I don't know how many of you have noticed this, but there appears to be a group of "regulars" who show up as inside sources in mainstream reporting and analysis. It's a curious development, because it hints to a possible weakness in our ability to objectively analyze the current state of the Salafist-Jihadist movement. Relying on the same sources - over and over again -- for inside information no longer makes them insiders in the strict sense of the word. They become analysts themselves, self-aware of their role as informants to a broader audience. This isn't a problem, per se, but it's becoming clear that the insights of the "celebrity" CT insiders are influencing too much of our mainstream reporting, including recent influential articles.
Montassir al-Zayyat, Saad al-Faqih, and Noman Benotman are three of the names that leap to mind, but there are a few others. They show up on Al-Jazeera, and other Arab news outlets, all the time, and they have shown up in such influential articles as Lawrence Wright's, "The Rebellion Within." AJ Strata links to this current article in The Australian which features the insights of Noman Benotman. He's a named source in Wright's article, and shows up as a quoted source (along with Saad al-Faqih) in Brynjar Lia's biography of Abu Mu'sab al-Suri. Media outlets (and I'll bet security orgs, too) have been going to these guys for years. For instance, Al-Zayyat is clearly a key source of information on Zawahiri for Lawrence Wright.
They are all smart men, and their insights should be sought out and respected. I have no doubt of their jihadi creds. HOWEVER, when so much of our current understanding of the state of al-Qaida relies on their credibility as insiders, it it safe to say that we are relying on too few voices for such lofty conclusions.
Comments