"Arc of extremism" - Blair tries to tie Hezbollah to Al Qaeda

26 posts / 0 new
Last post
Pilchardman's picture
Pilchardman
Offline
Joined: 29-12-03
Aug 1 2006 22:02
"Arc of extremism" - Blair tries to tie Hezbollah to Al Qaeda

He really is a mendacious shit. Any serious observer will tell you Hezbollah - whatever else you might feel about them - is not allied to A-Q.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5236862.stm

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Aug 1 2006 22:11

they're all brown and mental and from the orient aren't they? the Other returns ...

ghostzart
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Aug 2 2006 07:38

Funny, considering al-Qaeda infiltrated Hizbollah and tried to assassinate their leader. Somehow I doubt they're the best of allies. I read a quote from an interview, I think it was in Time.com, where Nasrallah said something like, "What did the deaths of those people in the towers in New York accomplish? The war is over here in the Middle East."

MalFunction
Offline
Joined: 31-10-03
Aug 2 2006 14:35

Al quaeda being mainly Sunni and Hizbollah being Shiite might pose something of a problem in them working together.

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Aug 2 2006 15:24

since when has orientalist ruling class propaganda had to be logically coherent? smile

Quote:
Mr Blair added: "We need to make clear to Syria and Iran that there is a choice: come in to the international community and play by the same rules as the rest of us [i.e. rush arms shipments to bomb civilians?]; or be confronted."
Refused's picture
Refused
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Aug 2 2006 17:27
MalFunction wrote:
Al quaeda being mainly Sunni and Hizbollah being Shiite might pose something of a problem in them working together.

Reality tends to have a left-wing bias, so unless you stop paying attention to reality the terrorists win.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Aug 14 2006 18:54

Wouldn't al-Qaeda have to exist as a group in the first place before they could be "allied" with anyone?

Felix Frost's picture
Felix Frost
Offline
Joined: 30-12-05
Aug 14 2006 19:19

Al-Qaeda does exist as a group. Is anyone claiming otherwise?

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Aug 14 2006 19:29
Felix Frost wrote:
Al-Qaeda does exist as a group. Is anyone claiming otherwise?

I am.

Al-Qaeda is a movement, which is comprised of various small cells and a very small number networks which link a few of these cells together. It is not a coherent group with a formal structure and thus can't really be allied to anything, least of all a fairly loose group with a much broader ideology that conflicts with that of Al-Qaeda.

Edit: what I'm trying to say is that saying "Hezbollah is allied to Al-Qaeda" is somewhat akin to saying "The SWP is allied to anarchist communism"

Felix Frost's picture
Felix Frost
Offline
Joined: 30-12-05
Aug 14 2006 22:47

Al-Qaeda is as far as I know a quite small network with a clear leadership: Bin Laden and friends. In adition to this, it is linked to - one might say allied to - a wider movement of radical islamists.

I also find it odd to argue that only coherent groups with formal stuctures can have allies.

By the way, I had a look at the link in the beginning of this thread, and it didn't claim anywhere that Hezbollah was allied to al-Qaeda.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Aug 15 2006 17:31
Felix Frost wrote:
Al-Qaeda is as far as I know a quite small network with a clear leadership: Bin Laden and friends. In adition to this, it is linked to - one might say allied to - a wider movement of radical islamists.

I also find it odd to argue that only coherent groups with formal stuctures can have allies.

By the way, I had a look at the link in the beginning of this thread, and it didn't claim anywhere that Hezbollah was allied to al-Qaeda.

Blair's making an 'almagam' - mentioning different groups in the same sentence enough and it begins to look like they're related. Talking about an 'arc of extremism' means that he sees Hizb and A-Q as essentially similar, if not related.

Pilchardman's picture
Pilchardman
Offline
Joined: 29-12-03
Aug 15 2006 18:49

And he's saying that when Israel kills Lebanese civilians it is doing so in the War Against Terror. (Rather than enaging in terror itself). His intention is to create for and against camps. And serve notice to people in the wrong camp that they can be attacked by the Good Guys.

His audience, though, was us. He may be softening us up for an attack on Iran.

Steven.'s picture
Steven.
Offline
Joined: 27-06-06
Aug 19 2006 19:52
Felix Frost wrote:
Al-Qaeda does exist as a group. Is anyone claiming otherwise?

I read a review in some mens magazine of a BBC documentary which made this claim I believe. Saying that Al Qaida wasn't a real group, but as the US govt + media claimed Al Quaida was responsible for 9-11 etc. a lot of islamist groups adopted the label. I didn't watch it though.

madashell's picture
madashell
Offline
Joined: 19-06-06
Aug 20 2006 00:34
John. wrote:
I read a review in some mens magazine of a BBC documentary which made this claim I believe. Saying that Al Qaida wasn't a real group, but as the US govt + media claimed Al Quaida was responsible for 9-11 etc. a lot of islamist groups adopted the label. I didn't watch it though.

Jason Burke's al-Qaeda: the true story of radical Islam is quite a good one on this.

Basically, Burke argues (fairly convincingly, IMO) the organisation around Bin Laden that is popularly conceived to exist only really existed as a coherent organisation from 1995 to 2001, after it lost it's roots in Afghanistan it became a more disparate network similar to the radical Islamist movement prior to its formation. This group never actually called itself al-Qaeda until that label was applied to it by American security services.

