Osama Bin Laden Influence
Influential does not equate with "good" or "positive" behavior. It simply means: powerful, important, significant, dominant or prominent. None of these are synonymous with good.
Osama Bin Laden lives thousands of miles away, purportedly in a cave, and people are talking about him more than Hillary Clinton who is roaming the streets of New York and Washington D.C. quite publicly, trying to get attention. This is a woman who could be the first female president in U.S. history. Without a doubt then Osama Bin Laden has a far-reaching hand, albeit it in a Darth Vader sort of way.
If you consider influential as a way of looking at whether or not a person is having or has had an impact on a group of people, Bin Laden is an obvious choice. He may …show more content…
not impact a person directly, but we must consider the trickle down effect. Those in the military have certainly been touched, and by extension so have their immediate and extended families. The towns in which these families live are full of people who are impacted by the fact that these families live there. In 2003, Time Magazine's Person of the Year was the American Soldier. Would that have happened without Bin Laden?
Osama Bin Laden is the most influential person for 2006 because absolutely nothing in our lives is the same as it was the day before we heard his name. That describes a person who has had a profound influence. http://voices.yahoo.com/why-osama-bin-laden-deemed-most-influential-135775.html?cat=37 Leadership
Pakistani journalist Hamid Mir interviewing then al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, in 1997
Information mostly acquired from Jamal al-Fadl provided American authorities with a rough picture of how the group was organized. While the veracity of the information provided by al-Fadl and the motivation for his cooperation are both disputed, American authorities base much of their current knowledge of al-Qaeda on his testimony.[42]
Osama bin Laden was the most historically notable emir, or commander, and Senior Operations Chief of al-Qaida prior to his assassination on May 1, 2011 by US forces. Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda's Deputy Operations Chief prior to bin Laden's death, assumed the role of commander, according to an announcement by al-Qaida on June 16, 2011. He replaced Saif al-Adel, who had served as interim commander.[43]
Bin Laden was advised by a Shura Council, which consists of senior al-Qaeda members, estimated by Western officials to consist of 20–30 people.
Atiyah Abd al-Rahman was alleged to be second in command prior to his death on August 22, 2011.[44]
On 5 June 2012, Pakistan intelligence officials announced that al-Rahman's replacement Abu Yahya al-Libi had been killed in Pakistan.[45]
Al-Qaeda's network was built from scratch as a conspiratorial network that draws on leaders of all its regional nodes "as and when necessary to serve as an integral part of its high command."[46] * The Military Committee is responsible for training operatives, acquiring weapons, and planning attacks. * The Money/Business Committee funds the recruitment and training of operatives through the hawala banking system. U.S-led efforts to eradicate the sources of terrorist financing[47] were most successful in the year immediately following the September 11 attacks;[48] al-Qaeda continues to operate through unregulated banks, such as the 1,000 or so hawaladars in Pakistan, some of which can handle deals of up to $10 million.[49] It also provides air tickets and false passports, pays al-Qaeda members, and oversees profit-driven businesses.[50] In the 9/11 Commission Report, it was estimated that al-Qaeda required $30 million-per-year to conduct its operations. * The Law Committee reviews Sharia law, and decides whether particular courses of action conform to it. * The Islamic Study/Fatwah Committee issues religious edicts, such as an edict in 1998 telling Muslims to kill Americans. * In the late 1990s there was a publicly known Media Committee, which ran the now-defunct newspaper Nashrat al Akhbar (Newscast) and handled public relations. * In 2005, al-Qaeda formed As-Sahab, a media production house, to supply its video and audio materials. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#Leadership
The following paper is an analysis of the Islamic Fundamentalist movement that has been involved in international acts of terror. These extremists have stopped at no obstacle to pledge their allegiance to the Jihad. I, Michael Eber am a counter terrorist specialist for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. I have studied the Muslim Extremist movements for 15 years now. I am a scholar of all writings that have been used to create leaders and mass movements. I have been used as an expert on the books The True Believer and The Prince. My training by the FBI and my Masters of English from Columbia Universityhave enabled me to create profiles and analyze possible threats from current world leaders. What you are about to read will enlighten and disturb you, because of the individual I am focusing on. Osama bin Laden is the most wanted felon in the world. Bin Laden fits my profile of a terrorist leader. He is the number one threat to world peace. Osama bin Laden has taken over the minds of thousands of Muslim Fundamentalists. He holds the power to call for terrorist attacks at any time. How did he achieve this power and how has he maintained it with such a large amount of people? He has gotten so many people to follow his teachings, that he is the world's most sought after terrorist. The Machiavelli and Hoffer wrote books that Osama has taken into account. He uses them to keep his subordinates in line. The psychological world classifies Osama bin Laden as a narcissist. The FBI certainly agrees. He has no interest in the return Islamic Kingdom of the 8th Century. He wants personal fame and glory. He stops at no cost and is willing to end people into certain death. This is the key to our profile. If bin Laden were out for the entire Islamic world, he would not have men kill themselves. No religion wants people to kill themselves. Bin Laden uses religion as a front for his mission. The suicide bombers are not martyrs. They are criminals and will be treated as criminals when they do not succeed. Bin Laden is full of himself and cares about no one else. This is why he allows men to kill themselves. This is the scariest type of leader, since he does not care about his own people.The True Believer by Eric Hoffer is a book that examines mass movements and fanaticism. Many people believe that this book is an important tool for people that study business and marketing. It is also helpful when we examine our own involvement in current movements as well as our ancestors. The insight that one gets from this book can help us understand why individuals get involved in mass movements. Through this book, we can see human beings shortcomings and tendencies to follow. After reading this book, I have a better understanding of the past and what is come in the future.
