BBC now admits al qaeda never existed

[Natan]

many of those that do not believe Al-queda exists, believe that the Illuminaten exist

You held a survey confirming that or you're just trolling?

 

[VonKleist]

I haven't read his book, so I don't know what it claims exactly.

I mentioned Bergen because he reproduces part of the document, I thought it more likely that you'd have access to that book rather than the trial proceedings of USA v Enaam Arnaout. That said, of course it's online:
HERE

I believe there is a group of people maybe working for a common cause, without a specific leadership necessarily. This is also how Al Qaeda is used today in all reports about sunni muslim terrorists, they are all "linked to Al Qaeda", without necessarily being clear what the link is other than being sunni muslim terrorist. I am not sure an actual organization existed, let alone under the name Al Qaeda. The evidence is more thin than many people believe.

Now, I'll agree with you that the media uses "linked to Al Qaeda" to refer to any Jihadist terrorists, even those belonging to national groups who disagree with Al Qaeda's goals. Similarly, the media often uses 'Taliban' and 'Al Qaeda' interchangeably with respect to Afghanistan. However, that is not to say that there never was a formal organisation of international Jihadists whose members swore bayat to Bin Laden, whether you refer to it as 'Al Qaeda' or the 'Bin Laden organisation' or whatever. The evidence is much stronger than you believe.

 

[jaydeehess]

I haven't seen it, so no. If it is in English, I would object it is possible translation is off. I've seen movies of Al Zawahiri where he clearly speaks of Qaeda al Jihad being put as Al Qaeda in transcript.

So the H what???

What difference does it make if they refer to their own org as Qaida Al Jihad and the west shortens the term to simply Al Qaida (or any other spelling)? It makes no difference at all even if the principals of the group never bothered to formally name their organization. IT STILL EXISTED whether there was a definitive name for it. OTOH though the news media, western or middle eastern, would be reporting on it and THEY would require a recognizable title name for it since having to go on a long explanation (the group responsible for the Cole bombing, the Lebanon Marine barracks bombing, the,,,,etc.) is obviously unweildy. Did Bin Laden or Zawahiri care one iota whether or not they gave the news media a tag for them. NOPE!

The issue here is that Clayton declares that the organization itself never existed and further that the BBC specifically , has declared ("admits" in his words) that this organization never existed.
Locally we had a paper mill, its name was the Boise Cascade Paper Mill but no one at all in this town ever refered to it that way, it was simply "the mill" or even more simply "Boise" Does the fact that neither name was correct mean that the mill "never existed"?
Ridiculous, of course not!

You are argueing the equivalent of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

 

[jaydeehess]

In years past the IRA trained at PLO camps. There was a link then between the IRA and the PLO. In the case of Islamic terror groups there is a similar linking with the added factor of not only a shared political goal but also a shared religious drive. (the IRA and the PLO had issues with G.Britain but diverged in religion obviously)

 

[Natan]

That said, of course it's online:
HERE

Interesting. It is a botched translation but nevertheless: it seems some documents concern the planning for a new (in 1988) military base or camp, Al Qaeda Al Askariya. Bin Laden again seems to say that he has not started an organization or islamic group.

=================

Between Abu Al Ridha and the Sheikh, a discussion regarding the
establishment of the new military work -> general camp
-> special camp"
-> Qaida (base)

=================

The Sheikh: I am one person. We have not started an organization or and Islamic group

=================

Open duration (long), they enter a testing camp and the best
brothers of them are chosen, in preparation to enter Al Qaeda Al Askariya (the Military Base)

 

[Natan]

In years past the IRA trained at PLO camps. There was a link then between the IRA and the PLO. In the case of Islamic terror groups there is a similar linking with the added factor of not only a shared political goal but also a shared religious drive. (the IRA and the PLO had issues with G.Britain but diverged in religion obviously)

I know that was claimed frequently but has there ever been proof that this was anything more than anti Gaddhafi propaganda? Gaddhafi was the big bad boogeyman before Bin Laden came along.

 

[funk de fino]

I know that was claimed frequently but has there ever been proof that this was anything more than anti Gaddhafi propaganda? Gaddhafi was the big bad boogeyman before Bin Laden came along.

Gaddaffi shipped arms to IRA. This is fact.

 

[Natan]

What difference does it make if they refer to their own org as Qaida Al Jihad and the west shortens the term to simply Al Qaida (or any other spelling)?

Qaeda al Jihad can also be an abstract concept, for it literally means the base of the jihad. It is not necessarily the name of an "organization". Bin Laden seems to consistently deny it is an organization. It seems more like muslim extremists with a common goal. It matters very much as an organization can be defeated and face it, "Al Qaeda" as it was claimed to be HAS BEEN DEFEATED. If Al Qaeda is however just sunni muslim extremists / terrorists, than it can never be defeated as there will always be sunni muslim extremists and terrorists. The difference is the end of the multi billion dollar War on Terror, data snooping and harassment of passenger or an Orwellian state of perpetual war. Maybe not a big difference to you, but it is to me.

the group responsible for the Cole bombing, the Lebanon Marine barracks bombing, the,,,,etc.) is obviously unweildy. Did Bin Laden or Zawahiri care one iota whether or not they gave the news media a tag for them. NOPE!

I thought the Lebanon marine barrack bombings were always blamed on Hezbollah / Iran. NOT Al Qaeda. Again without a shred of evidence ever having been presented.

The issue here is that Clayton declares that the organization itself never existed and further that the BBC specifically , has declared ("admits" in his words) that this organization never existed.

