Al-Qaeda: The True Story of Radical Islam

by Jason Burke

Book Overview

On a hot summer's day in 1996 a plane carrying Osama bin Laden and a few friends and family landed at a runway just outside the eastern Afghan city of Jalalabad. The Saudi-born Islamic activist had little equipment, few followers and minimal local support. Yet within five years he had built an organisation that was to carry out the most shocking and devastating terrorist attack in history. 'Al-Qaeda' is now the most over-used and misunderstood term...

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1850436665
• ISBN13: 9781850436669
• Release Date: October 2004
• Publisher: I. B. Tauris & Company
• Length: 400 Pages
• Weight: 0.70 lbs.
• Dimensions: 1.0" x 5.2" x 7.8"

Customer Reviews

Dont Judge it by its Cover

This book is a compilation of really good research (all footnoted), personal interviews, and eyewitness accounts of events that have occurred from 1990 forward. Mr. Burke's analysis is top notch, and accurate for the most part. That's all jim-dandy, but what sets this book apart from the rest, is Mr.Burke's understanding of the religion of Islam, Muslims, and the extremist mindset. Generally, most authors lack knowledge of Islam, and thus draw incorrect conclusions. The book is objectively written, with minimal personal opinions or diatribes. (That's a positive). I recommend this book as the definitive guide on Terrorism in the 21st century. Having said that, the Conclusion chapter is bad, and seems to be written by a PR person. Conclusions that do not line up with what Mr.Burke said in the book...But aside from this, a good read.

Fantastic overview of the structure, history, goals of al-Qaeda

_Al-Qaeda_ by Jason Burke is an excellent and well-researched book on the structure, history, philosophy, goals, and future of not only of al-Qaeda itself but of other militant movements within the Islamic world. Most fascinating to me was that the book was as much as about what al-Qaeda wasn't as about what it was (and is). Al-Qaeda is one of the most misused, overused, and misunderstood words in the media today, one that has artificially been imposed upon a rather large and diverse group of Islamist groups beginning in the early 1990s. In Arabic, al-Qaeda is basically an abstract noun, one meaning "base," as in a camp or a home, or "foundation," as is what is under a house. It can also mean "pedestal," such that what supports a column, and also can mean "rule," "formula," "method," and "pattern." It has been in use since at least the mid-1980s among the Islamic radicals fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan, though Burke wrote that this should not be surprising, as it is a common Arabic word. Generally the term since then has not been used to describe an extant organization, but actually a purpose and a function. One of the first times the term was encountered was from the name of a terrorist manual, entitled _Al-Qaeda_, obtained from Ahmed Ajaj, detained months before the 1993 World Trade Center attack and later convicted for his role in that assault. The title was translated at the time as meaning "the basic rules" and Burke felt that was the correct translation; that it is not the name of a group being used but rather it is being used in its sense of a "maxim" or the "fundamentals." Many in the media, in positions of leadership, and even professional analysts often make the mistake of thinking of al-Qaeda as some sort of united organization, run by one man, maybe envisioning a James Bond type villain presiding over a vast international organization from some secret lair in the desert. The closest thing according to Burke that ever really could have been called "al-Qaeda" was a rather small and short-lived organization, one active between 1996 and 2001 and largely based in Afghanistan, destroyed and dispersed as such by the fighting at Tora Bora. If anything, he wrote, there were three al-Qaedas. One is what he called "the al-Qaeda hardcore," based in Afghanistan, comprised of men such as bin Laden, Mohammed Atef, Abu Zubaydah, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and others, a small group of militants, generally Afghan war veterans. Then there "the associate members of al-Qaeda," long-term associates of bin Laden and the hardcore, not usually based in Afghanistan, who accepted missions from them, acted as intermediaries and recruiters for not only the hardcore but for others, and also undertook projects of their own. The third group is vast, amorphous, and hard to define, basically the movement of modern radical Islam itself, with its myriad cells, domestic groups, and individuals. This Burke called the "network of networks;" other groups, original

Best book on terrorism I've ever read

Thematically and factually Burke has done it better than any of his peers. This is a must read.He glosses over a few things (why the Pentagon changed his name from non-threatening Osama to icky and frightening sounding Usama, as well as the fact there's no Iraqi terrorism against the US) perhaps in a bid to be non-partisan, which he is.But his intensive research and unique and thoughtful assertions that militant Islam is so much bigger than Al Qaida, and his exploration of Al Qaida itself as a vague sideline player challenges the dumbed down childish media image of the organization. And he does it all without recourse to "send a message" "wake up call" mindless cliche drivel. This book is the "anti Fox news" without being partisan.There's no better book on this subject, and I've read almost all of them.David Anderson, JD, BA ( Middle East politics), NYC

Outstanding book

Ever since 1998 (the year of the embassy bombings), I've actively searched for good books about al-Qaeda. This book is probably the best that I've read. Only Peter Bergen's "Holy War Inc" approaches it in quality. In a comparison of Burke and Bergen's books, I would say the former is more up-to-date and with more analysis; the latter is slightly more readable. In total, I would give Burke's book the edge simply by reason of it being newer:The Very Good:1. The chapters explaining the al-Qaeda viewpoint are excellent.2. The details about the Cole plot and the Millenium conspiracy are very good.3. The analogy of the hard-core al-Qaeda being a "venture capital firm" of terrorism (or a library or newspaper) is quite apt and very interesting.The Not So Good:1. The book rambles in a couple of spots.2. The author does not provide any concrete road map for combating the al-Qaeda "ideology."**************************Another thing I would like to comment on is the fact that both Clarke and Bergen's books pass a number of tests for me about whether they are worth reading (I suggest readers apply them when considering buying future books on this topic):1. They don't blame the US or the West for the problem. This is a very annoying characteristic of a lot of writing about Bin Laden. Some people out there just refuse to accept that sometimes people do very bad things for no good reasons at all.2. They don't say that our problems with Bin Laden will disappear if we are more even-handed in dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian dispute.3. They don't propose or even waste time by considering idiotic conspiracy theories such as the idea that Bin Laden was behind Oklahoma City, TWA 800, and other unconnected tragedies and terrorist events.So read this book and learn something!

Al-Qaeda: Casting a Shadow of Terror

At last! What is destined to become the seminal publication on this important issue. Does not buy into the media myths about Al-Qaeda. Highly accessable, readable and tells you everything you need to know about modern Islamic terrorism and the philosphy that is Al-Qaeda.