The social misfits in societies are the most easily persuaded to join mass movements. When we look at misfits in recent years, we are forced to look at the Muslim Fundamentalists that attacked the World Trade Center twice in 10 years. It cannot be denied that there is a mass movement to destroy the United States and Israel. The people that are involved in this movement feel lost. They are impoverished and need someone to blame for their problems. The Muslim leaders that are involved use the United States and Israel as scapegoats. Hoffer discusses the idea that fanaticism derives from the frustration and sense of personal failure that people feel when social change is taking place. The people that are soldiers of the Al Qaeda terrorist group are definitely guilty of this. They feel as if the only way they can achieve their goal is through following their leaders. Even the people that are not soldiers are in support of the destruction of the United States. They have been degraded and deprived for so long, that they want to feel like human beings again. The world has become capitalistic and these people are suffering because of it. I am not agreeing with the terrorists' actions, but they are desperate for a better way of life. Hoffer brings up a theory that was definitely used by Osama Bin Laden. Hoffer thought that the past and the future are fictionalized. Osama also believed that the present needed to be fictionalized as well. Leaders of these movements must create outrageous ideas in order to achieve their goals. This is definitely the case with the World Trade Center attacks. Who would have thought to attack these buildings? It sounds like something out of a science fiction movie. Even the creators of the Die Hard Trilogy, were not imaginative enough to have planes crash into 110 story skyscrapers. This vision was crazy, but it captures what Hoffer was thinking and bin Laden's use of the theory. Another argument about mass movements is that negative personality types effect people's negative impulses. Obviously the Muslim leaders, such as Osama bin Laden are negative. Hitler used the same tactics. These two horrible individuals used negative things to achieve power and gain huge followings. Scapegoating is negative, but it works when you want to start a mass movement. Both the Nazis and the Muslim Fundamentalists of today have a person that they blame for their problems. This negative outlook brings people together to unite, and attempt to destroy other people in the hopes of bettering their lives. The group of Fundamentalists whom follow Osama blame the Americans for the state of the world. The hatred of Americans forms a common bond. Osama certainly used this scapegoat to build one of the most sophisticated terror networks ever. The scariest aspect of the arguments that Hoffer wrote about is that successful mass movements are more self-sacrificing than self-fulfilling. This can explain why the suicide bombers of 9/11 took the course of action that they did. They believed that if they died for the cause, their people would be better off. Osama praises people for self-sacrifice. Suicide bombers become martyrs. The entire community of Fundamentalists praises the person and, even go as far as to put up banners with the so-called martyr's face on the streets. In a way, this brought the whole situation in the Middle East to the worlds attention. Now, we actually know where Afghanistan is located. We are also more aware of the problems that are causing this mass movement. Before September 11, most Americans were oblivious to the entire Middle East. Osama bin Laden understands The True Believer and the book has aided him in this aspect of his leadership. Niccolo Machiavelli wrote The Prince for Lorenzo de’ Medici to help the Medici strengthen and govern Italy. Osama bin Laden has used this book in attempt to strengthen his own personal ego. The methods described by Machiavelli, are not necessarily the ways that he believes are ethical. The ways to achieve and hold power are almost all unethical. Machiavelli did not write this book with ethics in mind. Osama does not use an ethical protocol for any of his actions. It is obviously unethical to send suicide bombers to kill unarmed civilians. If Osama was ethical he would attack military installations. Machiavelli wrote The Prince to provide a blue print for dominance, achievement and political success. Osama bin Laden has certainly put this blueprint to work in his years of leading the Muslim Fundamentalists. Machiavelli obviously loved Italy and wanted Italy to prosper. Osama has misused this book for his own personal gain. Machiavelli’s study of the past made this book a great tool that has been used for both good and evil. He was able to prove his points through examples of past leaders that had both succeeded and failed. Osama has definitely studi Machiavelli believed that the end justifies the means. If it were necessary to kill and be ruthless in order to better Italy, it must be done. There is no way to achieve this goal, without being ruthless at some point. People would have to die in order for Italy to flourish. Even a hereditary principality may need to be shown brutality in order to maintain the power of the ruler. New principalities are in the most need of brutality, according to Machiavelli. Osama bin Laden follows this one particular view of Machiavelli. He does not care who is hurt in the process of the terrorist attacks, his top concern is hurting American civilians. Osama bin Laden does not care about the future of Islam, yet he has convinced his followers that he has th Machiavelli states that a leader must take care of the people that helped them get to their position of power. He also says that a leader must root out all of the people that used to hold power. According to Machiavelli, the people that help leaders get to where they are will turn if they are not treated correctly. This is actually an ethical idea. Machiavelli knew that a leader, who is not true to those who are true to him, would seek revenge. Osama bin Laden has certainly rooted out all individuals that used to hold power within circles of terrorist cells. Osama killed the leader of the Northern Alliance because he was such a strong threat to Osama’s success. Osama has helped those who have supported him, but he is still ruthless. He uses the Koran as his basis for terror yet this is an unethical reason for killing innocent people. Machiavelli defended the unethical advice he gave to Medici. It is supposed to be realistic. It is supposed to capture what it really takes to achieve political power. Osama bin Laden definitely understands how realistic this advice is. Machiavelli wrote that men are mostly bad and commit bad acts. He also pointed out that if your actions are too good, evildoers will conquer you. This brings up the cliché, “It’s a dog eat dog world!” Osama is the evil doer. He has certainly taken advantage of any good that there is in the world. When he planned the 9/11 attacks, he took advantage of the naïve security measures that the United States takes. George W. Bush tried to play the good guy for a long time. Now he is forced to attack Osama bin Laden and the Al Queda network. If a political leader is not on the offensive, they will be on the defensive in a short period of time. It is unethical for the leader to perform these acts, but the rival leader may attack. Neither side is ethical when this is examined. Both of the leaders should be seen as unethical. In the case of George W. Bush, it is not unethical for the U.S. to retaliate. It is necessary because no retaliation will send the message that terrorism will be feared and accepted. Machiavelli wrote that merciful is better than cruel. He warns that mercy should be used intelligently. He wrote that it is best to be feared and loved. If people can love a leader and see that the leader will kill if necessary, the leader may succeed. Osama bin Laden has definitely taken this to heart. His people love him and will die for him. They also know that crossing a line will result in immediate death. The world fears Bin Laden yet his people love him. This combination is rarely found. Adolph Hitler did the same thing during Nazi Germany. Bin Laden has most likely studied Adolph Hitler’s road to power. Hitler was also out for personal gain and glory. If Machiavelli was an unethical person, he would have used hearsay and he would not have used facts. Unethical arguments use false statements and manipulate the truth. Machiavelli was simply stating the facts. These facts helped convince Bin Laden that he had the ability to gain political success. If Machiavelli had not used facts it would have been a rougher road for Bin Laden to climb. The bottom line is, Machiavelli was not unethical, since he did not lie about anything. The real question is, is it wrong to actually discuss this topic? Bin Laden has used this book in an unethical manner. This does not mean that the book should be banned. Many times people become more motivated after reading it. Many of my fellow FBI agents have read this book and gained more status within the agency. Machiavelli had the right to point out past mistakes. The other question raised, is whether or not it is correct to invade principalities? The question for Osama bin Laden is whether or not it is ethical to kill innocent people for his own personal glory. Machiavelli wanted Italy to prosper just as Bin Laden wants personal gratification. This is why it is wrong for Machiavelli’s The Prince to be used for the purposes that Osama bin Laden has used them for. Bin Laden has taken the books and made himself one of the most feared people of all time. He planned the most horrible act of terrorism on U.S in history. His narcissism has caused him to want complete world domination and personal glory. The two books have caused him to achieve the title that he wants, Osama the Prince. This is the perfect title for a person who wants everyone to follow him. He wants people to follow him and even die for him. He achieved this goal and has become the most infamous terrorist of all time. The world will continue to fear him and the US will search for him. Osama has achieved his goal of world celebrity. His insanity has allowed him to want to be well known, even if it is because he is such a horrible person. http://www.nyu.edu/classes/keefer/joe/eber1.html Last week, on the one year anniversary of the fatal raid of Osama bin Laden’s house, a set of documents was released providing us additional insight into the mind of this famed terrorist. While certainly a despicable character, I find his charisma and longevity remarkable. Let’s take a look at his approach.
