The Power of Nightmares: The Shadows In The Cave

[Guderian]

The final espisode deals with the actual war on terror, it claims that Al Queda is not an international terror network, as claimed by the US and British governments, it claims that Al Queda had no influence until the attack on the WTC. After which the US governement created the term Al Queda which they got from dodgy sources in the Sudan embassy bombings, then Bin Laden used this name to create furthur publicity for his cause.

In the wake of the shock and panic created by the devastating attack on the World Trade Center on 11 September, 2001, the neo-conservatives reconstructed the radical Islamists in the image of their last evil enemy, the Soviet Union - a sinister web of terror run from the centre by Osama Bin Laden in his lair in Afghanistan.

But the nightmare vision of a uniquely powerful hidden organisation waiting to strike our societies is an illusion.

Wherever one looks for this al-Qaeda organisation, from the mountains of Afghanistan to the "sleeper cells" in America, the British and Americans are chasing a phantom enemy.

But the reason that no-one questions the illusion is because this nightmare enemy gives so many groups new power and influence in a cynical age - and not just politicians.

Those with the darkest imaginations have now become the most powerful.

In part one, the programme looked at the origins of the neo-conservatives and the radical Islamists in the 1950s.

The second part of the series examined how the radical Islamists and neo-conservatives came together to defeat the Soviet Union in Afghanistan.

What are your thoughts on the episode and do you think Al Queda exists/existed as an actual terror network? or are all the terrorist attacks isolated incidents motivated by Islam and and influenced by the publicity of terrorist attacks by the media?

[Ummon]

Here we are leaving the path of evidence to enter that of unsupported hypotheses.

[Guderian]

The documentary comes to this conclusion after examining the evidence. The channel which televised this, SBS Australia, is going to show a documentary called "the real Al Queda" which is supposed to refute the claims of the third episode of the Power of Nightmares. That's next tuesday, if it is interesting I will post a thread on that too.

[Erik]

I strongly beleive (and I had this stance before the documentary) that there is no organization that links different terrorist cells together.
There are, of course, terrorist organizations but they aren't driven by Osama or any other top-level terrorist organization, they are just a bunch of guys who turned radical and then blow themselves up.

When you see "toofage" of the Al-Qaida training kamp you always see people undergoing pretty standard military training (crawling under barbed wire).
Now, unless they beleive the Lonon subway wil be barricaded with barbed wire, I don't see how this is of any interest for terrorists.
So I assume these are pictures from a standard military training camp, for example for the Taliban's army.

I think Al-Qaida does exist, but it's a closed organization of a small group (say 10-20 people) of "thinkers", just like Team B.
I don't think there is any place where you can subscribe to the organization (wouldn't the secret services have found out by now?), nor do they give actual training to terrorists.

[Tiwaz]

Well, it is only logical to rather have separate organisations than one huge megalomaniac Organization of Terror and Things That Are Nasty, or OTTTAN.

It is more likely that what is considered "Al Quaida" is indeed blanket term given to large amount of different groups which may have slight contacts with one another (bit like international relations of intelligence agencies, they can call one another on some situations).

To have one large organisation would bring burden of bureaucracy, problems with security and overall inefficiency.

[Hanno the Navigator]

Well, Episode 3 does not unequivocally state the al-Qaeda does not exist "as a network", though it is easy and common to think it does. What it claims is that it is a network indeed, but not one made up from or dependent on physical contact or structure.

A harmless example for comparison would be indymedia. There is no structure uniting all the indymedia groups on the globe, though members have contact occasionally and sometimes work together. It is rather a network united by one thing: a common vision - in indymedia's case, the vision of media and news dispersion by ordinary people, in the case of al-Qaeda (and Osama seems to have liked the name, "the base" or "the foundation"), global terror in the name of Allah.

