Im reading a book at the moment called al Qaeda, by Jason Burke. Its a very good book if you are interested in this sort of stuff. Anyway, I would recommend anyone to buy it. Or try the following:
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms. ... 36&print=1
Share This Page:
al Qaeda
-
boothgraeme
- Member
- Posts: 52
- Joined: Thu 15 Apr, 2004 6:34 pm
- Location: Yorkshire
-
Bliartheliar
- Guest
Basically means that if they follow the example of the prophet Mohammed, the Hadith, the Muslim community, or the Umma, will propsper as it has done in the past before European dominance. Many Islamic extremists and radicals believe that the Muslim community fell apart because many Muslims interpreted the Koran in a different way than what was intended.
Burke doesnt mean that the tranformation will happen instantly, and makes it clear in the book that the Islamic struggle or Jihad will take many years, perhaps centuries or thousands of years. Islamic extremists also know this, but bleieve that thier actions are contributing towards the 'victory'.
Its a very good book. Burke describes that al Qaeda is not a group, as described by the politicians and the media, but a a tactic. al Qaeda is simply a convenient label given by the West to a unconventional enemy, in order to make it appear conventional - ie: an enemy that can be destroyed. He also goes on to explain how governments have exploited this, by condemming Islamic extremists and activists as 'al Qaeda' terrorists, although they probably do not have any links to Osama Bin Laden and have different goals than him. In other words, extremists whose goals are simply domestic are labelled as international al-Qaeda operatives, who are then forced to suffer the onslaught of American-led 'War on Terror.'
The book expells many myths and lies that have been generated by our governments and the media, without ovcourse condoning terrorism itself.
Burke doesnt mean that the tranformation will happen instantly, and makes it clear in the book that the Islamic struggle or Jihad will take many years, perhaps centuries or thousands of years. Islamic extremists also know this, but bleieve that thier actions are contributing towards the 'victory'.
Its a very good book. Burke describes that al Qaeda is not a group, as described by the politicians and the media, but a a tactic. al Qaeda is simply a convenient label given by the West to a unconventional enemy, in order to make it appear conventional - ie: an enemy that can be destroyed. He also goes on to explain how governments have exploited this, by condemming Islamic extremists and activists as 'al Qaeda' terrorists, although they probably do not have any links to Osama Bin Laden and have different goals than him. In other words, extremists whose goals are simply domestic are labelled as international al-Qaeda operatives, who are then forced to suffer the onslaught of American-led 'War on Terror.'
The book expells many myths and lies that have been generated by our governments and the media, without ovcourse condoning terrorism itself.
I was under the impression that al Qaeda emerged as a self proclaimed organisation under the leadership and funding of bin Laden, not just labeled by any government.
Jane Corbins book "The Base" (The Base is a literal translation of al Qaeda) is a cracking read focusing on al Qaeda history and the planning and execution of 9/11, although does pose some questions and holes have emerged as other 'evidence' has been released since 9/11.
Jane Corbins book "The Base" (The Base is a literal translation of al Qaeda) is a cracking read focusing on al Qaeda history and the planning and execution of 9/11, although does pose some questions and holes have emerged as other 'evidence' has been released since 9/11.
SP
The line between BS and PC is thin and blurry
The line between BS and PC is thin and blurry
My Tupence . . .
BBC 2 ran a program on them a few months back (Power of Nightmares?) and it stated there that the group was given the name AL QAEDA by Manhatton Lawyers in a bid to prosecute Bin Laden and others for the Embassy Bombings without them being present.
This was done because they had a suspect who implicated Bin Laden but in order to prosecute they had to prove a tangible link between the Embassy Bombings, the suspect and Bin Laden. This would ensure a conviction under complex Organized Crime laws in New York (originally to combat the Mafia).
So they believe that, in essence, the terrorists were assisted by the creation of AL QAEDA as it gave a global identity that any tom dick or mustafa can claim allegiance to or commit crimes in the name of (much like Islam itself)
I'll see if I can find a website but it was a very interesting program, though it's accuracy isn't guaranteed.
BBC 2 ran a program on them a few months back (Power of Nightmares?) and it stated there that the group was given the name AL QAEDA by Manhatton Lawyers in a bid to prosecute Bin Laden and others for the Embassy Bombings without them being present.