Vision
Osama bin Laden had a clear and consistent vision—attack America. He viewed the United States as an immoral nation, full of homosexuality, gambling, alcohol, and an unacceptable alliance with Israel.
Loosely allied terrorist groups frequently adopted this mission and expanded it to include local governments. This caused bin Laden quite a bit of consternation. He made a considerable effort to moderate these more extreme groups. In this sense he was a moderate.
He admonished rogue groups who reinterpreted ancient Islamic law regarding collateral damage in the event of an attack into enemy territory. While Islamic law may allow this only in extreme circumstances, these regional groups considered it acceptable to inflict casualties to innocent bystanders, including Muslims during “normal” operations.
Power
As these regional groups adopted more radical terrorist tactics bin Laden attempted to persuade them to come back into the fold and moderate their behavior. Surprisingly, based upon the materials I have examined, it seems that he did not attempt to use coercion or punishment as tools in this regard. Other al Qaeda leaders wanted to take more polar positions with these errant groups, either distancing themselves or bringing them under their wing in order to broaden the reach of al Qaeda central.
Adaptability
Osama bin Laden’s journey from country to country has been well-documented. He fought the Soviets in Afghanistan, then returned to his home country of Saudi Arabia from which he was expelled. He chose to live in Sudan and continue to build a network of terror. Pressured to leave that country, he boarded a chartered flight back to Afghanistan. Upon his return he struck up a friendship with Mullah Omar and began to establish the fighter training camps. Each stop along bin Laden’s journey he adapted to the local culture and developed a strong network of allies.
Training
In order to execute successful terrorist attacks significant training is necessary and bin Laden knew this. He invested both time and money in people and equipment. The September 11, 2001 attacks are a prime example of meticulous plans executed well.
Alignment
From the beginning, Osama bin Laden felt that discipline and a code of conduct were necessary.
The al Qaeda manual obtained in a raid on a Manchester, England house reveals a number of values and behaviors demanded from all members. These included patience, a calm personality, a commitment to the organization, and the Islamic faith.
And so we can get a better picture of Osama bin Laden the leader. Far from a feckless leader, he developed a vision and remained steadfast in it. He adapted well to contrary events, trained his people, and demanded the best of his men.
Osama bin Laden: loathsome—yes. A successful leader—yes, unfortunately.
Concepts:
* Maintain a clear and consistent vision * Use power wisely and effectively * Remain adaptable, able to adjust to changes in outside forces * Invest in training for your people * Communicate well to assure alignment of everyone in the organization
http://blog.turbochargedleadership.com/?p=280
1) He was charismatic - People willingly would die for him.
2) He was dedicated and single-minded - He didn't hesitate to order people to die for him
3) He was highly intelligent - He knew how to inspire and manipulate people to die for him
4) He was filthy rich - For all the pretense of him being a "soldier in a cave," OBL was a wealthy man...he had connections who could help him both financially and
politically.
Leadership is influence. That’s the most basic definition you’ll find for the complex and nuanced topic we call leadership: the ability to obtain followers. When you strip away all the moral issues surrounding the topic, Hitler was a leader, Abe Lincoln was a leader, Martin Luther King Jr. was a leader, Jim Jones was a leader. And – unfortunately for human history, Osama bin Laden was a leader. Stop. Take a deep breath. Before you start drafting your hate mail, put your pen down and hear me out. Despite how reprehensible I personally find bin Laden – actually, BECAUSE I find him so reprehensible – it’s my responsibility to study what factors allowed such a monster to build a following.
