Talk:Al-Qaeda

"Flag of Al Qaeda"

Further information: Black Standard and Flag of al-Qaeda

This image is used as the "flag of Al Qaeda" all over Wikipedia, even as casual and superfluous thumbnail, as if this was about a participating nation in some sports event. Can people please muster some minimal skepticism? The source of this flag is a single, unverifiable report made to Flags of the World in September 2004[1]. The reporting user stated that "The flag is being debated as either Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi’s al-Qaeda (Ansar al-Zarqawi) flag or the al-Qaeda flag in Iraq" and that he himself (having served in Iraq for six months) had a captured banner with this design, and that another personal acquaintance of his has another version, with white lettering.

Now this report, even if unverifiable, sounds credible enough to excuse people who state that "this is a flag seen in some beheading videos back in 2004, and captured in some al-Qaeda safe-houses at the time". It is certainly not enough to excuse using this as a generic logo of al-Qaeda all over Wikipedia.

Additionally, will you please take note that the reporting user is identified as "Colonel Emerson Begolly". I don't know if anyone touting this flag in terrorism articles has ever bothered to google the name. A "Colonel Emerson Begolly" is entirely unknown to the internet other than in the context of this very flag. But a person called "Emerson Begolly" (not a Colonel) is very well known to the internet. And Emerson Begolly isn't exactly a very likely or frequent name. Emerson Begolly is a "Nazi buff turned Jihadi" who was arrested by the FBI this past January.

It is as likely as not that this person, clearly an utter nutcase, has made up this flag and the story connected with it, out of thin air back in 2004 and posted it to FOTW. If there is, by some weird coincidence, a bona fide Col. Emerson Begolly somewhere, I will be very surprised, but until we have verified that there is, this flag design clearly shouldn't be used anywhere on Wikipedia. Thank you. --dab (𒁳) 16:00, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

I am not going to sift through beheading videos just to research this, but here[2][3][4] is some evidence that whenever al Qaeda members feel they need some sort of wall hanger or logo, they simply use the white-on-black Shahada also used by the Taliban and by Islamic extremists in general.[5] In other words, there is no "flag of al Qaeda", but if you absolutely must use some sort of logo, just take File:Flag of Jihad.svg, the "reverse Taliban flag" that has been displayed on some pro-al-Qaeda websites from 2001.

The internet has it that "Nazi Jihadist" Emerson Begolly was obsessed with watching beheading videos, so it may well be that he was acquainted with wall decorations in this context. So perhaps his story about the yellow dot used in such a flag isn't entirely made up. But as long as we don't have independent verification of this, I don't think Mr. Begolly, in spite of his expertise in the field, quite qualifies as a WP:RS. --dab (𒁳) 16:28, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

ok, so researching the "black flag of jihad" I found this, a youtube video collecting black flags in videos released by Islamic terrorists. So, Begolly or no Begolly, it turns out that in 2004, various beheading videos were released with a black flag that contained some sort of yellow or white dot. The video quality isn't sufficient to tell whether there is an inscription inside the dot. This concerns the videos of the beheadings of Eugene Armstrong, Jack Hensley, Nick Berg, Georgi Lazov, Kim Sun-il and Shosei Koda, all killed in 2004. The flags all look slightly different. The dot thing seems to have disappeared again after 2004. None of these flags corresponds to File:Flag of al-Qaeda in Iraq.svg exaclty. There usually seems to be additional writing surrounding the dot. --dab (𒁳) 19:29, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

well it doesnt look like any flag i have seen on TV. that is the limit of most peoples relation to al-qaeda muslim and non-muslim, at least anywhere inclined towards regular use of wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.3.154.152 (talk) 14:14, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Definition made by Robin Cook

In a column for the Guardian four weeks before his death, Robin Cook described Al-Qaeda as a product of a western intelligence:

“ Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by Western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan. Al-Qaida, literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians. ”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1523838,00.html

Regards.--79.16.165.43 (talk) 12:20, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

