An analytical report in “American Thinker” magazine discussed the Muslim Brotherhood’s efforts in the United States to tarnish the reputation of the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces, Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar, by using US courts to advance allegations of supporting “terrorism,” despite a ruling of lack of jurisdiction issued in April 2024, before an appeals court accepted the plaintiffs’ petitions in June of the same year.
The report stated that pro-Muslim Brotherhood media outlets, such as “Al Jazeera,” “Middle East Eye,” and “Middle East Monitor,” amplified damaging narratives about Haftar, which resonated in Western newspapers including “The Washington Post” and “The New York Times.” It highlighted the role of the “Libyan American Alliance,” led by Muslim Brotherhood member Esam Omeish, in bringing this discourse to the United States and leveraging the authority of the American judiciary and administration.
The report noted that Omeish initiated lawsuits starting in 2019, in collaboration with lawyer Faisal Gill, and later with lawyer Asim Ghafoor, who, according to the report, was associated with suspicious Islamist entities and networks in the 1990s and early 2000s. It also pointed to apparent ideological biases among some plaintiffs on social media.
The report cited examples of plaintiffs whose families have ties to extremist groups like “Al-Qaeda” and “Ansar al-Sharia,” referencing Sarah Adams’s book “Benghazi: Know Your Enemy” regarding the background of Muna Al-Said. It also noted that some cases were not judicially proven due to the chaos of war and shelling by militias loyal to the former Government of National Accord.
The report deemed the case an example of “vexatious litigation” driven by vengeful and partisan motives. It pointed to the stances of the Muslim Brotherhood-dominated “International Union of Muslim Scholars,” which has called for resistance against Haftar since 2014, and the adoption of the rhetoric of “Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb,” which portrays the army’s anti-terrorism operations as a “war on Islam.”
The analysis concluded that Field Marshal Haftar is facing a siege by individuals and entities closely linked to the Muslim Brotherhood and “Al-Qaeda” due to his efforts to undermine their influence in Libya. It asserted that the accusations lack a substantive basis, as they come from sympathizers of the movements that caused the 2011 chaos, and therefore should be rejected.