1. Cast a vision (that’s not about you). Bin Laden’s influence stemmed from his ability to tap into a deep fear that Western culture is threatening the fabric of Muslim civilization. He was able to channel the rage over what is widely viewed as Western expansion (military and cultural). Take a look at just one example of the language bin Laden used in casting a vision to incite his followers: ” . . . For the American forces to expect anything from me personally reflects a very narrow perception. Thousands of millions of Muslims are angry. The Americans should expect reactions from the Muslim world that are proportionate to the injustice they inflict.” — Osama bin Laden to Time Magazine Dec 1998 Now look at what Abraham Lincoln told the battle-weary soldiers of the 166th Ohio Regiment: “It is not merely for today, but for all time to come that we should perpetuate for our children’s children this great and free government… I beg you to remember this, not merely for my sake, but for yours… It is in order that each of you may have… an open field and a fair chance for your industry, enterprise, and intelligence; that you may all have equal privleges in the race of life…” — Abraham Lincoln, 1864 The common denominator is the message that: “It’s not about me. It’s about you.” 2. Don’t just lead, catalyze. Al Qaeda is a decentralized organization. For a time, bin Laden may have acted as CEO, but eventually he became more or less a figurehead for a leaderless organization. Intentional or not, al Qaeda grew into a decentralized, open organization. It inspired subsidiary (or copycat) organization in Somalia, Iraq, Spain and many other corners of the globe. And that’s precisely what made it so difficult to confront. In The Starfish and the Spider, Ori Brafman and Rod Beckstrom define a Catalyst as “the person who initiates a circle and then fades away into the background.” They go on to discuss how these types of decentralized “starfish organizations” can grow and morph and become extremely difficult to contain. “…given that eliminating the catalyst is a futile effort… and given that when you [kill the catalyst], new ones quickly emerge, the only part of the decentralized organization that you can realistically go after is the ideology.” For several examples of more positive “starfish organizations”, consider Wikipedia or Craiglist. 3. Build your bench. Groom your successors. It remains to be seen whether al Qaeda has any formal or informal successors that will step into the role of catalyst or leader. Hopefully any formal successors are now known to the world’s security forces and will never be able to catalyze al Qaeda to the degree bin Laden did. But students of leadership would do well to learn a lesson from bin Laden’s downfall: you never know when your influence will end. You probably aren’t hiding in a bunker waiting for the Navy SEAL Team Six, but don’t fool yourself: you can’t lead forever. You might get hit by a bus tomorrow. Are you identifying and mentoring the leaders of tomorrow? 4. One determined person can change the world. Some of the most impactful images seized in the raid on bin Laden’s bunker are of a haggard bin Laden in a skull-cap sitting under a blanket, watching himself on a TV. Frankly, I was surprised by the images – bin Laden’s ratty bunker was a far cry from the Dr. Evil headquarters I had imagined. Here’s a man that is among the few that can honestly claim to have changed the course of history. It’s hard to believe that THIS is the guy that caused so much pain and destruction. And that’s the point. One determined person that harnesses the powers of leadership can change the world – for evil…or for good. If this broke-down old man in a ratty basement can shake up the world for evil, what’s stopping you from changing the world for good? http://www.quantumworkplace.com/4-leadership-skills-we-can-learn-from-osama-bin-laden/ America’s new, and most poignant, “day of infamy” raises deep questions about leadership. As a nation we look as never before to our leaders to create and achieve a new vision in this tormented world. But it must be a moral vision and our means of achieving it must be moral as well. Moral leadership must strive for noble causes such as improving human well being or realizing the goals stated in The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Morality is often assumed in descriptions of leadership. One of our leading thinkers, Warren Bennis, sums up it up as follows. They are people “who know what they want, why they want it, how to communicate that to others to gain their support to get it.” And, they are able to mobilize others to struggle toward their shared aspirations. Moral leadership requires something more: securing improvement in the human condition through one’s own and other’s efforts.
By the traditional account, Osama bin Laden is an effective leader. He wanted to make a horrific statement to the United States and did, for reasons we cannot fully fathom but must be clear to his baneful mind. Bin Laden’s compelling reasons undoubtedly included resentment against the United States and what we stand for. “A race of such men of resentiment,” Nietzsche observed, “is bound to become eventually cleverer than any noble race; it will also honor cleverness to a far greater degree.” If nothing else the terrorists were clever. Our leaders must respond with equal shrewdnesss.
The transplanted Saudi has been especially effective in enlisting others to create a global cell-structured organization that he uses to communicate his wants. The resulting information net is robust and redundant. Knock out one cell and the others adapt.
Incredibly, bin Laden and his cohorts have been able to entice hundreds of talented young men to spend several years of their lives in waiting, learning a distinctive skill, such piloting large aircraft. Only to be triggered on command to employ that skill by smashing a plane, laden with passengers and fuel, into some of the world’s largest buildings. At least 19 of these followers, some of whom apparently had families and promising careers, were calmly and steadfastly loyal to the cause, although they knew with certitude that their lives would come to a fiery end.
This is a remarkable feat of leadership, but it is based on a bad morality. Unguided leadership is just raw power. As Nietzsche also reminds us the higher the level of power the greater the possibility that it can be used for evil as well as good. To wit: Hitler and Stalin. Ethical leadership needs a moral compass.
What is true North for this compass? According to the Declaration of Human Rights we should assure “the inherent dignity” and “the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family.” In William James’ vision, moral leaders should try to bring about “the very largest total universe of good.” In our quest for justice we must not compromise these sacred values, although our notions of freedom and security will never be the same.
What steps must be taken? A few simple rules will not suffice given the complex, pluralistic, uncertain world in which we live. The moral challenge we face today is several fold. First, we must affirm our moral vision.
As a society we must begin to develop a retinue of moral leaders of all ages and persuasions. The clash of civilizations we are dealing with covers the globe and will be with us for a long time
We must encourage our current leaders, beginning with President Bush and radiating out to all citizens, to temper our rightful moral outrage with moral wisdom. The mythic leader is an infantry first lieutenant rising out of the trench and pointing to the enemy. Today there is no one single source of evil at which to point. This evil is marbled throughout the world. It must be rooted out one small unit at a time. Doing justice requires many cell-sensitive rapiers rather than a massive bludgeon. Instead of a few large moral decisions – invade Normandy, drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima – thousands of globally distributed and frequently unique moral decisions must be made, often in parallel.
Each leader’s moral character will be our bulwark.
Where will these leaders of character come from? Our educational system is our first line of defense and offense. Character formation begins in early youth, first in the family, then in our schools. Traits like honesty, integrity and regard for the sacredness of human life begin there. Local organizations like the Dallas Coalition for Character and Values are working to help meet this need.
Moral development continues, indeed for many it takes significant strides, during the college years. One gains powerful knowledge and leadership skills as part of a university education. It is essential that students also learn to use this power for moral ends. Programs at the U.S. Naval Academy, West Point, Duke, and SMU, among others, are geared to do this. Business also is addressing the issue . Metroplex based companies such as EDS, TI, Southwest Airlines, TXU, ATMOS Energy, Help International Inc., and The Container Store have crafted programs to assure that their employees behave ethically and treat their customers and fellow employees with respect.
In light of the challenge of the Al-Qaeda network, however, all of these noteworthy efforts must be expanded.
In searching for an overarching principle for building character and guiding distributed moral leadership in today’s fractionated world, leaders will do well to follow Aristotle’s maxim: always act towards the right person, at the right time, in the rightplace, in the right amount, and in the right way. http://ethics.sandiego.edu/Resources/PhilForum/Terrorism/Mason.html conviction,religion as a support,
We love death. The U.S. loves life. That is the big difference between us.