It is no doubt the case that this opinion has been voiced online and in print. Is it notable? Probably to some limited extent. Is it The Truth? Hard to tell (to say the least). So if the western bloc had acted very differently from how it did during the Cold War, would the world today be a better or a worse place? That's a question you could only answer from the vantage point of a full overview of the Multiverse as it spawned since 1945. --dab (𒁳) 11:19, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

unsigned comment added by 121.45.19.46 (talk) 00:52, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Merge "World Islamic Front"

The organization described at World Islamic Front is just al-Qaeda by another name. That article should be merged into this one. Variations in the translation from Arabic (especially dropping words to make the name shorter) are responsible for the difference between "World Islamic Front" and "International Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Crusaders and the Jews" (i.e. al-Qaeda). JRSpriggs (talk) 05:36, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

There is a plethora of Category:Jihadist organizations, and "al-Qaeda" is just a loose network of these. If the "World Islamic Front" was a pre-9/11 sobriquet taken up by al-Qaeda proper, it would be nice to see some reference to the effect. You will note that the claim "Terrorism experts consider the 'World Islamic Front"' synonymous with al-Qaeda" has just been sitting there, since 2005, woefully unsubstantiated, and has also been contested in allcaps in the past. --dab (𒁳) 11:27, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Edit request from Ash66656, 26 May 2011

There is an error In the leadership section stating Bin Laden was killed on May 1 st 2010 this should be changed to the correct date of May 1st 2011

Ash66656 (talk) 03:31, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

 Done Thanks. Qwyrxian (talk) 05:43, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Army?

Al-Qaeda is a very loose network and brodi is da bomb. It isn't an organisation in any formal sense. Such a grouping cannot be said to have an "army". Even the best organised and most contralised terrorist organisation has at most a number of cells of activists/soldiers/fighters, call them what you will. But to call the whole an army would be just wrong. As Al-Qaeda is particularly decentralised (partly by choice, partly because it isn't single organisation) reference to an "army" is faintly ridiculous. And of course if it was an army, its fighters would be soldiers subject to the protection of international conventions - no more disappearing into the legal limbo of Guantanamo Bay, or waterboarding. So I don't think the American's would welcome the exaggerated reference to an "army"!

Army can also mean "a body of persons organized to advance a cause". This definition does fit al Qaeda, even if their organization is fairly loose. --Khajidha (talk) 15:34, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Leader is not Saif al-Adel

...but Ayman al-Zawahiri[6]. 96.26.213.146 (talk) 16:55, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Request wording change

I request the phrase "assassination on 1 May 2011 by US forces" in the leadership portion be changed to "death on 1 May 2011 during a U.S. Navy SEAL operation".

The proposed wording does not change the fact that American forces were responsible for his death, but changes the tone from one of targeted killing (assassination) to casualty during a capture operation.

178.76.190.16 (talk) 17:08, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Kharijte?

The infobox says that al-Qaeda is a Kharijite organization, citing a book as a source. No mention of this is made in the article. Also, I'm pretty sure that Kharijism is distinct from Sunni Islam, which is definately part of al-Qaeda ideology. Finally, the Wikipedia page on Kharajites says that the only surviving Kharijite sect is the Ibadi sect, which is almost entirely located in Oman. If al-Qaeda is Kharijite, then wouldn't it be more centered in Oman than in other Islamic countries? 71.184.241.68 (talk) 20:14, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, problem resolved. 71.184.241.68 (talk) 15:33, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

My edits i was all wrong about the subject

reverting all my edits - i was totally wrong 1.World wide Caliphate/they never wanted play world domination fantasies 2.Strategy/complete original research by me and Adamrce none of the sources actually supported any of this 3.Criticism/we need to face reality.None of the sources acutally supported the three changes i and Adamrce made Lightpositive ^talk 16:16, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Just to clarify; it was a simple misunderstanding, i did not make bad edits on purpose i thought the edits were good before finally realising that they were wrong but since i have now reverted those edits there is no problems anymore Lightpositive ^talk 18:52, 16 July 2011 (UTC)