Al Qaeda Doesn't Exist

[mohammed farah]

Maybe the fact that they have posted on websites that they have existed, and claimed responsibility for many attacks long before 9/11.


Maybe that the financial records of their activity and recruiting in various places has been known long before 9/11.

Did you see the interviews of Osama Bin Laden by Peter Bergen?



How so, I am not insulting the poster. I am insulting the idea of the video.

look at hezbollah its not run by al qaeda or funded, look at the ETA its not run by a al qaeda or funded, look at the IRA theyr not run by al qaeda or funded. and please tell me look at the bombing of the twin towers in 1994 i dont remember them saying al qaeda is behinded but it was osama bin laden, the only used the name al qaeda because it was givin to them by the U.S. after 9/11

And yes I have seen Peter Bergen documentary of osama bin laden.

 

[KAding]

Al Qaeda Doesn't Exist

This is not the opinion of any of the scholars and experts on the subject of Al-Qaeda I have read. I can't accept that they are all delusional and ignorant and that this documentary maker knows what he is talking about. "The power of nightmares" is trying to make a bigger point, in which Al-Qaeda is merely an example. I'd rather trust those who studied the subject for the sake of learning, rather than in search of material to make a documentary on the power of fear in politics.

To quote Gilles Kepel, who is a learned scholar on the international jihadist movement:

In 1986 Osama established several camps of his own within Afghanistan. His wealth and generosity, the simplicity of his behavior, his personal charm, and his bravery in battle soon became legendary. In 1988 he established a database of all the jihadists and other olunteers who had passed through his camps, and this gave birth to an organizational structure built around a computer file whose Arabic title Al Qaeda (The [Data]base) became famous only ten years later when it was portrayed by American Justice Department as the key to an ultra-secret terrorist network; this led to bin Laden's indictment for conspiracy.
<...>
[T]he attack on America meant that Al Qaeda and anyone suspected to be in touch with its network - which still remained fairly obscure - would be hunted down. Its infrastructure in Afghanistan, to the extend that is was known, was destroyed within a few months. Whether these search-and-destroy tactics will prove sufficient in the long run against a rather fluid network, whose very name refers to a world wide database of operatives, remains to be seen.

(Source: The Trail of Politcal Islam, Giles Kepel, 2002, p. 315 and 322)

Clearly Al Qaeda already existed before the US Justice Department indicted Bin Laden in the late 90s. The point one could make is that the media portrayal of Al Qaeda has been incorrect, since it is indeed a fairly loose network and not a bureaucratic organization with offices in downtown Kandahar. But I believe even the media - after all these years - has gotten the point now that Al Qaeda is not an organization like any other. It is indeed an fluid network of contacts, something Gilles Kepel and any expert I know understood, even back in 2002.

Besides, even if you insist on claiming Al Qaeda didn't exist before, surely you cannot claim it doesn't exist now, with all these organizations committing bombings and say they are "Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia" or "Al Qaeda in the Maghreb", etc. And if Al Qaeda doesn't exist, what to make of Bin Laden? Is his "Declaration of Jihad against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places" a fraud as well? What is the point exactly? That he didn't have the means to fight such a jihad? That he never had the intention to fight it (ie. the declaration is a US invention)? Or that Bin Laden is on the US payroll? Read the declaration of jihad and tell me how American it sounds? Does it not include legitimate Muslim grievances?

None of this makes sense. If it is an American invention, it is a **** convincing one, fooling scholars and jihadist alike.

 

[KAding]

Al qaeda group is a boogeyman for the western world; just to scare people on daily life.

So does that mean it does not exist? That the organizations (in the UK, Morocco, Algeria, Iraq, etc) that aligned themselves openly with Bin Laden and Zawahiri are:
1. Not part of "al-qaeda", but separate jihadist groups
2. Do not exist at all and did not commit any attacks

Does Al-Qaeda being a 'boogeyman' mean that there are no Muslim groups that are commiting terrorist attacks against Western interest? Or that they simply have nothing to do with al-qaeda? Could you clear that up a bit. Thanks .

 

[Keltoi]

It is really disheartening that so many seem willing to defy logic and reason when it suits them. The media didn't invent Al-Qaeda, they invented themselves. They are fairly good at propoganda, spreading their message through videos and statements. By the way, it isn't the U.S. media who spreads these tapes and statements, it is Al-Jazeera. Pretending that Al-Qaeda doesn't exist might make some on this forum feel better, and I realize that self-imposed ignorance can be bliss, but thankfully there are many on this forum with a mind of their own and the ability to think rationally.