Osama Bin Laden lives thousands of miles away, purportedly in a cave, and people are talking about him more than Hillary Clinton who is roaming the streets of New York and Washington D.C. quite publicly, trying to get attention. This is a woman who could be the first female president in U.S. history. Without a doubt then Osama Bin Laden has a far-reaching hand, albeit it in a Darth Vader sort of way.
If you consider influential as a way of looking at whether or not a person is having or has had an impact on a group of people, Bin Laden is an obvious choice. He may …show more content…
not impact a person directly, but we must consider the trickle down effect. Those in the military have certainly been touched, and by extension so have their immediate and extended families. The towns in which these families live are full of people who are impacted by the fact that these families live there. In 2003, Time Magazine's Person of the Year was the American Soldier. Would that have happened without Bin Laden?
Osama Bin Laden is the most influential person for 2006 because absolutely nothing in our lives is the same as it was the day before we heard his name. That describes a person who has had a profound influence. http://voices.yahoo.com/why-osama-bin-laden-deemed-most-influential-135775.html?cat=37 Leadership
Pakistani journalist Hamid Mir interviewing then al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, in 1997
Information mostly acquired from Jamal al-Fadl provided American authorities with a rough picture of how the group was organized. While the veracity of the information provided by al-Fadl and the motivation for his cooperation are both disputed, American authorities base much of their current knowledge of al-Qaeda on his testimony.[42]
Osama bin Laden was the most historically notable emir, or commander, and Senior Operations Chief of al-Qaida prior to his assassination on May 1, 2011 by US forces. Ayman al-Zawahiri, al-Qaeda's Deputy Operations Chief prior to bin Laden's death, assumed the role of commander, according to an announcement by al-Qaida on June 16, 2011. He replaced Saif al-Adel, who had served as interim commander.[43]
Bin Laden was advised by a Shura Council, which consists of senior al-Qaeda members, estimated by Western officials to consist of 20–30 people.
Atiyah Abd al-Rahman was alleged to be second in command prior to his death on August 22, 2011.[44]
On 5 June 2012, Pakistan intelligence officials announced that al-Rahman's replacement Abu Yahya al-Libi had been killed in Pakistan.[45]
Al-Qaeda's network was built from scratch as a conspiratorial network that draws on leaders of all its regional nodes "as and when necessary to serve as an integral part of its high command."[46] * The Military Committee is responsible for training operatives, acquiring weapons, and planning attacks. * The Money/Business Committee funds the recruitment and training of operatives through the hawala banking system. U.S-led efforts to eradicate the sources of terrorist financing[47] were most successful in the year immediately following the September 11 attacks;[48] al-Qaeda continues to operate through unregulated banks, such as the 1,000 or so hawaladars in Pakistan, some of which can handle deals of up to $10 million.[49] It also provides air tickets and false passports, pays al-Qaeda members, and oversees profit-driven businesses.[50] In the 9/11 Commission Report, it was estimated that al-Qaeda required $30 million-per-year to conduct its operations. * The Law Committee reviews Sharia law, and decides whether particular courses of action conform to it. * The Islamic Study/Fatwah Committee issues religious edicts, such as an edict in 1998 telling Muslims to kill Americans. * In the late 1990s there was a publicly known Media Committee, which ran the now-defunct newspaper Nashrat al Akhbar (Newscast) and handled public relations. * In 2005, al-Qaeda formed As-Sahab, a media production house, to supply its video and audio materials. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#Leadership
The following paper is an analysis of the Islamic Fundamentalist movement that has been involved in international acts of terror. These extremists have stopped at no obstacle to pledge their allegiance to the Jihad. I, Michael Eber am a counter terrorist specialist for the Federal Bureau of Investigation. I have studied the Muslim Extremist movements for 15 years now. I am a scholar of all writings that have been used to create leaders and mass movements. I have been used as an expert on the books The True Believer and The Prince. My training by the FBI and my Masters of English from Columbia Universityhave enabled me to create profiles and analyze possible threats from current world leaders. What you are about to read will enlighten and disturb you, because of the individual I am focusing on. Osama bin Laden is the most wanted felon in the world. Bin Laden fits my profile of a terrorist leader. He is the number one threat to world peace. Osama bin Laden has taken over the minds of thousands of Muslim Fundamentalists. He holds the power to call for terrorist attacks at any time. How did he achieve this power and how has he maintained it with such a large amount of people? He has gotten so many people to follow his teachings, that he is the world's most sought after terrorist. The Machiavelli and Hoffer wrote books that Osama has taken into account. He uses them to keep his subordinates in line. The psychological world classifies Osama bin Laden as a narcissist. The FBI certainly agrees. He has no interest in the return Islamic Kingdom of the 8th Century. He wants personal fame and glory. He stops at no cost and is willing to end people into certain death. This is the key to our profile. If bin Laden were out for the entire Islamic world, he would not have men kill themselves. No religion wants people to kill themselves. Bin Laden uses religion as a front for his mission. The suicide bombers are not martyrs. They are criminals and will be treated as criminals when they do not succeed. Bin Laden is full of himself and cares about no one else. This is why he allows men to kill themselves. This is the scariest type of leader, since he does not care about his own people.The True Believer by Eric Hoffer is a book that examines mass movements and fanaticism. Many people believe that this book is an important tool for people that study business and marketing. It is also helpful when we examine our own involvement in current movements as well as our ancestors. The insight that one gets from this book can help us understand why individuals get involved in mass movements. Through this book, we can see human beings shortcomings and tendencies to follow. After reading this book, I have a better understanding of the past and what is come in the future.
