Morocco # English board

Al Qaeda's Pan-Maghreb Gambit
November 21, 2006 18 00 GMT

By Fred Burton

Spanish newspaper El Periodico reported Nov. 20 that Algeria's Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC) -- which recently swore allegiance to al Qaeda -- has been instructed to form a unified command with Morocco's Islamic Combatant Group, Libya's Islamic Fighting Group and several Tunisian groups, most notably the Tunisian Combatant Group. The new organization reportedly will be called The Union of the Arab Maghreb. The newspaper cited Spanish anti-terrorism intelligence sources, who said the information regarding the creation of the new unified network was derived from a plan Moroccan police discovered in one of several raids over the summer.

The al Qaeda concept of creating a unified group of "Qaedat al-Jihad in the Arab Maghreb Countries" is not new. Moroccan authorities discovered plans for such a union in late 2005, when raids targeting several suspected militants turned up messages sent by leaders in the region to Osama bin Laden. In those messages, leaders reportedly discussed a plan for the GSPC to officially join al Qaeda and then unite jihadists in the Maghreb countries -- in many ways conforming to the pattern established by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, who united jihadists in Jordan and Iraq. Significantly, the GSPC effort would also strive to unite North African militants living in Europe into a cohesive paramilitary entity.

El Periodico's report would seem to confirm that plans for the pan-Maghreb merger have proceeded. Other signs of traction came from Ayman al-Zawahiri, who said in a Sept. 11, 2006, message that GSPC had joined forces with al Qaeda in a union he hoped would be "a thorn in the neck of the American and French Crusaders and their allies, and an arrow in the heart of the French traitors and apostates." Al-Zawahiri went on to say, "We ask Allah to help our brothers of the GSPC to hit the foundations of the Crusader alliance, primarily their old leader the infidel United States, praise be on Allah." On Sept. 13, GSPC acknowledged the merger on its Web site with a message from its emir, Abu Musab Abd al-Wadoud, who wrote that, "We have full confidence in the faith, the doctrine, the method and the modes of action of [al Qaeda's] members, as well as their leaders and religious guides."

The fact that al Qaeda pressed on with plans for a Maghreb merger, despite the arrests of more than 50 suspects in Morocco and the fact that the plan was exposed, indicates that the group (and its new local subsidiaries) has some compelling reasons to do so. As Stratfor has noted, acting alone, the GSPC has been unable to derail the peace process between the Algerian government and the country's main Islamist movement, Front Islamique du Salut (FIS). Militant groups in Morocco, Tunisia and Libya are also struggling to gain traction in their respective countries. Linking with each other and al Qaeda will provide them with a boost -- and will provide al Qaeda an important new geographic base and operational arm.


The Motives for Mergers

The plan to unite the disparate militant groups operating in the Maghreb under al Qaeda's banner makes perfect sense from the jihadist perspective. (The name proposed for this new network should not be confused with the Arab Maghreb Union, a pan-Arab trade agreement aiming for economic and political unity in Northern Africa).

Since its foundation, al Qaeda has applied the principles of unity and strength in numbers. The declaration by the so-called "World Islamic Front" in 1998 of "jihad against Jews and Crusaders" was signed not only by bin Laden and al-Zawahiri (who represented what was then an independent group, Egyptian Islamic Jihad), but also by representatives of Egypt's Gamaah al-Islamiyah, Jamiat-ul-Ulema-e-Pakistan and the Jihad Movement in Bangladesh. Al Qaeda leaders later forged close ties with groups such as Abu Sayyaf in the Philippines and Jemaah Islamiyah in Indonesia.

Within al Qaeda, there is a culture of inclusion, and -- though the existence of strong Saudi and Egyptian cadres has been noted -- commanders have been promoted for the most part on the basis of their faith and merit rather than ethnicity or national origin. Commanders from East Asia, Africa and South Asia also have been joined by the likes of Abu Yahya al-Libi and Ahmed Ressam from states in the Maghreb. Indeed, men from the Maghreb states, and Morocco in particular, occupy a considerable (and disproportionate) number of leadership positions in the central al Qaeda organization. Moreover, Stratfor has received unconfirmed reports that more than 400 North Africans are being trained in al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere.

In announcing the GSPC merger, al-Zawahiri issued a reminder to "all my brothers who act in the service of Islam, who help the Muslims to resist the Zionist-Crusader campaign, and myself, of the need for unity, which is the door to victory. This unity is a religious duty upon the Muslims while confronting their enemies."

