareness more in politics. It goes hand in hand with shiism. 

They showed video of bin laden's son wedding in Iran and a whole document of transcripts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

They showed video of bin laden's son wedding in Iran and a whole document of transcripts.

I was reading somewhere else that the wedding in the video was in Pakistan not in Iran. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Ībn Mūneer Āl-Feylī said:

It's so ironic you use that term. Trump made that term and this report came out under him...

"fake" and "news" are two English words, we can't say them anymore because Trump used to say it? Lol..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some inconsistencies here, if Iran did indeed shelter AQ leaders and have them pass through the country without stamping their passport as if to say they had something to do with 9/11 or any acts of terrorism conducted against US targets whether in KSA or even in the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, why then would Iran offer full cooperation in Afghanistan to the Americans? The Americans couldn't have done what they did without the Northern Alliance support on the ground, which was fully backed by Iran, so somehow Iran was an ally of the enemy of Al Qaeda, but also supporting them at the same time? It has very little credibility, at a time when Trump is trying to isolate Iran and withdraw from the nuclear deal and convince others to do the same, I really think this is an attempt to demonize and get people to rally for another war. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recent Posts on ShiaChat!

    • Salam dear friend, God is the 'creator' of destruction, so how can his creation be applied to him? It's like saying for example, I make a sandwich and then I eat it, but I don't believe it's possible for my sandwich to eat me lol (I know weird example lol), the rules of creation don't apply to the creator it's that simple, God is not limited to the imagination of our mind, but we are limited to the imaginative ability he has 'created' for us, anyway I hope you find the answer you seek all the best, wsalam
    • Bismehe Ta3ala, Assalam Alikum  I would never celebrate the slaughter of a nation.  Curse be upon CC. Just like we hate it when people celebrate on Ashura, we should feel the same way towards this mass murdering day.  But every year I mention the same thing, just a reminder for the passerby. M3 Salamah, FE AMIN Allah 
    • Thanks the most relevant answer to the question i have got is given below:  Mirza Jawad Tabrizi سؤال: ألا يكره للمصلي لبس السواد؟ كيف نجمع بين هذا الحكم الشرعي وبين استحباب لبس السواد عزاءا على الحسين عليه السلام؟ جواب: لم يثبت كراهية لبس السواد لا في الصلاة ولا في غيرها، نعم ورد في بعض الروايات ما يستفاد منها كراهية لبس السواد، ولكنها ضعيفة السند، ومع الإغماض عن ضعفها، فالكراهة في الصلاة بمعنى أقل ثوابا، ولبس السواد في عزاء الحسين والأئمة عليهم السلام لأجل إظهار الحزن وإقامة شعائر المذهب مستحب نفسي، وثوابه أكثر من نقص الثواب في الصلاة، والله العالم. Question: Isn’t wearing black while praying Makruh? On the other hand, donning black is commendable during the mourning period for Imam Hussein (AS). What is the justification for the contradiction between these two points? Answer: The undesirability of wearing black clothes in the state of praying or in other situations is not proven as an absolute fact. It is only derived from a number of narratives the chains of transmission of which are unreliable and weak. Regardless of their unreliability, wearing black clothes while praying will lessen its spiritual reward. But putting on black clothes in grief for Imam Hussein (AS) is a religious rite and commendable. Al-‘Amili; al-Intisar, vol. 9, p. 247; publication, Dar al-Sirat, Beirut, Lebanon, the first edition, 1422. Following the analysis of jurists’ ideas it was finally revealed that wearing black in prayers is Makruh. Another question which may come into the readers’ minds is whether praying in black clothes for black-clad mourners during the month of Muharram or ceremonies held for the martyrdoms of the Aimma is Makruh as well. The question has been answered by Haj Aqa Mirza Jawad Tabrizi. سؤال: ما حكم اللباس الأسود في الصلاة أيام وفيات الأئمة عليهم السلام، هل هو مكروه ؟ جواب : إذا كان اللبس بداع إظهار الحزن وتعظيم الشعائر فليس بمكروه، والله العالم. It is not Makruh if the motivation behind the clothing is the expression of grief. Al-‘Amili; al-Intisar, vol. 9, p. 247; publication: Dar al-Sirat, Beirut, Lebanon, the first edition, 1422. The considerable point in jurists’ decrees is bad this kind the prohibition implies that wearing black while praying will only diminish its spiritual rewards. In other words, donning black while praying does not nullify the prayer. It only decreases its rewards. So, wearing garments in other colors is recommended for the state of praying. http://www.valiasr-aj.com/english/mobile_shownews.php?idnews=251 wasalam
    • ^^^ A7SANTI sister, Mash'Allah.  God bless you. Allhoma sali 3la Mohammad wa Ahli Mohammad 
    • Are you asking if they are makrooh to wear in Muharram? No they are not.  They are only makrooh to wear in days that are not mourning days. Sayyed Al-Sistani said it is makrooh to wear black in a normal day.
×