What's happening in Iraq is a case in point: al-Qaeda is the ultimate opt-in solution: there is a loose set of basic ideas behind it, and once you accept these, the only thing you have to say to get in is "I'm in". Every fanatic with an axe to grind can join al-Qaeda; there's no recruitment drive, no initiation ceremony, no hierarchy, no real coordination. That is what makes it so dangerous. In a conventional (physical) network, take out the key nodes and the thing collapses. But once the al-Qaeda idea has gotten hold, it is impossible to counter it except by tackling the very roots of the problem, the feeling of being second-rate among young lower-middle-class Muslim males that makes them join the Cause. Therefore, Power of Nightmares drives home a strong point: by building up al-Qaeda as something it wasn't and the "philosophers" of terror like Osama or Zawahri not letting their game dicated by Perle or Ledeen (i.e., building a conventional network structure reliant on physical contact and interaction), the "experts" in charge created something they could not handle; they built their own worst nightmare indeed.

What it also shows is that the West made Osama into the poster boy of terror he is these days. Hadn't there been all this focus on the man bin Ladin as the head of a shady well-connected network with sleeper cells and whatnot, he would have been the frustrated rich kid that once in his life managed to hit it big, or as we say here, the blind chicken that once in a while still finds a grain.

Butu did they learn from their mistakes? Nooooo. The mental flexivbility of those so-called "experts" of 20th century vintage did not manage to break out of their groupthink and get to grips with the real world in the 21st century. al-Zarqawi is, from all we know, the equivalent of a moderately successful Crips lieutenant: a gangbanger with some physical strength, but not outstanding in the intelligence department. In spite of this, he is blown up out of proportion as the "mastermind" or "coodrinator" of terrorism in Iraq, which is clearly impossible. By touting him as such, the US have created another poster boy whose example makes people who would otherwise stayed home and tended the sheep or whatnot go to Iraq and do the dirty thing: "if some hoodlum from the slums of Jordania's Pittsburgh can become a terrorist mastermind, so can I".

[Erik]

Very good description, Hanno.
It's also interesting to note that the term "Al-Qaida in Iraq" is made up by the US and then adopted to al-Zarqawi (who named his organization differently).
"Al-Qaida in Iraq" isn't realy liked to "Al-Qaida", they don't even share the same ideals.
But to be called "Al-Qaida in Iraq" gives you instand power and fame, it's like a token of recognition by the enemy.

Anyways, I came up with this comparisson:
I am a computer programmer.
You have computer programmers all over the world, developing software in small groups.
We have many trainings camps (universities/schools).
And we all share the same ideology that writing software is beneficial to society.
We even have sleeper cells: a friend of mine is trained as a programmer, but he currently works as a maths teacher.
Programmers sometimes get into contact with other programmers from different cells, for example to play online games and share "leet skillz".
But does this mean you can say there is an international NETWORK of computer programmers lead by Bill Gates and Linus Torvalds?

[MadKow]

My understanding is that the group that received the name Al-qaeda was fairly organized and financed originaly in Afghanistan, they were leftovers of the Muslim radicals that went there to fight the USSR, in the early eighties. Once the Russians retreated they spread to muslim countries trying to fuel their cause. We could see their actions in Egypt, Algeria and a few other countries. Since they were not successful in achieving power by targeting muslims, they turned against the USA, a perceived enemy (once ally) that was easier to gather support among muslims.

Its hard to tell the level of contact and organization that these groups have, but i would venture that they are more united by the idea, Al Qaeda as an ideal, with a now almost mythical figure (that may even not be alive anymore...) as role model, than by any de facto structure and organization.

[Ummon]

In any case, it is nice to hear that those guys who appear on tapes on the TV do not have any importance, and their organization doesn't exist. :wink:

[TIGERCAT]

I some questions to ask? Where is Bin Ladin?
Is he in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan? How can a man 6'-5"
in ill health and an I.V. bag vanish?
Is he dead, did he die in Tora Bora and is the U.S. govt.
covering it up so the war or whatever continues? Who is in charge of AL QAEDA now
and how large of an organization is it?