The social misfits in societies are the most easily persuaded to join mass movements. When we look at misfits in recent years, we are forced to look at the Muslim Fundamentalists that attacked the World Trade Center twice in 10 years. It cannot be denied that there is a mass movement to destroy the United States and Israel. The people that are involved in this movement feel lost. They are impoverished and need someone to blame for their problems. The Muslim leaders that are involved use the United States and Israel as scapegoats. Hoffer discusses the idea that fanaticism derives from the frustration and sense of personal failure that people feel when social change is taking place. The people that are soldiers of the Al Qaeda terrorist group are definitely guilty of this. They feel as if the only way they can achieve their goal is through following their leaders. Even the people that are not soldiers are in support of the destruction of the United States. They have been degraded and deprived for so long, that they want to feel like human beings again. The world has become capitalistic and these people are suffering because of it. I am not agreeing with the terrorists' actions, but they are desperate for a better way of life. Hoffer brings up a theory that was definitely used by Osama Bin Laden. Hoffer thought that the past and the future are fictionalized. Osama also believed that the present needed to be fictionalized as well. Leaders of these movements must create outrageous ideas in order to achieve their goals. This is definitely the case with the World Trade Center attacks. Who would have thought to attack these buildings? It sounds like something out of a science fiction movie. Even the creators of the Die Hard Trilogy, were not imaginative enough to have planes crash into 110 story skyscrapers. This vision was crazy, but it captures what Hoffer was thinking and bin Laden's use of the theory. Another argument about mass movements is that negative personality types effect people's negative impulses. Obviously the Muslim leaders, such as Osama bin Laden are negative. Hitler used the same tactics. These two horrible individuals used negative things to achieve power and gain huge followings. Scapegoating is negative, but it works when you want to start a mass movement. Both the Nazis and the Muslim Fundamentalists of today have a person that they blame for their problems. This negative outlook brings people together to unite, and attempt to destroy other people in the hopes of bettering their lives. The group of Fundamentalists whom follow Osama blame the Americans for the state of the world. The hatred of Americans forms a common bond. Osama certainly used this scapegoat to build one of the most sophisticated terror networks ever. The scariest aspect of the arguments that Hoffer wrote about is that successful mass movements are more self-sacrificing than self-fulfilling. This can explain why the suicide bombers of 9/11 took the course of action that they did. They believed that if they died for the cause, their people would be better off. Osama praises people for self-sacrifice. Suicide bombers become martyrs. The entire community of Fundamentalists praises the person and, even go as far as to put up banners with the so-called martyr's face on the streets. In a way, this brought the whole situation in the Middle East to the worlds attention. Now, we actually know where Afghanistan is located. We are also more aware of the problems that are causing this mass movement. Before September 11, most Americans were oblivious to the entire Middle East. Osama bin Laden understands The True Believer and the book has aided him in this aspect of his leadership. Niccolo Machiavelli wrote The Prince for Lorenzo de’ Medici to help the Medici strengthen and govern Italy. Osama bin Laden has used this book in attempt to strengthen his own personal ego. The methods described by Machiavelli, are not necessarily the ways that he believes are ethical. The ways to achieve and hold power are almost all unethical. Machiavelli did not write this book with ethics in mind. Osama does not use an ethical protocol for any of his actions. It is obviously unethical to send suicide bombers to kill unarmed civilians. If Osama was ethical he would attack military installations. Machiavelli wrote The Prince to provide a blue print for dominance, achievement and political success. Osama bin Laden has certainly put this blueprint to work in his years of leading the Muslim Fundamentalists. Machiavelli obviously loved Italy and wanted Italy to prosper. Osama has misused this book for his own personal gain. Machiavelli’s study of the past made this book a great tool that has been used for both good and evil. He was able to prove his points through examples of past leaders that had both succeeded and failed. Osama has definitely studi Machiavelli believed that the end justifies the means. If it were necessary to kill and be ruthless in order to better Italy, it must be done. There is no way to achieve this goal, without being ruthless at some point. People would have to die in order for Italy to flourish. Even a hereditary principality may need to be shown brutality in order to maintain the power of the ruler. New principalities are in the most need of brutality, according to Machiavelli. Osama bin Laden follows this one particular view of Machiavelli. He does not care who is hurt in the process of the terrorist attacks, his top concern is hurting American civilians. Osama bin Laden does not care about the future of Islam, yet he has convinced his followers that he has th Machiavelli states that a leader must take care of the people that helped them get to their position of power. He also says that a leader must root out all of the people that used to hold power. According to Machiavelli, the people that help leaders get to where they are will turn if they are not treated correctly. This is actually an ethical idea. Machiavelli knew that a leader, who is not true to those who are true to him, would seek revenge. Osama bin Laden has certainly rooted out all individuals that used to hold power within circles of terrorist cells. Osama killed the leader of the Northern Alliance because he was such a strong threat to Osama’s success. Osama has helped those who have supported him, but he is still ruthless. He uses the Koran as his basis for terror yet this is an unethical reason for killing innocent people. Machiavelli defended the unethical advice he gave to Medici. It is supposed to be realistic. It is supposed to capture what it really takes to achieve political power. Osama bin Laden definitely understands how realistic this advice is. Machiavelli wrote that men are mostly bad and commit bad acts. He also pointed out that if your actions are too good, evildoers will conquer you. This brings up the cliché, “It’s a dog eat dog world!” Osama is the evil doer. He has certainly taken advantage of any good that there is in the world. When he planned the 9/11 attacks, he took advantage of the naïve security measures that the United States takes. George W. Bush tried to play the good guy for a long time. Now he is forced to attack Osama bin Laden and the Al Queda network. If a political leader is not on the offensive, they will be on the defensive in a short period of time. It is unethical for the leader to perform these acts, but the rival leader may attack. Neither side is ethical when this is examined. Both of the leaders should be seen as unethical. In the case of George W. Bush, it is not unethical for the U.S. to retaliate. It is necessary because no retaliation will send the message that terrorism will be feared and accepted. Machiavelli wrote that merciful is better than cruel. He warns that mercy should be used intelligently. He wrote that it is best to be feared and loved. If people can love a leader and see that the leader will kill if necessary, the leader may succeed. Osama bin Laden has definitely taken this to heart. His people love him and will die for him. They also know that crossing a line will result in immediate death. The world fears Bin Laden yet his people love him. This combination is rarely found. Adolph Hitler did the same thing during Nazi Germany. Bin Laden has most likely studied Adolph Hitler’s road to power. Hitler was also out for personal gain and glory. If Machiavelli was an unethical person, he would have used hearsay and he would not have used facts. Unethical arguments use false statements and manipulate the truth. Machiavelli was simply stating the facts. These facts helped convince Bin Laden that he had the ability to gain political success. If Machiavelli had not used facts it would have been a rougher road for Bin Laden to climb. The bottom line is, Machiavelli was not unethical, since he did not lie about anything. The real question is, is it wrong to actually discuss this topic? Bin Laden has used this book in an unethical manner. This does not mean that the book should be banned. Many times people become more motivated after reading it. Many of my fellow FBI agents have read this book and gained more status within the agency. Machiavelli had the right to point out past mistakes. The other question raised, is whether or not it is correct to invade principalities? The question for Osama bin Laden is whether or not it is ethical to kill innocent people for his own personal glory. Machiavelli wanted Italy to prosper just as Bin Laden wants personal gratification. This is why it is wrong for Machiavelli’s The Prince to be used for the purposes that Osama bin Laden has used them for. Bin Laden has taken the books and made himself one of the most feared people of all time. He planned the most horrible act of terrorism on U.S in history. His narcissism has caused him to want complete world domination and personal glory. The two books have caused him to achieve the title that he wants, Osama the Prince. This is the perfect title for a person who wants everyone to follow him. He wants people to follow him and even die for him. He achieved this goal and has become the most infamous terrorist of all time. The world will continue to fear him and the US will search for him. Osama has achieved his goal of world celebrity. His insanity has allowed him to want to be well known, even if it is because he is such a horrible person. http://www.nyu.edu/classes/keefer/joe/eber1.html Last week, on the one year anniversary of the fatal raid of Osama bin Laden’s house, a set of documents was released providing us additional insight into the mind of this famed terrorist. While certainly a despicable character, I find his charisma and longevity remarkable. Let’s take a look at his approach.
