New al Qaeda chief hails Arab Spring, says U.S. losing

[ScreamingEagle]

DUBAI (Reuters) - New al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri voiced support in an Internet video for popular revolts sweeping the Middle East, saying Arabs were no longer afraid of the United States, 10 years after the country was targeted by the militant network.

"Ten years have passed since the blessed attacks on New York and Washington and Pennsylvania: that mighty event which shook and continues to shake the pillars of the global crusade," Zawahri said in the video posted on Islamist websites on Tuesday to mark the anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

New al Qaeda head hails Arab uprisings, says U.S. losing - Yahoo! News

 

[yidnar]

DUBAI (Reuters) - New al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri voiced support in an Internet video for popular revolts sweeping the Middle East, saying Arabs were no longer afraid of the United States, 10 years after the country was targeted by the militant network.

"Ten years have passed since the blessed attacks on New York and Washington and Pennsylvania: that mighty event which shook and continues to shake the pillars of the global crusade," Zawahri said in the video posted on Islamist websites on Tuesday to mark the anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

New al Qaeda head hails Arab uprisings, says U.S. losing - Yahoo! News

sad to say, but the no good islamic shithand Zawahri is right !!

 

[pgm]

He's desperately trying to put a positive spin on the fact that millions of Arabs have rejected Al Qaeda and have chosen democracy.

 

[Claudette]

Yeah. He could be right.

I'll just bet though that the old fucker is shakin in his boots just waiting for SEAL TEAM 6 to pay him a visit.

 

[Moonglow]

I am sure that those living under Muslim rule are happy campers, not!

 

[ScreamingEagle]

DUBAI (Reuters) - New al Qaeda leader Ayman al-Zawahri voiced support in an Internet video for popular revolts sweeping the Middle East, saying Arabs were no longer afraid of the United States, 10 years after the country was targeted by the militant network.

"Ten years have passed since the blessed attacks on New York and Washington and Pennsylvania: that mighty event which shook and continues to shake the pillars of the global crusade," Zawahri said in the video posted on Islamist websites on Tuesday to mark the anniversary of the September 11, 2001 attacks.

New al Qaeda head hails Arab uprisings, says U.S. losing - Yahoo! News

sad to say, but the no good islamic shithand Zawahri is right !!

Funny how Obama and Al Qaeda both "hail" the Arab Spring....

 

[pgm]

Funny how Obama and Al Qaeda both "hail" the Arab Spring....

John McCain too.

 

[BlindBoo]

10 years after, and a few thousand American KIA and tens of thousands of Arabs killed, 2 Arab countries invaded and occupied, American foriegn policy of covert and overt intervention unchanged.

I'd say he is wrong.

 

[Avatar4321]

He's desperately trying to put a positive spin on the fact that millions of Arabs have rejected Al Qaeda and have chosen democracy.

I think you're confusing who is spinning here. Because the Arab spring isnt about democracy unless you mean in the purest sense of mob rule. Which I dont is what you mean.

Tell me, how is Egypt better off in control of the Muslim Brotherhood. You don't think the people are actually free there do you?

Or how about in Libya. Do you think us helping Rebels, which included Al Qaeda, is really going to free Libya?

Who do you think gets more out of Islamic controled regimes that offer no freedom to their people: Al Qaeda or the US?

 

[pgm]

I think you're confusing who is spinning here. Because the Arab spring isnt about democracy unless you mean in the purest sense of mob rule. Which I dont is what you mean.

Eh, we'll see. There's certainly a desire for greater representation. Although, if anything, the Arab spring was about food prices.

Tell me, how is Egypt better off in control of the Muslim Brotherhood. You don't think the people are actually free there do you?

Egypt is currently under military rule, so no, I don't think they're free. If/when there is a transition to a civil-led government, then we'll see what happens.

Elections are expected in October or November. I think there are five declared candidates at the moment. Mohammed el-Baradei is the ex-director general of the IAEA - you've probably seen him on television. He's a smart guy and not particularly radical. You also have Amr Moussa, a former foreign secretary and former head of the Arab League. He worked for Mubarak, which is enough proof for me that he's not a member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Hazem Salah Abu Ismail is an Islamic scholar and TV personality, who is "proud to be associated with the Muslim Brotherhood," but is not a member because of
"minor differences". He is associated with the "liberal Islam" movement. Abdel Moneim Aboul Fotouh is the guy who you could call the Muslim Brotherhood candidate. Still, like most of the Muslim Brotherhood, he supports democracy, believing it to be compatible with Islam. Finally, Mohammad Salim Al-Awa is another moderate Islamist.

We'll see what happens. El-Baradei has been the most popular for a while, but the Muslim Brotherhood is the best organized. Still, I have confidence in a democratic Egypt in the future.

Or how about in Libya. Do you think us helping Rebels, which included Al Qaeda, is really going to free Libya?

We'll see. I certainly expect greater freedom than we had under Gaddafi. My primary concern is stability at the moment.

Who do you think gets more out of Islamic controled regimes that offer no freedom to their people: Al Qaeda or the US?

To answer your loaded question, al-Qaeda. Now, who gets more out of a democracy that has some Islamic elements, but isn't dominated by Islam?

As for who benefits the most from an un-Islamic dictator like Mubarak, I'd say it's a wash. The U.S. gets an ally, while al-Qaeda gets a recruitment aid. No one benefits from Gaddafi.

Is there a chance this blows up and becomes the Iranian Revolution 2.0? Of course. But I think the odds are small. 1) The Islamists were late to the game. 2) The Islamists are much more moderate in Egypt than they were in Iran. 3) Everyone has seen Iran and no one wants to be Iran. 4) It's a Sunni nation and the clergy is much more powerful in Shi'a Islam. 5) I forget what five was, but five reasons sounds better than four.

 

[pgm]

Article on Libya's women

 

[Sallow]

Al Qaeda was against before they were for it.