Al Qaeda's doctrine of unity is rooted not only in theology but in very practical considerations as well. From experiences in Afghanistan during the 1980s, and now in Iraq, the jihadists have learned about the tactical and strategic value of joining forces. Al-Zarqawi was able to transform several smaller jihadist groups in Iraq into a unified, effective insurgent force -- not to mention a prodigious media entity. Indeed, many jihadists from the Maghreb have traveled to Iraq to fight. In September 2005, the Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated that 600 Algerians were fighting as foreign jihadists in Iraq. At the time, this was believed to be 20 percent of the total strength of the foreign insurgents in Iraq -- the largest of any single group. Moroccan militant networks have also been instrumental in funneling jihadists from Europe to Iraq. This exposure to the jihad in Iraq and their experience with al-Zarqawi's organization reportedly helped to propel the unification scheme in their home region. By uniting, small organizations are better able to maximize resources -- sharing finance and logistics networks and important nodes, such as training camps. It also allows them to use the al Qaeda "brand name" for recruiting and propaganda purposes.

Implications of the Merger

Moroccan authorities also reportedly received information from their Pakistani counterparts that a key aide to al-Zawahiri recently traveled to Morocco using a Thai passport, masquerading as an Asian antiques merchant. His objective was to coordinate the activities of a number of fundamentalist groups in North Africa -- presumably a reference to the merger now being discussed by El Periodico.

This information complements reports from Stratfor sources in the region, who say the leaders of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia feel threatened by an Islamic fundamentalist "tsunami" they believe might strike within the next five years. Because of this threat, Moroccan King Muhammad VI, Algerian President Abdel Aziz Bouteflika and Tunisian President Zayn al-Abidin bin Ali reportedly are preparing (quietly) for a joint security summit.

Of course, political leaders in the region are not alone in their concerns. The United States recently announced that it wants to add Libya to the Trans-Sahara Counterterrorism Partnership (TSCTP), a group of nine North and West African countries cooperating with Washington against Islamist militants. There are growing concerns about the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group -- and Washington is especially concerned that al Qaeda might be seeking sanctuary in TSCTP territories. Al Qaeda also seems to be gaining influence with Western Saraha's Polisario Movement, many of the leaders of which have let their beards grow in the fundamentalist tradition. They openly call for introducing the rule of the Caliphate in the Arab Maghreb -- the goal espoused by the groups now partnering with al Qaeda.

Tactically speaking, the Maghreb is not as strategically significant to the United States or other "crusader" powers as the Middle East, but it still features a number of economically important targets, including Western oil companies operating in Algeria and Libya and tourist sites in Tunisia and Morocco.

Since the 2003 bombings in Casablanca, there have been few terrorist strikes in the region that bore al Qaeda's imprimatur -- though militant activity has been a low constant. The simultaneous truck bomb attacks against two Algerian police stations on Oct. 30 did bear some characteristics of an al Qaeda operation -- and perhaps a hint of al Qaeda influence -- but there were some stark differences as well. For instance, the attacks occurred at night, rather than at a time when casualties would be high.

That said, such tactical differences likely will begin to dissipate as the al Qaeda-Maghreb militant relationship deepens. Ultimately, al Qaeda's previously effective strategies and attack templates likely will become more prominent in the Maghreb. By this, we mean an increase in attacks against oil-related targets (like the uptick seen in Iraq, Saudi Arabia and Yemen) and more strikes against soft tourist targets such as restaurants, resorts and hotels (like those seen in Indonesia, Iraq, Jordan, Egypt and Kenya). Additionally, the use of suicide bombers -- which are not generally part of the GSPC repertoire -- is likely to increase. The Moroccans certainly have already incorporated the suicide bomber tactic. The 2003 Casablanca attacks, in which 14 suicide operatives were dispatched, involved the largest number of suicide operatives seen in a single operation other than 9/11.

North African militants also will benefit from the training in operational security and tradecraft they can receive from al Qaeda cadre. Those who are traveling to fronts like Iraq already are receiving some of this type of training, but under the new arrangement al Qaeda will be able to dispatch personnel to serve, in a sense, as adjunct professors at camps run by groups such as the GSPC in the region. This means more men from the Maghreb will have access to the training since they will no longer have to travel to Pakistan or Afghanistan to attend al Qaeda camps. This also allows al Qaeda to diversify its training camps and provides continuity in case it loses a camp elsewhere.