Caiman del Barrio
Offline
Joined: 28-09-04
Aug 20 2006 01:59
John. wrote:
Al Qaida wasn't a real group, but as the US govt + media claimed Al Quaida was responsible for 9-11 etc., a lot of islamist groups adopted the label.

Indeed...I'd hypothesise that the vast majority of "Islamist" terrorism has been a self-fulfilling prophesy as concerns Blair and Bush.

Felix Frost's picture
Felix Frost
Offline
Joined: 30-12-05
Aug 20 2006 23:00

Yeah, the Bin Laden network used the name "World Islamic Front for Jihad against Zionists and Crusaders" pre 9/11, but they have since adopted the al-Qaeda label. Probably they decided it was catchier and had better name recognition...

Today they seem to operate on a franchice model, whereby local islaminst groups can swear loyalty to Bin Laden and in return get to use the al-Qaeda brand name. So maybe they are more of a loose network than a coherent organization, but I still don't see why this would preclude them from having allies.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Aug 21 2006 12:06
Felix Frost wrote:
Today they seem to operate on a franchice model, whereby local islaminst groups can swear loyalty to Bin Laden and in return get to use the al-Qaeda brand name. So maybe they are more of a loose network than a coherent organization, but I still don't see why this would preclude them from having allies.

I agree with this conception of AQ's structure. The reaso that they're unlikely to be real allies with Hezbollah has already been pointed out above - it's similar to the reasons that Baathists and AQ's aren't allies, even though they may share enemies.

Felix Frost's picture
Felix Frost
Offline
Joined: 30-12-05
Aug 21 2006 15:59
Lazlo_Woodbine wrote:
The reaso that they're unlikely to be real allies with Hezbollah has already been pointed out above - it's similar to the reasons that Baathists and AQ's aren't allies, even though they may share enemies.

Actually, the Baathists and the "al-Qaeda in Iraq" group are sort of allies today, even though I'm sure they really hate each other and are just waiting for a chanse to stab each other in the back. Hezbollahs friends in Iraq, on the other hand, actually take part in the American supported government.

It's all politics.

Lazlo_Woodbine
Offline
Joined: 26-09-03
Aug 21 2006 16:29
Felix Frost wrote:
Actually, the Baathists and the "al-Qaeda in Iraq" group are sort of allies today

Like I said, just because they attack some of the same people doesn't mean they're allies, any more than the Royalist and Communist partisans in Yugo were. Zarqawi's salafeh fighters aren't too popular with the Iraqi nationalists, especially since many are syrians and saudis.

theanarchistfor...
Offline
Joined: 2-08-06
Aug 21 2006 16:32

What ever happened to looking into the theory that the Saudi airforce carried out the 9/11 attacks? It seems to have been buried along with all that molten gold.

Joseph Kay's picture
Joseph Kay
Offline
Joined: 14-03-06
Aug 21 2006 17:37

phoenix, your trolling is getting tiresome. you come on a libertarian communist board, tell us if we don't support al qaeda we're US stooges, don't engage at all with others, except to occasionally acknowledge a good point - then restate your initial position regardless.

cantdocartwheels's picture
cantdocartwheels
Offline
Joined: 15-03-04
Aug 22 2006 07:32
theanarchistformerlyknownasphoenix wrote:
What ever happened to looking into the theory that the Saudi airforce carried out the 9/11 attacks? It seems to have been buried in the dark recesses of my brain, possibly by nanotechnology.

No but seriously, how on fucking earth do you figure that the saudi arabian airforce has the militay might to assault the eastern sea board?

john
Offline
Joined: 9-07-06
Aug 22 2006 09:46

who did do it, then?

because surely "Al-Kaieeda" have got even less might

jef costello's picture
jef costello
Offline
Joined: 9-02-06
Aug 22 2006 09:58
Lazlo_Woodbine wrote:
The reaso that they're unlikely to be real allies with Hezbollah has already been pointed out above - it's similar to the reasons that Baathists and AQ's aren't allies, even though they may share enemies.

Exactly, the Baathists may use islamic rhetoric when it suits them, as Saddam did, but they are basically secular. As far as Al-Qaeda is in Iraq it is since the invasion and the collapse of the Iraqi security services.

Quote:
Actually, the Baathists and the "al-Qaeda in Iraq" group are sort of allies today, even though I'm sure they really hate each other and are just waiting for a chanse to stab each other in the back. Hezbollahs friends in Iraq, on the other hand, actually take part in the American supported government.

Who are Hezbollah's friends in Iraq? Sciri?
This is the rub, (as far as it is an organisation) Al Qaeda's founders and funders seem to be salafists, so as long as it is about power they may work with Shias, but it will only be a tactical alliance.
I read an article which described AQ as an ideology rather than an organisations. Small groups may be in contact with each other, they may reference each other and copy each others tactics, this does not mean that there is any kind of centrally controlled organised network. I would still put a large amount of the activity in Iraq down to conflict between factions. The only faction that really seem to benefit from the American presence are the Kurds, and their areas are notably free of roadside bombs and the like.

Mr.Lazy
Offline
Joined: 8-07-06
Aug 28 2006 15:24

http://www.archive.org/details/ThePowerOfNightmares

downloadable bbc documentary