I just thought of something; if we (U.S.) can't ever
find HIS BODY; do we stay in the middle east forever?

[TIGERCAT]

In any case, it is nice to hear that those guys who appear on tapes on the TV do not have any importance, and their organization doesn't exist. :wink:

AGREED LOL

Erik is right it's all a conspiracy made up by the
Bush Admin. 9-11 was conducted by Jewish Americans
to get the U.S. army on ther ground in the Middle East.
Also, the U.S. never landed on the moon, it was
manufactured by Hollywood. (I hope you know
I'm being sarcastic)

[Guderian]

Very well put Hanno, what this means is that the Al Queda as described by the Bush administration did not exist. What did exist was a bunch of frustrated fundamentalists who got kicked out of every country in the ME and were hiding out in Afghanistan trying to get some publicity by creating a new enemy, in this case America. It was the neo cons which created them into the worldwide terror network by the name of Al Queda, by portraying them as such.

Now any muslim can become a part of Al Queda simply by watching the news and deciding Bin Laden is thier hero...when in actual fact he is "the blind chicken that once in a while still finds a grain" as Hanno put it.

[Francisco Montana]

Very well put Hanno, what this means is that the Al Queda as described by the Bush administration did not exist. It was the neo cons which created them into the worldwide terror network by the name of Al Queda, by portraying them as such.

Ahhh, so it was the neocon Republican, Bill Clinton who said we needed to bring Bin Laden and the rest of Al Qaeda to justice. And, appearantly it was neocon Republican jews who flew those planes into the World Trade Center towers.

Man, I don't know how I missed all those facts.

Thanks for clearing it all up for me.

[TIGERCAT]

Agreed

[Guderian]

Ahhh, so it was the neocon Republican, Bill Clinton who said we needed to bring Bin Laden and the rest of Al Qaeda to justice. And, appearantly it was neocon Republican jews who flew those planes into the World Trade Center towers.

Did you read Hanno's post or even mine? Did Bill Clinton say Al Queda? Was it before or after the Sudan embassy bombings trial? All I can say is watch the documentary because none of what your saying is what is claimed in the documentary.

"what this means is that the Al Queda as described by the Bush administration did not exist."

It's free and downloadable here:

http://marc.perkel.com/archives/000753.html

[Guderian]

An actual excerpt from The Power of Nightmares: The Shadows In The Cave regarding 9/11, and the Bush administrations reaction.

VOICE OVER:
The attack on America by 19 hijackers shocked the world. It was Ayman Zawahiri's new strategy, implemented in a brutal and spectacular way. But neither he nor bin Laden were the originators of what was called the ''Planes Operation.'' It was the brainchild of an Islamist militant called Khalid Sheik Mohammed, who came to bin Laden for funding and help in finding volunteers. But in the wake of panic created by the attacks, the politicians reached for the model which had been created by the trial earlier that year: the hijackers were just the tip of a vast, international terrorist network which was called, ''Al Qaeda.''

[CUT TO INTERIOR, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, UNITED STATES CONGRESS]

GEORGE W BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES [ON SPEAKER'S PODIUM]:
Al Qaeda is to terror what the Mafia is to crime. There are thousands of these terrorists in more than 60 countries. They are recruited from their own nations and neighborhoods, and brought to camps in places like Afghanistan, where they are trained in the tactics of terror.


[CUT TO PENTAGON BRIEFING ROOM]

DONALD RUMSFELD, SECRETARY OF DEFENSE:
This one network, Al Qaeda, that's receiving so much discussion and publicity make have activities in 50 to 60 countries, including the United States.

[CUT TO OTHER INTERIOR, PODIUM]

BUSH:
Our war is against networks and groups, people who coddle them, people who try to hide them, people who fund them. This is our calling.


VOICE OVER:
And the attacks had another dramatic effect: they brought the neoconservatives back to power in America. When George Bush first became president, he had appointed neoconservatives like Paul Wolfowitz, and their allies like Donald Rumsfeld, to his administration. But their grand vision of America's role in the world was largely ignored by this new régime.