Vision
Osama bin Laden had a clear and consistent vision—attack America. He viewed the United States as an immoral nation, full of homosexuality, gambling, alcohol, and an unacceptable alliance with Israel.
Loosely allied terrorist groups frequently adopted this mission and expanded it to include local governments. This caused bin Laden quite a bit of consternation. He made a considerable effort to moderate these more extreme groups. In this sense he was a moderate.
He admonished rogue groups who reinterpreted ancient Islamic law regarding collateral damage in the event of an attack into enemy territory. While Islamic law may allow this only in extreme circumstances, these regional groups considered it acceptable to inflict casualties to innocent bystanders, including Muslims during “normal” operations.
Power
As these regional groups adopted more radical terrorist tactics bin Laden attempted to persuade them to come back into the fold and moderate their behavior. Surprisingly, based upon the materials I have examined, it seems that he did not attempt to use coercion or punishment as tools in this regard. Other al Qaeda leaders wanted to take more polar positions with these errant groups, either distancing themselves or bringing them under their wing in order to broaden the reach of al Qaeda central.
Adaptability
Osama bin Laden’s journey from country to country has been well-documented. He fought the Soviets in Afghanistan, then returned to his home country of Saudi Arabia from which he was expelled. He chose to live in Sudan and continue to build a network of terror. Pressured to leave that country, he boarded a chartered flight back to Afghanistan. Upon his return he struck up a friendship with Mullah Omar and began to establish the fighter training camps. Each stop along bin Laden’s journey he adapted to the local culture and developed a strong network of allies.
Training
In order to execute successful terrorist attacks significant training is necessary and bin Laden knew this. He invested both time and money in people and equipment. The September 11, 2001 attacks are a prime example of meticulous plans executed well.
Alignment
From the beginning, Osama bin Laden felt that discipline and a code of conduct were necessary.
The al Qaeda manual obtained in a raid on a Manchester, England house reveals a number of values and behaviors demanded from all members. These included patience, a calm personality, a commitment to the organization, and the Islamic faith.
And so we can get a better picture of Osama bin Laden the leader. Far from a feckless leader, he developed a vision and remained steadfast in it. He adapted well to contrary events, trained his people, and demanded the best of his men.
Osama bin Laden: loathsome—yes. A successful leader—yes, unfortunately.
Concepts:
* Maintain a clear and consistent vision * Use power wisely and effectively * Remain adaptable, able to adjust to changes in outside forces * Invest in training for your people * Communicate well to assure alignment of everyone in the organization
http://blog.turbochargedleadership.com/?p=280
1) He was charismatic - People willingly would die for him.
2) He was dedicated and single-minded - He didn't hesitate to order people to die for him
3) He was highly intelligent - He knew how to inspire and manipulate people to die for him
4) He was filthy rich - For all the pretense of him being a "soldier in a cave," OBL was a wealthy man...he had connections who could help him both financially and
politically.
Leadership is influence. That’s the most basic definition you’ll find for the complex and nuanced topic we call leadership: the ability to obtain followers. When you strip away all the moral issues surrounding the topic, Hitler was a leader, Abe Lincoln was a leader, Martin Luther King Jr. was a leader, Jim Jones was a leader. And – unfortunately for human history, Osama bin Laden was a leader. Stop. Take a deep breath. Before you start drafting your hate mail, put your pen down and hear me out. Despite how reprehensible I personally find bin Laden – actually, BECAUSE I find him so reprehensible – it’s my responsibility to study what factors allowed such a monster to build a following.