This was done because they had a suspect who implicated Bin Laden but in order to prosecute they had to prove a tangible link between the Embassy Bombings, the suspect and Bin Laden. This would ensure a conviction under complex Organized Crime laws in New York (originally to combat the Mafia).
So they believe that, in essence, the terrorists were assisted by the creation of AL QAEDA as it gave a global identity that any tom dick or mustafa can claim allegiance to or commit crimes in the name of (much like Islam itself)
I'll see if I can find a website but it was a very interesting program, though it's accuracy isn't guaranteed.
-
Bliartheliar
- Guest
First of all, al Qaeda has more than one meaning. The term can mean a base, but can also mean a foundation, the base of a cloud, and 'a precept, rule, principle, maxim, formula, method, model or pattern.'
In the first few chapters of his book, Burke uses a lot of evidence to support the claim that al Qaeda is not a group but a tactic. For example, before 1996 the FBI and CIA did not mention al Qaeda in thier reports, Islamic extremists have addmitted in interrogations that they have never heard of a group called al Qaeda although they have connections to OBL, and Israel does not use the term itself.
Buke also goes on to say that the goals of Osma Bin Laden and his 'hardcore' of followers was to provide what many militants did not have - state support. State sponsered terrorism gives groups access to training camps, resources, money and a safe haven. Many Islamic Militants did not have support, and Bin Laden, who virtually had a country of his own, provided them with training camps and resources. Ovcourse it is important to realise that not every training camp in Afghanistan belonged to, or had connections with, Bin Laden.
Bin Laden and extremists all over the world know that the majority of Muslims do not support thier tactics and have no desire to fight against the West, notably the US. One of OBLs goals is to instigate uprisings among the Muslim world, which he has to an extent achieved by using the 9/11 attacks and previous attacks.
Basically, Burke describes Islamic extremism as a phenomenon that has no word to describe it. al Qaeda is simply a convenient label to give the impression that every terrorist or extremist belongs to a conventional group under the leadership of OBL. This is exactly how the media interprets it, and therefore the vast majority of the population.
Burke also relates to the Muslim faith and past and present scholars to offer insight in to why militancy and terrorism takes place and the goals of extremists. He expells the belief, shared by many on the right, that terrorism is a result of a 'clash of civilisations' between Islam and the West. He also makes it clear that terrorism can never be prevented by brute force alone.
The book goes into too much detail to explain here, so I would advise anyone to go out and buy it, especially considering how relevent the subject is today.
In the first few chapters of his book, Burke uses a lot of evidence to support the claim that al Qaeda is not a group but a tactic. For example, before 1996 the FBI and CIA did not mention al Qaeda in thier reports, Islamic extremists have addmitted in interrogations that they have never heard of a group called al Qaeda although they have connections to OBL, and Israel does not use the term itself.
Buke also goes on to say that the goals of Osma Bin Laden and his 'hardcore' of followers was to provide what many militants did not have - state support. State sponsered terrorism gives groups access to training camps, resources, money and a safe haven. Many Islamic Militants did not have support, and Bin Laden, who virtually had a country of his own, provided them with training camps and resources. Ovcourse it is important to realise that not every training camp in Afghanistan belonged to, or had connections with, Bin Laden.
Bin Laden and extremists all over the world know that the majority of Muslims do not support thier tactics and have no desire to fight against the West, notably the US. One of OBLs goals is to instigate uprisings among the Muslim world, which he has to an extent achieved by using the 9/11 attacks and previous attacks.
Basically, Burke describes Islamic extremism as a phenomenon that has no word to describe it. al Qaeda is simply a convenient label to give the impression that every terrorist or extremist belongs to a conventional group under the leadership of OBL. This is exactly how the media interprets it, and therefore the vast majority of the population.
Burke also relates to the Muslim faith and past and present scholars to offer insight in to why militancy and terrorism takes place and the goals of extremists. He expells the belief, shared by many on the right, that terrorism is a result of a 'clash of civilisations' between Islam and the West. He also makes it clear that terrorism can never be prevented by brute force alone.
The book goes into too much detail to explain here, so I would advise anyone to go out and buy it, especially considering how relevent the subject is today.
