Does Al Qaida really exist??

Hello to all.

Here's a sure to be controversial question. But one that I think really needs to be asked.

I know that the simple answer to this is ...YES, of course it exists! But does it really? Does it exist as it has been built up by the media, and certain government administrations?

Does Osama Bin Laden exist? Did he ever? If he does (did), is he now dead?

Who was that guy with the false beard, and false nose who appeared in the latest "Al Qaida video"?

Where was that video produced? and by whom?

When a government wishes to impose tyranny on the people, it needs a "Boogeyman".

Who here feels 'threatened' by people hiding in caves in a remote corner of the planet?

I don't. And yet I am being led to believe that this supposed small group of Islamic radicals hiding in caves in a remote region of the planet, is the biggest threat to my existence ever!

I'm not buying it.

Are you?

And please don't answer this question like they do on the Fedorah Chronicles...by posting pictures of building demolitions. Answer it with real intelligent thought.

Bin ladens alive
and yes theres al queda

OK.........

Thanks............

But do you think that they are the biggest threat to Western Civilization EVER???

Or are they a few fanatics hiding out in caves in a remote corner of the planet???

Where is Bin Laden?

False binary. Nice.

Of course they aren't the biggest threat to Western civilization ever, but the entire point of terrorism is that when there's a threat from a non-state actor, a few radicals who are willing to be violent can cause great fear and not entirely without reason. Entirely apart from the threat to life and limb, though that does sometimes take place, is the psychological threat. I'm not into French philosophy or Foucault or anything, but that's a valid point. Terrorism makes every place a potential target and every person a potential perpetrator. Al-Qaeda is just the most prominent practitioner of this, from the American perspective, at least.

But by your post you imply that there is a 'threat' from this organization called Al Qaida.

I'm not so sure.

I mean, of course there is a 'threat'. There is a threat from anything. There is a threat if I go out on the freeway that I will be killed in a car accident. If a warm front collides with a cold front there is a threat that I will be killed in a tornado. Drug crazed gang members threaten me on the streets of America's large cities.

But does the organization labeled Al Qaida really exist in such a degree that it threatens us here in Western Civilization, that it requires us to pursue the extreme measures that we do? Does it require us to alter our basic foundations of Western Civilization?

I think not.

But there are dark forces at work who wish to usurp our freedoms, and who use the "Boogeyman" Al Qaida to do so.

I am fundamentally opposed to those forces. Furthermore, I question, if not the existence of Al Qaida, then certainly their potency, or their ability to 'threaten' us.

Please, the old chestnut about how evil Republicans are and how they'd impose an Orwellian state if they could? Surely we can do better than that.

My point is that the unique capacity al-Qaeda and like entities have to inflict large damage at will any place they like, whether or not they will (they very likely may not) inflicts definite psychological damage on people. Perhaps the current administration has, from time to time, taken advantage of this fear to advance other goals (for reasons which, I'm quite suspect, are not nefarious in nature but rather wrong-headed), but even were this not the case, the fear would still be real. It's probably better to encourage some level of a culture of fear rather than to be forced to deal with the even more severe psychological aftermath of another attack, in the event of one.

Thats a really good question
I do believe obviously they exist but i think the media do build up the threat so it makes it look like were actually extinguishing a modern threat to civilization but i dont find it terrorizing that al qaeda is hiding in caves.I mean how is anyone supposed to be scared of a few people hiding in a cave in the middle of basically nowhere?The media plays it a bit i think maybe just to a)have something interesting and possibly scary subject on the news and to B)Make everyone believe there is a threat out there and bring fear into homes so people think theres actually something worth fighting for

I do have great admiration and respect for anyone fighting in the war of "terrorism"

After a doco I watched last night, I'm more worried about Russia.

Attila the Professor said:

Please, the old chestnut about how evil Republicans are and how they'd impose an Orwellian state if they could? Surely we can do better than that.

It's probably better to encourage some level of a culture of fear rather than to be forced to deal with the even more severe psychological aftermath of another attack, in the event of one.

Click to expand...

To the first: It's not a chestnut, but rather an encroaching reality.

To the second: You speak for yourself. I myself would rather risk the proverbial "Attack", than to give up my liberties and freedoms, and live in a society ruled by fear.

To quote a famous American: "Give me liberty, or give me death". (Nathan Hale)

Americans, or for that matter, Western Civilization, has never before cowered in fear before anyone or anything. Why now? and why before some rag tag band of cave dwellers? Simple: because it suits the dark forces that wish to enslave the world in their corporate plantation.

North korea freaks me out its so isolated and comminist and obviously dictatorship and you just dont know wtf is going on in that country or what theyre planning

Al Qaida surely exists, but its figure is used to justify actions that have nothing to do with fighting terrorism... like invading Iraq.

