Time to talk to Al Qaeda?

[ECH1969]

AS THE WAR between the United States and Al Qaeda enters its fifth year, the nature of the armed, transnational Islamist group's campaign remains misunderstood. With the conflict viewed largely as an open-and-shut matter of good versus evil, nonmilitary engagement with Al Qaeda is depicted as improper and unnecessary.

Yet developing a strategy for the next phase of the global response to Al Qaeda requires understanding the enemy -- something Western analysts have systematically failed to do. Sept. 11 was not an unprovoked, gratuitous act. It was a military operation researched and planned since at least 1996 and conducted by a trained commando in the context of a war that had twice been declared officially and publicly. The operation targeted two military locations and a civilian facility regarded as the symbol of US economic and financial power. The assault was the culmination of a larger campaign, which forecast impact, planned for the enemy's reaction, and was designed to gain the tactical upper hand.

Overwhelmingly centered on the martial aspects of the conflict, scholars and policymakers have been too focused on Al Qaeda's ''irrationality," ''fundamentalism," and ''hatred" -- and these conceptions continue to color key analyses. The sway of such explanations is particularly surprising in the face of nonambiguous statements made by Al Qaeda as to the main reasons for its war on the United States. These have been offered consistently since 1996, notably in the August 1996 and February 1998 declarations of war and the November 2002 and October 2004 justifications for its continuation.

Since the attacks on New York and Washington, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri have delivered, respectively, 18 and 15 messages via audio or videotape making a three-part case: The United States must end its military presence in the Middle East, its uncritical political support and military aid of Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories, and its support of corrupt and coercive regimes in the Arab and Muslim world.

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2005/09/14/time_to_talk_to_al_qaeda/

[wtmusic]

1. Finally some common sense in the media

although "talking to al Qaeda" is a stretch.

[Spoonerian]

3. Maybe someone could break the ice

by asking them why they chose a their name from a US military intelligence database.

[wtmusic]

4. First I've heard of that one

have a link?

[Spoonerian]

5. First of all,

if such a group as "Al Queda" exists at all, they would never be allowed to choose their name. That's the job of embedded script writers in the US government and media in Washington and Hollywood.

I recall watching 60 minutes a few years ago and I think I saw that Richard Clark guy tell a story about how they coined the Al Queda brand name in Washington.

Yesterday, I came across a quip that the name came from some government secret spook database. After searching for the quote for the last hour, I finally found it:

"It apparently does not matter at all that the London bombings were never connected to al-Qaeda or for that matter were the perpetrators ever satisfactorily identified (since they were conveniently blown to smithereens, or so we are told)—in Bushzarro (and Blairzarro) world, all terrorism stems from a single source—an evil and omnipotent clan of medieval Muslim cave dwellers who took their name from an intelligence database."

link from Another Day in the Empire

[wtmusic]

7. Without denying what you're saying is possible

that's a crappy source. Not attributed to anything or anyone. An opinion.

[Spoonerian]

8. Yes, clearly it was a "quip"

as I called it. But their point (and mine) was that these monsters, their names, and the legends that grow up around them are manufactured by the US government. In this case, at least one US government employee has claimed that they invented the name "Al Qaeda" themselves. Earlier, when I was searching for the quip, I googled to try to find something documenting what I saw on 60 minutes where Clark told the story about how they coined the name, but didn't find anything. I'll look again later.

[wtmusic]

9. I seem to recall Clarke saying something about that

in his book...will also do some checking

[Spoonerian]

10. The name "al-Qaeda" was first coined by the U.S.

federal government based on the name of a computer file of bin Laden's that listed the names of contacts he had made in Afghanistan, which talks about the organisation as the al-Qaeda-al-Jihad ("the base of the jihad"). In neither Osama bin Laden's declaration of war, or the fatwa he issued in 1998, does he mention an organisation called "al-Qaeda." "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jamal_al-Fadl

So, apparently one may kid with one's "al-qaeda" sympathizing friends and relatives about how they "chose" their name from a U.S. government spook database and still be grounded in wikipedian established fact--concerning everything but the "choosing" that is. But I think an "al-qaeda" sympathizing friend or relative would recognize the sarcasm.

[wtmusic]

11. thanks

heh how typical. Probably a mis-translation that everybody decided would be a good handle to hang on the nemesis du jour.

I apologize for my bad manners

welcome to DU

:bounce: :toast: :bounce:

[enigma000]

2. Does this include surrender?

American President Osama bin-Laden? Might be a hard sell to the public.

[sarcasmo]

6. Does this include talking to AL-CIA-DU? The real Bogey MAN

[applegrove]

12. I wouldn't talk to murderes. Especially not when bin Laden is sick.