Strategically, a focus on the Maghreb makes sense for al Qaeda: The region has a long history of militant Islamism and of struggling against colonial and "apostate" rulers. Moreover, there is geographic proximity to Europe, and many North Africans have close ties to Europe and North America via their friends and family residing in large North African communities in places such as Paris, Amsterdam, Milan and Montreal. That makes the region a great springboard not only for operatives looking to carry out strikes in Europe, but also for proselytizers seeking to unify and radicalize the large North African communities in the continent. Those communities can act as either support networks or as camouflage for jihadist operatives.

Though the focus of jihadist combat operations is Iraq and Afghanistan, Europe long has served as an important logistical and support base for jihadists. In recent years, however, it has become an operational theater as well -- as the 2004 and 2005 attacks in Madrid, Amsterdam and London demonstrated. Italian authorities have thwarted several attacks in the last five years -- as has France, which was singled out in al-Zawahiri's 9/11 anniversary message and could be the site of the next al Qaeda-linked attack.

However, the Maghreb node faces a completely different operational environment than the chaos of Iraq. The Maghreb countries have central governments and military, law enforcement and intelligence units that have been fighting Islamist insurgents for decades. With the exception of Libya, these countries are also closely tied to Western military and intelligence agencies and have been cooperating with them for some time. The plan to add Libya to the TSCTP is intended to plug that gap. In this hostile environment, operational security and terrorist tradecraft will be vital, as will the node's leadership.

Since the organization is based on the model of al Qaeda in Iraq, GSPC will assume the central role in the organization like Jamaat al-Tawhid wal-Jihad did in Iraq. Furthermore, al-Wadoud, the emir of the GSPC, will take on the leadership role that was so skillfully played by al-Zarqawi in Iraq. As we have seen from Iraq (and from al Qaeda's organization in Saudi Arabia), the strength of the local leader has a significant impact on the performance of the al Qaeda regional branches. When the leader is strong and organized, the branch is efficient and deadly; when the leader is weak and incapable, the branch either loses its effectiveness or never congeals into an effective force in the first place. In this case, the proof will indeed be in the pudding, as it remains to be seen whether al-Wadoud possesses the leadership skills necessary to mold this new group into a cohesive and effective organization.

Should al-Wadoud prove to be a commander of the caliber of al-Zarqawi or Abdel Aziz al-Muqrin, a noticeable uptick in the number and quality of attacks in the region can be expected. From there, as seen with al-Zarqawi's organization, the new Maghreb branch could project its power and conduct attacks in neighboring countries -- in this case, in Europe.

[www.stratfor.com]

The author is one of those who are making money with the war on terrorism.

hummmm... these terrorists would be better than the arab governments if they succeed in uniting

it's kinda of good news... the terrorists arent so dumb lol

nah, there is a nice book about terrorism, i need time to buy it and read it...

but it said that there is two kinds of terrorists, the one fighting for a crusade (jihad) to "convert" the non-believers (pseudo muslims or not)... and these dudes are doing a great job on the indirect way... they forced people to care about religion, triggered racism and islamophobia...

all of these factors push the muslims toward radicalisation by closing the doors of society in front of them.

and then, the "nicer" kind of terrorists... the ones trying to avenge the harm done on the muslims...
Hamas is a good exemple to this kind of terror...

anyway... i keep hope in mankind. it's all i can do.

the terrorists in Iraq had a little rebellion in their ranks, more and more kamikazes were angry to see their lives wasted to kill innocents rather than aim at Coalition troops... and to see some "intelligence" or humanism... call it as you wish... in the mind of a candidate to a kamikaze attack is just wonderful.

but it's (honestly) scary... i always saw them as total morons... but looks like they start to "evolve"... hope it's in the good direction.

oh yeah, terrorist are the most humanist kind of people on earth. They are so loving and considerate. What kind of BS is that?

zaki7 you speak like a minsinformed dude...

and yes, terrorists are human beings, and some terrorists care for human life... in their "own way"...

in Iraq (following an article) said that there was riots in the ranks of Al-Quaeda in Iraq. the kamikaze candidates were mad to see their "superiors" send them for bombing civilians rather than to aim at the Coalition forces...

let me translate it for you:
a terrorists was mad because he was sick of targeting civilians (women and children) and he asked for military targets.

and you can see that in Hamas aswell.
if you look carefully, since Hamas is in a democratic process, they started caring for armed resistance, rocket attacks and less kamikaze attacks...
and this is related to the intervention of "moderate muslims" in the terror organisation...

do you understand?

i'm not an expert in terrorism, but it looks like it's easier to deal with a Taliban than with an atheist lol...

well first of all, don't dude me or buddy me plz, I am not your buzz boy or your campus fraternity brother.

second of all, if terrorist care for human life, then we must have a very different meaning of the word terrorist and humanist. May be you should give us your definition of terrorist so we can go from that.