[TITLE: SEPTEMBER 2000]

[CUT TO PRESIDENTIAL DEBATE]

BUSH:

I just don't think it's the role of the United States to walk into another country and say, ''We do it this way, so should you.''

[TITLE: BUT NOW]

BUSH:
We're going to find those who, uh, who, uh, uh, those evil-doers.

VOICE OVER:
But now, the neoconservatives became all-powerful, because this terror network proved that what they had been predicting through the 1990s was correct: that America was at risk from terrifying new forces in a hostile world. A small group formed that began to shape America's response to the attacks. At its heart were Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, along with the vice-president, Dick Cheney, and Richard Perle, who was a senior advisor to the Pentagon. The last time these men had been in power together was 20 years before, under President Reagan. Back then, they had taken on and, as they saw it, defeated a source of evil that wanted to take over America: the Soviet Union. And now they saw this new war on terror in the same epic terms.


RICHARD PERLE, CHAIRMAN PENTAGON DEFENSE POLICY BOARD 2001-2003:
The struggle against Soviet totalitarianism was a struggle between fundamental value questions. ''Good'' and ''evil'' is about as effective a shorthand as I can imagine in this regard, and there's something rather similar going on in the war on terror. It isn't a war on terror, it's a war on terrorists who want to impose an intolerant tyranny on all mankind, an Islamic universe in which we are all compelled to accept their beliefs and live by their lights, and in that sense this is a battle between good and evil.

VOICE OVER:
But, as previous episodes have shown, the neoconservatives distorted and exaggerated the Soviet threat. They created the image of a hidden, international web of evil run from Moscow that planned to dominate the world, when, in reality, the Soviet Union was on its last legs, collapsing from within. Now, they did the same with the Islamists. They took a failing movement which had lost mass support and began to reconstruct it into the image of a powerful network of evil, controlled from the center by bin Laden from his lair in Afghanistan. They did this because it fitted with their vision of America's unique destiny to fight an epic battle against the forces of evil throughout the world.

VINCENT CANNISTRARO, HEAD OF COUNTER - TERRORISM, CIA, 1988-90:
What the neoconservatives are doing is taking a concept that they developed during the competition with the Soviet Union, i.e., Soviet Communism was evil, it wanted to take over our country, wanted to take over our people, our classrooms, our society. It was that kind of concept of evil that they took -- an exaggerated one, to be sure -- and then apply it to a new threat, where it didn't apply at all, and yet it was layered with the same kind of cultural baggage. The policy says there's a network, the policy says that network is evil, they want to infiltrate our classrooms, they want to take our society, they want all our women to wear, you know, veils, and this is what we have to deal with and therefore since we know it's evil let's just kill it, and that will make it go away.

Source

[Francisco Montana]

That's funny, because in the spring of 1998 the Clinton Justice Department prepared an indictment of Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda network. The relevant passage, prominently placed in the fourth paragraph, reads:


"Al Qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al Qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects, specifically including weapons development, al Qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq."

Ooops. Guess you shouldn't believe everything you read. I still have some kool-aid left over if you so desire. :wink:

[Guderian]

How about a source my Lord...

That quote would not be related to the 1998 New York trial of the WTC bombers would it?

[Francisco Montana]

The source is the United States Department of Justice. If you can't find it there yourself (it's not easy to navigate I agree....just SOOO much info involved) I have it here for you in a nice news article from 1998.

http://usinfo.state.gov/is/Archive_I..._Bombings.html
(I count 9 al Qaeda references)

This is Bill Clinton's Justice Department, remember. :wink:

[Guderian]

Ah so it was quoted from the Sudan trials. This is exactly what the documentary is claiming. It did not claim that the Bush Administration actually invented the term but it exagerated the term.