 

[NoName55]

any body and every body is alqaeda as long as you are in dispute with them.
does not really matter which country the rebellion is in it is alqaeda.

recently a British Police Chief described them as an international group of terrorists and sympathiser united by a common ideology but composed of independent cells without any central control and command centre.

in other words any Muslim anywhere can be accused of being one man alqaeda cell.

 

[Keltoi]

any body and every body is alqaeda as long as you are in dispute with them.
does not really matter which country the rebellion is in it is alqaeda.

recently a British Police Chief described them as an international group of terrorists and sympathiser united by a common ideology but composed of independent cells without any central control and command centre.

in other words any Muslim anywhere can be accused of being one man alqaeda cell.

That is why many refer to al-qaeda as a franchise. There are many groups who use the name because of the recognition it brings them.

 

[NoName55]

about 2 year ago a bearded old man of Pakistani appearance was robbed and beaten by a gang in Leeds England, he retaliated by going in to bruce li mode and used his walking stick on them.

when police arrived the muggers claimed that he was making a pro alqaeda speech at them and was swearing at them in arabic, they were merely trying to make a citizen's arrest. They were believed until it was discovered that he was not a Muslim But a Christian.

every brown person is alqaeda until proven otherwise

 

[DAWUD_adnan]

lol at racisim..

 

[KAding]

any body and every body is alqaeda as long as you are in dispute with them.
does not really matter which country the rebellion is in it is alqaeda.

recently a British Police Chief described them as an international group of terrorists and sympathiser united by a common ideology but composed of independent cells without any central control and command centre.

in other words any Muslim anywhere can be accused of being one man alqaeda cell.

There is a lot of truth in that. At least, any jihadist group who follows the ideology and tactics which resemble earlier actual al-qaeda attacks are often simply called 'al-qaeda' in the media. Sometimes they say stuff like 'inspired by al-qaeda'. In that sense it is a movement and not really an organization anymore. In a way these groupings are asking for it, since there are so many different groups in the Muslim world fighting for the same ideals, it is almost impossible to keep them all apart. There simply is no hierarchy or structure within the movement that encompasses all these different jihadist groups that fight the US and its allies. What makes it even harder for the Western media is that these groups don't bother too much with public relations. They hardly ever claim an attack and most of their messages are intended for Muslims. Neverthelsss, one should also not underestimate the networking within the jihadist movement, especially between veterans of the Afghanistan conflict in the 1980s.

In the end though, what does it matter if Al-Qaeda is one big group, loosely connected groups or only a 'movement' with very little interconnectedness? The end result is still that there are Muslims out there who are committed to fight a Jihad against the US and its interests and vise versa. The original author seemed to imply that 'Al Qaeda doesn't exist' would somehow mean that there is no enemy for the US, which is a falsehood IMHO.

 

[Muezzin]

The original author seemed to imply that 'Al Qaeda doesn't exist' would somehow mean that there is no enemy for the US, which is a falsehood IMHO.

That's not how I interpret the statement 'Al Qaeda doesn't exist'. It's foolish to say the US does not have an enemy. But it's just factually incorrect to say there is this super duper alliance of terrorists (which is how Al Qaeda is portrayed), when really, it's a bunch of loosely connected cells.

But then, I see a lot of things differently from other people. C'est la vie.

 

[Keltoi]

That's not how I interpret the statement 'Al Qaeda doesn't exist'. It's foolish to say the US does not have an enemy. But it's just factually incorrect to say there is this super duper alliance of terrorists (which is how Al Qaeda is portrayed), when really, it's a bunch of loosely connected cells.

But then, I see a lot of things differently from other people. C'est la vie.

The U.S. media, if they did, doesn't characterize Al-Qaeda as a "super duper alliance of terrorists". The news I watch and read constantly makes mention of the fact that Al-Qaeda has become a loosely centralized organization with many copycat groups who use the name, like a franchise. What makes the word Al-Qaeda so important to Americans is the fact that they are the group who brought down the Twin Towers and killed 3,000 people. They also, usually Zawahiri, release a fairly large amount of propoganda tapes and statements. It is true they aren't the big centralized terror group many thought they were back in 2001, but they still inspire acts of terrorism around the world, which makes the name and the group dangerous.