And I seriously doubt Bin Laden lives in a cave.

monkey said:

To quote a famous American: "Give me liberty, or give me death". (Nathan Hale)

Click to expand...

this was said by PATRICK HENRY, not nathan hale.

yes, al-qaeda exists. yes, bin ladin is alive and still giving us little anti-american chestnuts, thanking the left-wing for helping him (but the left wing is too thick-headed to understand this aspect) and referencing our pop-culture to prove that the videos are recent.

iran and russia are going to be the big problems. bin ladin is irrelevant--he's simply a icon or figurehead to the movement--that's it. north korea is a problem, but nothing on the level of iran and russia. russia might be doing a treaty of versailles on us--putin is bad. hugo chavez and venezuela are other problems.

meanwhile, we have hanoi jane [fonda] and sean penn helping terrorists. there are tapes of terrorists actually commenting on these people saying how inspired they are to destroy america when they see/hear these people.

let's just say that these terrorists have explicitly spelled out exactly what they are planning to do to us. and ironically, two of the first people they want the heads of are madonna and britney--examples of people they consider vulgar figureheads of what they are fighting against. they plan to be coming after those very hollywood idiots who are running around saying things like terrorists are mommies and daddies, too (here's looking at you, rosie).

you know how you deal with terrorists? you stick them back in the dark ages where they came from and kill them before they kill you.

to them, the western world is WEAK. by not fighting them, they see that as a sign of weakness. peace treaty crap is a joke to these people. they will not stop until the entire world is fundamentalist muslim. the definition of "peace" is that peace is when the entire world believes the same as you do--without freedom of choice (and yes, that is marxist ideology--in his own words: "the meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism"). but you can stick any other word in there and you have the definition of peace for anybody who wants to force their beliefs on you (including radical islam).

another nugget from marx: "all that is necessary for evil to succeed is for good men to do nothing."

(chilling, isn't it?)

I tend to think there's a reason Locke, Jefferson, and their fellows list "life" prior to "liberty" (and both prior to "property" or "the pursuit of happiness") that isn't merely rhetorical. The primary duty of the state has always been the protection of its citizens from outside forces. Everything else, including customarily accepted rights, are only secondary or tertiary.

I don't think people are cowering. I hate to jump on you for this, but you do seem to view the world in binaries, and that's just a tendency I've never understood. There's a middle ground between getting into bunkers and only leaving to go to the mall and between complete and total ignorance of the issue so that nothing can affect our way of life, and that's probably where we are.

Do you not realize how disasterous it would be if an attack occurred and the government had tried to make it seem as if it were impossible? How all legitimacy and faith in government would be lost, how an already skeptical civil society would be dealt yet another blow, how people actually would begin to out-and-out cower?

And, again, I fail to see any persuasive evidence that the motivations of President Bush and his administration are evil rather than wrong-headed. Basically claiming that they're slave-drivers is pretty strong and it'd be nice to see something to back that up. Don't attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by incompetence.

Al Queada is more of a rag tag group of extremists, they most certainly exist & of course their image is being overblown by the media, after all they caught the US with its pants down on 9/11.

Violet Indy said:

After a doco I watched last night, I'm more worried about Russia.

Click to expand...

I watched it too. Something about Sputnik. Sort of disturbing just how secretive and obssessed Mr. Eisenhower was to get up there...


As for this thread...what a dumb idea. Al Quada (that's probably spelled wrong, I know) definitely exists, along with Bin Laden, Hitler, Alexander the great and King Herod (Just Kidding! I could hear your roars of fury fifty miles away ClintonHammond...I couldn't resist...)! Look at all those poor people that died on 9/11? Have you watched any 9/11 docs lately? If you even attempted to talk to the hurting families of those victims about this 'conspiracy' idea of yours, you would get a well-deserved slap and possibly a complaint to the police. What you guys are thinking about this fake-Al Quada theory is disrespectful, cruel and unecessary deep thinking that is an insult to the poor people that died on that day. Same goes for Holocaust deniers. They want to not believe in such terrible events because they refuse to acknowledge mankind's murderous, homicidal and sadistic nature. People who deny or are skeptical towards this type of stuff (They caught 9/11 on TV, for christs sake!) are just cowardly.

Sorry if I have offended anybody. I get really into these type of discussions. (I just hope Finn doesn't lock this thread up because of me... )

bin ladens hiding and people are supplying him with food and stuff .

It's hard to say if bin laden is still alive there's some evidence he is but I think what most likely is that he's dead but the government won't tell us that so they can keep the war going. Hopefully Australia will be out soon because it's 99.9% that Howard's going to be voted out and Rudd will bring our troops back 3 of them have already been killed.

bin ladens alive he has enough support

monkey said:

Attila, I'll buy your 'incompetence rather than evil' theory concerning the current US Administration. But I believe that there are dark forces working in the background that manipulate. Corporate greed and Neocon philosophies.

Click to expand...

I'll grant you that corporate greed can get out of hand (although I tend to defend capitalism on liberal and developmental grounds). Neoconservativism is another story however. The problem with neoconservatism is not that it is morally corrupt or evil but rather that it is morally pure and that that sort of purity leads to wrong conclusions, most particularly in the international sphere. Imposition of democracy is among the most dangerous things possible; I believe this fervently. But their motives are decent.