Today, there were 140 deaths in Irak, not 1, 2, 20, or 50 but 140 in coordinated attacks to kill as many civilians as possible. if you're not watching the news by choice to not see the plain truth like it is, then at least don't put forward ideas that everyone would laugh at the second you spit them out.

If terrorist are your brothers in religion, then your religion is terrorism and has nothing to do with Islam. Please stop talking of the majority of muslims. You don't represent them, period.

I am not an expert in kamikaze attacks but it seems that you fit the profile perfectly. Go get yourself a couple of bombs and go chase the "atheist", I heard humans make their religius choice at the age of 3. All you need a fatwa and a kindergarden of "blonde" heads and you'll be awakened by 70 virgins.

Somebody please tell me how people like this can still say they are muslim and speak in the name of a majority of 1.5 billion peaceful and life-loving muslims? sometimes it just makes me want to puke.

zaki7 you are so hasty.
i'm opposed to kamikaze attacks, i dont see them as a good tool to win a war...

it's perfect tool to make casulties, but we dont win a war that way. and the muslim way in warfare is clear when it comes to rules of engagement.

but my opinion isnt important here. we arent here to talk about me.

but you should stop caring about numbers and look carefully.

there is many kinds of terrorists in Iraq. and there is also insurgents... these are perfectly honorable people. they attack Coalition troops alone... we shouldnt spit on them.

but i care about these candidates for kamikaze attacks.

yesterday, they attacked civilians and killed many women and children without caring about the consequences.
today, they start to question these methods and start to ask for MORE military targets.

you see that or not?

it's called an evolution... a change. and i have to add that it's an evolution in the good path.

maybe that tomorrow they will stop targeting civilians AT ALL.

and next avoid attacking military targets to spare civilians...

and then, stop using kamikaze attacks and start using conventional weapons ALONE...

and then bla bla bla

you see that? it's an evolution.

stop using stereotypes... we are dealing with a population, and small margin? yeah for sure... but an active one... and this population, we treated it like Nazis for a long time.
we saw them as a part of muslims we have to sacrifice to live in peace.

but with stuff like that, they prooved they can change and learn...

you always say "it's not Islam", i fully agree with you. so why dont we teach them about REAL Islam?

i dont say that kamikaze attacks are good... but that these dudes are human beings... and they can get better.

of course, they are dangerous, we have to stop them. but i'm against an active and aggressive behavior toward them. because more we push, worse they are.

look at Hamas, once the people was FORCED to accept them. they turned into a "better" kind of terrorists...

do you understand?

oh yeah, no doubt about that, they are really changing. Now they're killing civilians by the hundreds... wake up "dude", how is the weather like in lala land? are you that blind about whats going on around you? or is it some sort of thick ideology layer that prevents you from calling a killer a killer? Now you are talking about enrolling them into "1 on 1 humanism for dummies", very funny...

zaki7 dont get blinded by numbers...

it's a "movement", a change in the good direction... if they start just asking questions, then it's already a good start.

and these 140 deaths arent what i'm talking about... dont use statistics that way... we cant see the future. maybe that if there was no one in the terror side caring for civilians, there would 1400 dead people in these attacks...

it's a war, statistics arent relevant AT ALL.

if you really need to use stats, you should care about stats about... let's see:
number of candidates for suicide attacks.
percentage of "terrorists" wanting to target Coalition/military targets alone
and such...

i said that the growing rate of the candidates for kamikaze attacks is "maybe"(because we cant know for sure) slowing down...

do you understand that? it's very simple.

the number of dead people is just a matter of competences, it's not relevant... they got better when it comes to killing people? sure... it's natural to learn from experiance... but dont get fooled.

Ok I won't get blinded by the outrageous number of deaths these people create on a daily basis, what do you want to talk about, the whales reproduction in Alaska in the 1900's? Get real...

zaki7 i'm not as sensible as you on these points...

i'm interested in other things... numbers arent important.