 

[KAding]

That's not how I interpret the statement 'Al Qaeda doesn't exist'. It's foolish to say the US does not have an enemy. But it's just factually incorrect to say there is this super duper alliance of terrorists (which is how Al Qaeda is portrayed), when really, it's a bunch of loosely connected cells.

But then, I see a lot of things differently from other people. C'est la vie.

Well, actually, thinking about it a bit more: an informal 'alliance' is exactly what best describes al-qaeda IMHO. Not an organization, that implies structure, which it hasn't anymore. Nor are these groupings operating completely separated from eachother. They often have contact with each other; they follow the same ideology; they are largely fighting the same war. I think they believe it is their duty to come to the help of their fellow Muslims in the fight against a hostile kafir. So an informal alliance, in defense of the Ummah. But than again, what do I know .

Wikipedia knows it all though! And behold, it agrees with me!

Al-Qaeda or Al-Qaida or Al-Qa'ida (Arabic: القاعدة al-qāʕida, trans. 'the base') is the name given to an international alliance of militant Islamist organizations established in 1988 by Osama bin Laden.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Qaeda

 

[Muezzin]

The U.S. media, if they did, doesn't characterize Al-Qaeda as a "super duper alliance of terrorists". The news I watch and read constantly makes mention of the fact that Al-Qaeda has become a loosely centralized organization with many copycat groups who use the name, like a franchise. What makes the word Al-Qaeda so important to Americans is the fact that they are the group who brought down the Twin Towers and killed 3,000 people. They also, usually Zawahiri, release a fairly large amount of propoganda tapes and statements. It is true they aren't the big centralized terror group many thought they were back in 2001, but they still inspire acts of terrorism around the world, which makes the name and the group dangerous.

I agree, you're right.

'Portrayed' was the wrong word. It's less the way they are portrayed than the way they are understood by the layman.

 

[NoName55]

people make things up as they go/as and when needed

last time I used or heard the word franchise it meant in context of a central controller/owner

like Mcdonald burgerking, every frachisee is answerable to the head honcho.

osama was never more than a front man for powers that be.

 

[Keltoi]

people make things up as they go/as and when needed

last time I used or heard the word franchise it meant in context of a central controller/owner

like Mcdonald burgerking, every frachisee is answerable to the head honcho.

osama was never more than a front man for powers that be.

A "front man" meaning what?

 

[anis_z24]

AA

You know the problem is that
some Muslims actually believe this.

they even become supporting something thats not there, but
makes so much trouble.
makes me mad.

WA

 

[Khan-Ghalgha]

Everything what you hear on MM about AQ is coming from US government.

AQ and 9/11 is neocons dream come true.

Remember the AQ base, under a mountain, super hideout of bad guys...?

perfect enemy.

 

[Keltoi]

Everything what you hear on MM about AQ is coming from US government.

AQ and 9/11 is neocons dream come true.

Remember the AQ base, under a mountain, super hideout of bad guys...?

perfect enemy.

Meaning what exactly? Oh yeah, a conspiracy.

 

[Khan-Ghalgha]

LOL, I meant exactly that, you obviously don't remember how some government officials were describing a hide out of AQ infamous Tora-Bora.

It was hilarious, even John Stewart made fun of it.

 

[Hashim_507]

So does that mean it does not exist? That the organizations (in the UK, Morocco, Algeria, Iraq, etc) that aligned themselves openly with Bin Laden and Zawahiri are:
1. Not part of "al-qaeda", but separate jihadist groups
2. Do not exist at all and did not commit any attacks

Does Al-Qaeda being a 'boogeyman' mean that there are no Muslim groups that are commiting terrorist attacks against Western interest? Or that they simply have nothing to do with al-qaeda? Could you clear that up a bit. Thanks .

This is a pchylogical war thats going; the identity is very hidden. Its about bush's interest not "American interest" i qouted. Its about brainwashing society from truth. I am strongly against al qaeda killing innocent people if they exist.Creating al qaeda means to have enemy around for every war and conflict that will get resources for a nation. Creating al qaeda is intellegent ideas to start never ending wars or conflicts. Creating al qaeda means to turn away from the truth and the boogeyman will go after western society. Also to conquer middle east for resources and power.