Well, even Bin Laden seems to deny such an organization, now already in TWO documents. An interview with Tayseer Allouni and thank you garethdjb for the second document.

You are argueing the equivalent of how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

I like the analogy but I'm afraid the stakes are higher than that. The implications are either perpetual war or a winnable war. Do you want the War on Terror to ever be won or you don't think that is possible? What would it take?

 

[Natan]

Gaddaffi shipped arms to IRA. This is fact.

I can claim God exists. This is FACT.

"Common knowledge" doesn't make things fact.

 

[VonKleist]

I know that was claimed frequently but has there ever been proof that this was anything more than anti Gaddhafi propaganda? Gaddhafi was the big bad boogeyman before Bin Laden came along.

Other than the seizure of an arms shipment from Libya with an IRA engineer on the boat you mean?

 

[Natan]

Other than the seizure of an arms shipment from Libya with an IRA engineer on the boat you mean?

Well, it was a genuine question. I'm too young to remember. Perhaps I should have consulted wikipedia on that one first.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Irish_Republican_Army_arms_importation#Libyan_arms

 

[funk de fino]

I can claim God exists. This is FACT.

"Common knowledge" doesn't make things fact.

It has been proven in court and IRA members were caught red handed and sent to jail. Please research before you blather rubbish about things you have no clue about.

(and before you cry stitch up - the IRA member admitted it)

You seem to be doing a lot of claiming. Not much else though.

 

[Natan]

It has been proven in court and IRA members were caught red handed and sent to jail. Please research before you blather rubbish about things you have no clue about.

Well I'm sorry, I didn't blather rubbish, I asked a question. Geez. Way to answer things with "this is a fact". I don't take anything at face value, that's the whole point of JREF.

You seem to be doing a lot of claiming. Not much else though.

I have now two official sources with Bin Laden saying there is no organization. Better than anything you have presented (nothing) that there is.

 

[VonKleist]

Well, it was a genuine question. I'm too young to remember. Perhaps I should have consulted wikipedia on that one first.

As a bare minimum. . . .

 

[Natan]

As a bare minimum. . . .

Well sorry again. Gaddhafi is however not the topic at hand.

 

[funk de fino]

Well I'm sorry, I didn't blather rubbish, I asked a question. Geez. Way to answer things with "this is a fact". I don't take anything at face value, that's the whole point of JREF.

BS - you made a smarmy reply to me instead of checking. Some skeptic you eh?

I have now two official sources with Bin Laden saying there is no organization. Better than anything you have presented (nothing) that there is.

I wasn't involved in that discussion. However the nit picking about the name of the organisation is irrelevant. That there is a global jihadist threat with him as the figure head inspiring and commanding people like KSM is without doubt. Clayton's ridiculous point was trying to prove it must have been an inside job because there was no boogeyman.

 

[Natan]

However the nit picking about the name of the organisation is irrelevant.

I already told jaydeehess about why it IS relevant.

That there is a global jihadist threat with him as the figure head inspiring and commanding people like KSM is without doubt.

I am sure that is why the trial of KSM is behind closed doors, with only relatives of victims watching at one point and with as added security 5 seconds or was it 5 minutes of delay in the broadcasting. Shows more fear of the truth than anything else.

Clayton's ridiculous point was trying to prove it must have been an inside job because there was no boogeyman.

Did you see me make that point? I am however agreeing it is quite possible there is/was no fixed organization with that name.

 

[Dave Rogers]

I have now two official sources with Bin Laden saying there is no organization. Better than anything you have presented (nothing) that there is.

I seem to remember that the original point of the thread was this:
Clayton Moore claimed that a BBC documentary admitted that al-Qaeda didn't exist. The documentary in question made no such admission; rather, it claimed that what we in the West refer to as al-Qaeda was not a well-defined heirarchical organisation but a loose association of groups with related agendas. Clayton Moore's claim was therefore demonstrably wrong.

What you're now saying is that al-Qaeda is not a well-defined, heirarchical organisation, but that there is a loose association of groups with related agendas, and that this is what we are actually referring to when we rather loosely and inexactly use the term "al-Qaeda". While I wouldn't dispute this, I'm at a loss to see exactly how it adds anything to what's already been said.

Dave

 

[Natan]

Clayton Moore claimed that a BBC documentary admitted that al-Qaeda didn't exist. The documentary in question made no such admission; rather, it claimed that what we in the West refer to as al-Qaeda was not a well-defined heirarchical organisation but a loose association of groups with related agendas. Clayton Moore's claim was therefore demonstrably wrong.

Yes, but it does not demonstrably show the BBC's claim wrong, which is also believed by many here. I am less sure about that for the reasons given.

What you're now saying is that al-Qaeda is not a well-defined, heirarchical organisation, but that there is a loose association of groups with related agendas, and that this is what we are actually referring to when we rather loosely and inexactly use the term "al-Qaeda".

Exactly.

While I wouldn't dispute this, I'm at a loss to see exactly how it adds anything to what's already been said.

As I already mentioned, the difference is either perpetual war or a war that can be won (or HAS BEEN WON). Up to you which one you prefer.

 

[funk de fino]

As I already mentioned, the difference is either perpetual war or a war that can be won (or HAS BEEN WON). Up to you which one you prefer.

If you think the war on terror can ever be won then I have a big clock in London I'd like to sell you.

The name or structures of the groups are irrelevant to how long this war will last. However, Holocaust deniers making false claims because they are also 911 truth nuts just does not wash here and they'll get called out on it.