It seems many small fry have-a-go terrorist groups claim to be with Al Queda.
[ul]
[li]Why do they do this?[/li][li]Doesn’t Al Queda (if it still has any real power left) get upset? To take the most recent headlines, If I was their leader, I would be rather angry if a guy who murdered two infants and their dad was claiming to represent my organisation.[/li][li]I thought Al Quada was only a single organisation, or can its name be used by different groups. A la the turkish Hezbollah(army of god) is a semi-secular non-violent party, whereas the Lebanese one is a full blown mujihadeen army[/li][/ul]
Not sure if that’s really a GQ question, but my bet would be that it’s for the reputation if nothing else. Al Qaeda is widely regarded as a serious threat; calling yourself that makes people take you more serously and be more frightened of you than if you just make up some name.
If they do it doesn’t much matter; if law enforcement or the military can’t track down someone and arrest/kill them, then Al Qaeda is even less likely to be able to do so. And if they have been tracked down by the authorities, then the authorities will punish them; no need for Al Qaeda to do anything.
It’s been my understanding it’s as much a brand name as it is an organization.
Probably for the same reason that most of the upper middle class white kids in the New England suburb that I live in seem to think that they are affiliated with Los Angeles street gangs.
[li]Why do they do this?[/li][/quote]
Makes them seem stronger and more powerful than they are.
What are they going to do? Hit them with a trademark infringement suit?
Al Queda only recently started caring about their public image, once the US started blaming them – and not Islamists – for their crimes. But there’s no reason for them to say anything: if they deny there’s a connection, who will believe them (remember, the denied having anything to do with 9/11 at first, too)?
Again, they haven’t trademarked the name. Bin Ladin’s Al Queda is one organization, but they can’t stop people from using the name unless they want to attack them, which probably isn’t worth their time.
Maybe the OP is conjugating the Spanish verd “qodar” in the 1st person plural.
Yo Quedo
Tu Quedas
El Queda. Sometimes confused with Al Queda.
Yes, I think that’s it!
Seriously, though, the others have answered. You don’t have to join Al Qaeda, you just announce you’re part of that group and you seem bigger than you are as a lone actor.
Near his end days, Bin Laden was concerned that the Al Qaeda brand had been destroyed: Bin Laden ruminated about “mistakes” and “miscalculations” by affiliates in Iraq and elsewhere that had killed Muslims, even in mosques. He told Atiyah to warn every emir, or regional leader, to avoid these “unnecessary civilian casualties,” which were hurting the organization.
“Making these mistakes is a great issue,” he stressed, arguing that spilling “Muslim blood” had resulted in “the alienation of most of the nation [of Islam] from the [Mujaheddin].” Local al-Qaeda leaders should “apologize and be held responsible for what happened.”
Bin Laden also criticized subordinates for linking their operations to local grievances rather than the overarching Muslim cause of Palestine. Worse, the shift away from the “War on Terror” rhetoric by the Obama administration took its toll: The al-Qaeda brand had become a problem, bin Laden explained, because Obama administration officials “have largely stopped using the phrase ‘the war on terror’ in the context of not wanting to provoke Muslims,” and instead promoted a war against al-Qaeda. The organization’s full name was “Qaeda al-Jihad,” bin Laden noted, but in its shorthand version, “this name reduces the feeling of Muslims that we belong to them.” He proposed 10 alternatives “that would not easily be shortened to a word that does not represent us.” His first recommendation was “Taifat al-tawhid wal-jihad,” or Monotheism and Jihad Group. That’s from Ignatious at WAPO. As Kevin Drum says, “Rebranding is that last refuge of the failed CEO”. The war on terror rhetoric certainly ginned up the masses during US elections, but ending it poisoned Bin Laden’s efforts in the Middle East to assert a War of Civilizations. By the time the Arab Spring rolled in, Al Qaeda were non-players.
I’m guessing it benefits both sides. The small nutty Islamist group benefits by being associated with a major outfit like al Qaeda. Al Qaeda benefits because all of these small groups claiming allegiance make al Qaeda look more powerful than it would otherwise be.
Same reason why most of the nutbars in the USA claim to be ex-navy-seal or CIA. (Did you notice the word “nutbar”?) When you are bragging and self-promoting, what sounds better? “I am a wannabe” or “I am a member of a killer elite”? I suspect when these sorts of idiots show up in Afghanistan, Pakistan, or Iraq, the real Al Qeda guys roll their eyes and hope these guys are dumb enough to be talked into being suicide bombers…
***From the article:
*U.S. analysts don’t see evidence that these plots have materialized. “The organization lacks the ability to plan, organize and execute complex, catastrophic attacks, but the threat persists,” says a senior administration analyst who has carefully reviewed the documents. *
*The garbled syntax of bin Laden’s communications may result from their being dictated to several of his wives, according to the U.S. analyst. And his rambling laundry list of recommendations illustrates the problems of communicating with subordinates when it could take several months to receive an answer. The al-Qaeda leader had a “great fear of irrelevance,” the analyst believes. *
*** And you got to love this BS on Palestine:
*Bin Laden also criticized subordinates for linking their operations to local grievances rather than the overarching Muslim cause of Palestine. He chided his affiliate in Yemen for saying an operation was a response to U.S. bombing there. He even scolded the organizers of the spectacular December 2009 suicide attack on the CIA base in Khost, Afghanistan, for describing it as revenge for the killing of Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud. “It was necessary to discuss Palestine first,” lectured bin Laden. *
*** Personal fav:
*Bin Laden and his aides hoped for big terrorist operations to commemorate the 10th anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001. They also had elaborate media plans. Adam Gadahn, a U.S.-born media adviser, even discussed in a message to his boss what would be the best television outlets for a bin Laden anniversary video.
“It should be sent for example to ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN and maybe PBS and VOA. As for Fox News let her die in her anger,” Gadahn wrote. At another point, he said of the networks: “From a professional point of view, they are all on one level — except [Fox News] channel, which falls into the abyss as you know, and lacks objectivity, too.”
What an unintended boost for Fox, which can now boast that it is al-Qaeda’s least favorite network.*
Now, this is real funny. Made up, but funny as hell.
I mean, really?! Bin Laden had Media adviser who pokes fun at Fox News?
Al Qaida is not a legal entity in any country where it exists. It has no legal means of enforcing use of its name. It has no official apparatus that can enforce rules. A group of terrorists in Afghanistan started calling itself Al Qaida, and after it had some success, other people started using its name. Who’s going to stop them? Al Qaida isn’t a country or a corporation. It has no overarching lines of authority or broad enforcement capabilities.
Besides that, it is advantageous for them for people to get the impression that Al Qaida is a large, wide-reaching entity.
Interesting. Are there any known formal membership criteria for Al Qaeda (e.g. J. Random Muslim Terrorist applied for formal membership in Al Qaeda in 2005 but he was rejected because he could not recite enough of the Quran and failed the explosives knowledge test), or a known list of “Official Members” somewhere? I know that Communist Parties were, and to some extent still are, rather scrupulous in establishing and updating their official member lists, and issuing ID cards (e.g. a “red card”). Is there anything remotely resembling this with respect to Al Qaeda or any other Islamic terror group? E.g. when they found Bin Laden, did he have an “Al Qaeda Member” card in his pocket?
Obviously, if you know any information that cannot be revealed because it is classified, do not do so.