1. Cast a vision (that’s not about you). Bin Laden’s influence stemmed from his ability to tap into a deep fear that Western culture is threatening the fabric of Muslim civilization. He was able to channel the rage over what is widely viewed as Western expansion (military and cultural). Take a look at just one example of the language bin Laden used in casting a vision to incite his followers: ” . . . For the American forces to expect anything from me personally reflects a very narrow perception. Thousands of millions of Muslims are angry. The Americans should expect reactions from the Muslim world that are proportionate to the injustice they inflict.” — Osama bin Laden to Time Magazine Dec 1998 Now look at what Abraham Lincoln told the battle-weary soldiers of the 166th Ohio Regiment: “It is not merely for today, but for all time to come that we should perpetuate for our children’s children this great and free government… I beg you to remember this, not merely for my sake, but for yours… It is in order that each of you may have… an open field and a fair chance for your industry, enterprise, and intelligence; that you may all have equal privleges in the race of life…” — Abraham Lincoln, 1864 The common denominator is the message that: “It’s not about me. It’s about you.” 2. Don’t just lead, catalyze. Al Qaeda is a decentralized organization. For a time, bin Laden may have acted as CEO, but eventually he became more or less a figurehead for a leaderless organization. Intentional or not, al Qaeda grew into a decentralized, open organization. It inspired subsidiary (or copycat) organization in Somalia, Iraq, Spain and many other corners of the globe. And that’s precisely what made it so difficult to confront. In The Starfish and the Spider, Ori Brafman and Rod Beckstrom define a Catalyst as “the person who initiates a circle and then fades away into the background.” They go on to discuss how these types of decentralized “starfish organizations” can grow and morph and become extremely difficult to contain. “…given that eliminating the catalyst is a futile effort… and given that when you [kill the catalyst], new ones quickly emerge, the only part of the decentralized organization that you can realistically go after is the ideology.” For several examples of more positive “starfish organizations”, consider Wikipedia or Craiglist. 3. Build your bench. Groom your successors. It remains to be seen whether al Qaeda has any formal or informal successors that will step into the role of catalyst or leader. Hopefully any formal successors are now known to the world’s security forces and will never be able to catalyze al Qaeda to the degree bin Laden did. But students of leadership would do well to learn a lesson from bin Laden’s downfall: you never know when your influence will end. You probably aren’t hiding in a bunker waiting for the Navy SEAL Team Six, but don’t fool yourself: you can’t lead forever. You might get hit by a bus tomorrow. Are you identifying and mentoring the leaders of tomorrow? 4. One determined person can change the world. Some of the most impactful images seized in the raid on bin Laden’s bunker are of a haggard bin Laden in a skull-cap sitting under a blanket, watching himself on a TV. Frankly, I was surprised by the images – bin Laden’s ratty bunker was a far cry from the Dr. Evil headquarters I had imagined. Here’s a man that is among the few that can honestly claim to have changed the course of history. It’s hard to believe that THIS is the guy that caused so much pain and destruction. And that’s the point. One determined person that harnesses the powers of leadership can change the world – for evil…or for good. If this broke-down old man in a ratty basement can shake up the world for evil, what’s stopping you from changing the world for good? http://www.quantumworkplace.com/4-leadership-skills-we-can-learn-from-osama-bin-laden/ America’s new, and most poignant, “day of infamy” raises deep questions about leadership. As a nation we look as never before to our leaders to create and achieve a new vision in this tormented world. But it must be a moral vision and our means of achieving it must be moral as well. Moral leadership must strive for noble causes such as improving human well being or realizing the goals stated in The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
Morality is often assumed in descriptions of leadership. One of our leading thinkers, Warren Bennis, sums up it up as follows. They are people “who know what they want, why they want it, how to communicate that to others to gain their support to get it.” And, they are able to mobilize others to struggle toward their shared aspirations. Moral leadership requires something more: securing improvement in the human condition through one’s own and other’s efforts.
By the traditional account, Osama bin Laden is an effective leader. He wanted to make a horrific statement to the United States and did, for reasons we cannot fully fathom but must be clear to his baneful mind. Bin Laden’s compelling reasons undoubtedly included resentment against the United States and what we stand for. “A race of such men of resentiment,” Nietzsche observed, “is bound to become eventually cleverer than any noble race; it will also honor cleverness to a far greater degree.” If nothing else the terrorists were clever. Our leaders must respond with equal shrewdnesss.
The transplanted Saudi has been especially effective in enlisting others to create a global cell-structured organization that he uses to communicate his wants. The resulting information net is robust and redundant. Knock out one cell and the others adapt.
Incredibly, bin Laden and his cohorts have been able to entice hundreds of talented young men to spend several years of their lives in waiting, learning a distinctive skill, such piloting large aircraft. Only to be triggered on command to employ that skill by smashing a plane, laden with passengers and fuel, into some of the world’s largest buildings. At least 19 of these followers, some of whom apparently had families and promising careers, were calmly and steadfastly loyal to the cause, although they knew with certitude that their lives would come to a fiery end.
This is a remarkable feat of leadership, but it is based on a bad morality. Unguided leadership is just raw power. As Nietzsche also reminds us the higher the level of power the greater the possibility that it can be used for evil as well as good. To wit: Hitler and Stalin. Ethical leadership needs a moral compass.
What is true North for this compass? According to the Declaration of Human Rights we should assure “the inherent dignity” and “the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family.” In William James’ vision, moral leaders should try to bring about “the very largest total universe of good.” In our quest for justice we must not compromise these sacred values, although our notions of freedom and security will never be the same.
What steps must be taken? A few simple rules will not suffice given the complex, pluralistic, uncertain world in which we live. The moral challenge we face today is several fold. First, we must affirm our moral vision.
As a society we must begin to develop a retinue of moral leaders of all ages and persuasions. The clash of civilizations we are dealing with covers the globe and will be with us for a long time
We must encourage our current leaders, beginning with President Bush and radiating out to all citizens, to temper our rightful moral outrage with moral wisdom. The mythic leader is an infantry first lieutenant rising out of the trench and pointing to the enemy. Today there is no one single source of evil at which to point. This evil is marbled throughout the world. It must be rooted out one small unit at a time. Doing justice requires many cell-sensitive rapiers rather than a massive bludgeon. Instead of a few large moral decisions – invade Normandy, drop the atomic bomb on Hiroshima – thousands of globally distributed and frequently unique moral decisions must be made, often in parallel.
Each leader’s moral character will be our bulwark.
Where will these leaders of character come from? Our educational system is our first line of defense and offense. Character formation begins in early youth, first in the family, then in our schools. Traits like honesty, integrity and regard for the sacredness of human life begin there. Local organizations like the Dallas Coalition for Character and Values are working to help meet this need.
Moral development continues, indeed for many it takes significant strides, during the college years. One gains powerful knowledge and leadership skills as part of a university education. It is essential that students also learn to use this power for moral ends. Programs at the U.S. Naval Academy, West Point, Duke, and SMU, among others, are geared to do this. Business also is addressing the issue . Metroplex based companies such as EDS, TI, Southwest Airlines, TXU, ATMOS Energy, Help International Inc., and The Container Store have crafted programs to assure that their employees behave ethically and treat their customers and fellow employees with respect.
In light of the challenge of the Al-Qaeda network, however, all of these noteworthy efforts must be expanded.
In searching for an overarching principle for building character and guiding distributed moral leadership in today’s fractionated world, leaders will do well to follow Aristotle’s maxim: always act towards the right person, at the right time, in the rightplace, in the right amount, and in the right way. http://ethics.sandiego.edu/Resources/PhilForum/Terrorism/Mason.html conviction,religion as a support,
We love death. The U.S. loves life. That is the big difference between us.