Al Queda was used by prosecuters in the trial so that they could prosecute Bin Laden for the bombings, using laws intended to take down mafia dons. I.e A mafia don is prosecutable even if he has not commited any actual crime under US laws since he is the head of a criminal organisation. The documentary claims that the prosecuters created this term so as to prosecute Bin Laden for the Sudan bombing in his absence. Transcript from the documentary:

[TITLE: MANHATTAN, JANUARY 2001]

VOICE OVER:
In January, 2001, a trial began in a Manhattan courtroom of four men accused of the embassy bombings in east Africa. But the Americans had also decided to prosecute bin Laden in his absence. But to do this under American law, the prosecutors needed evidence of a criminal organisation because, as with the Mafia, that would allow them to prosecute the head of the organisation even if he could not be linked directly to the crime. And the evidence for that organisation was provided for them by an ex-associate of bin Laden's called Jamal al-Fadl.

JASON BURKE, AUTHOR, ''AL QAEDA'':
During the investigation of the 1998 bombings, there is a walk-in source, Jamal al-Fadl, who is a Sudanese militant who was with bin Laden in the early 90s, who has been passed around a whole series of Middle East secret services, none of whom want much to do with him, and who ends up in America and is taken on by -- uh -- the American government, effectively, as a key prosecution witness and is given a huge amount of American taxpayers' money at the same time. And his account is used as raw material to build up a picture of Al Qaeda. The picture that the FBI want to build up is one that will fit the existing laws that they will have to use to prosecute those responsible for the bombing. Now, those laws were drawn up to counteract organised crime: the Mafia, drugs crime, crimes where people being a member of an organisation is extremely important. You have to have an organisation to get a prosecution. And you have al-Fadl and a number of other witness, a number of other sources, who are happy to feed into this. You've got material that, looked at in a certain way, can be seen to show this organisation's existence. You put the two together and you get what is the first bin Laden myth -- the first Al Qaeda myth. And because it's one of the first, it's extremely influential.


VOICE OVER:
The picture al-Fadl drew for the Americans of bin Laden was of an all-powerful figure at the head of a large terrorist network that had an organised network of control. He also said that bin Laden had given this network a name: ''Al Qaeda.'' It was a dramatic and powerful picture of bin Laden, but it bore little relationship to the truth.

[EXCERPT, CNN EXCLUSIVE VIDEO: BIN LADEN AND SOLDIERS]

VOICE OVER:
The reality was that bin Laden and Ayman Zawahiri had become the focus of a loose association of disillusioned Islamist militants who were attracted by the new strategy. But there was no organisation. These were militants who mostly planned their own operations and looked to bin Laden for funding and assistance. He was not their commander. There is also no evidence that bin Laden used the term ''Al Qaeda'' to refer to the name of a group until after September the 11th, when he realized that this was the term the Americans have given it.

[CUT TO MANHATTAN SKYLINE]


VOICE OVER:
In reality, Jamal al-Fadl was on the run from bin Laden, having stolen money from him. In return for his evidence, the Americans gave him witness protection in America and hundreds of thousands of dollars. Many lawyers at the trial believed that al-Fadl exaggerated and lied to give the Americans the picture of a terrorist organisation that they needed to prosecute bin Laden.

SAM SCHMIDT, DEFENCE LAWYER EMBASSY BOMBINGS TRIAL:
And there were selective portions of al-Fadl's testimony that I believe was false, to help support the picture that he helped the Americans join together. I think he lied in a number of specific testimony about a unified image of what this organisation was. It made Al Qaeda the new Mafia or the new Communists. It made them identifiable as a group and therefore made it easier to prosecute any person associated with Al Qaeda for any acts or statements made by bin Laden -- who talked a lot.

BURKE:
The idea -- which is critical to the FBI's prosecution -- that bin Laden ran a coherent organisation with operatives and cells all around the world of which you could be a member is a myth. There is no Al Qaeda organisation. There is no international network with a leader, with cadres who will unquestioningly obey orders, with tentacles that stretch out to sleeper cells in America, in Africa, in Europe. That idea of a coherent, structured terrorist network with an organised capability simply does not exist.