Zaki said:
Somebody please tell me how people like this can still say they are Muslims and speak in the name of a majority of 1.5 billion peaceful and life-loving Muslims? Sometimes it just makes me want to puke.
Very well said Zaki, indeed.
As I said many times on this forum, if anyone sees these killers other than killers, then they really have a major problem. They made Islam a religion of blood and wars; they made it the only religion on the face of earth to be feared. They made all Muslims loose the pride they once had, the world think we all are terrorists, these terrorists made us stand in lines in airports around the world praying that our names won’t be a reason to reject our visas or entries. They made some frail ones even change their names, and on and on…these scumbags are the ones behind the decline of a great civilization and the burial of its history. And it’s not only the example of 144 victims of yesterday that we have here, but their choice always of bombing mosques and never see the difference between killing a fighter and a child or a mother. We have to have the guts if we showed the video of Israelis soldiers shooting at those women 3 weeks ago, to also show that these criminals are killing dozens of women every single day. And by the way I never in my life heard a more outrageous phrase us: “i'm interested in other things... numbers arent important” “what the hell are saying le Mask? Are you really sane to say something like this? Someone once said about absurd comments: They are not worth the paper they're written on. And I see we have many of that in our societies.
But I see, the disparity in thinking and analyzing we have here in the forum is so wide; the best one can do sometimes is not to engage too much. The parrots learn only what someone teaches them, they’ll sit and pluck themselves to death if we live them alone.
Peace,

Almot, i dont care about numbers... and i will say it again and again...

not that i like provocation, but it's true. i really dont think that it's relevant.

you have two sides in a kamikaze attack... the kamikaze, and the victims...

the kamikaze side is interessant to study, the victims isnt... and i will tell you why. if a kamikaze blow his bomb in the desert he will kill no one... but if he does in a place where there is a lot of people, he will kill a lot of people...

and if he takes a bigger bomb he will kill much more... so, the kamikaze side is frozen, and we can study it. while the consequences of his actions are irrelevant and changing following the situation.

i say that there is a movement in the good path in the terrorists side. i dont say that they are good... i just say that they dont get worse... it's a change. a positive one.

first they will start to ask for more military targets, and tommorow for more and then for more. it's a good thing.

now, i understand, you are shocked by these numbers... but horror doesnt block my view on the world.
yeah, it's horrible... so what? what can i do?

you speak just like the Americans here "they are just terrorists"... yeah, they are... but they are terrorists because someone dont see them as human beings...
the day you will treat them as human beings, this day they will change.

but the fathers of these terrorists were rapped, tortured and treated in an inhuman way...

extremism have a root...

how can i get mad at Palestinian dude who lost his kids because of the Israelis? how can i be mad at him if he is vulnerable enough to believe the BS they serve him in this situation? how can i be mad at him if he took an explosive belt and tried to get as many Israelis as possible?

it's not the perfect answer... but it's a human answer. when you push people too far, they push back...

why you arent a terrorist? yeah, YOU almot... because no one did anything to you directly. would you be the same in these conditions? i dont think so.
i blame the situation... and i want to change it.

leMask
I think you made your point very clear and you showed who you are really. I have to say that you, unlike others on this forum who think like you do, left the parrot culture of just repeating things for the sake of repeating, and spoke your mind.
I agree with you the suicide bombers culture you so admire really works; look at how much land the Palestinians gain with it, how dare we want them to leave such a wonderful and a Muslim way? Just one look at the map of Palestine and you will see all the land they returned.
Oh and also, the same for Iraq, they really brought peace through strapping themselves and blowing markets and mosques, and mostly the mosques, which is so cute to blow mostly on Fridays, I think 72 virgins is too little for your friends, they should get double that. That is true Islam. What a shame!!!
Hamza and Abou Dar Al Ghifari are turning in their graves with excitements right now, if you know who they are.

Almot you call me a terrorist fan now?
i dont agree with them.
but their reaction is the natural reaction of a weakened person. you cant imagine the strain of a conflict... for years and decades... it's a new culture.

and i have to disagree with you, Israel used terrorism, but it also made concessions because of terrorism...

terrorism WORKS... believe it or not! in Iraq, terrorism is making the COalition regret their attack.
but the problem is that the "price" is too high...

the terrorists did win, but they lost so much... so they are loosers as well in the conflict...

it have a positive side, but the price is way too high... it's not a smart way...

remember the kamikaze attacks in Lebanon against US troops? so many Marines wiped out in one attack...

until today, they didnt loose so many Marines in a conflict... deadly efficient... and this is why there is still terrorists...

Let me sum up your thought,

you are not a terrorist fan, you just feel for them, poor little guys... and you don't care about the "numbers". Those numbers are nothing else than innocent civilian lives that you despise. I guess we got your point, you're not a terrorist but you can happily be their cheerleader who never participates in the act itself but who wears the team colors and talks about how loving and great his team is, even when they tarnish an entire religion and community.

Let me ask you a very simple question: do you think kamikaze will go to paradise or hell? if you're going to answer like : I don't know, only God knows, I will reply Yes not only God already knows but he also clearly told you what stance you should have as a muslim regarding this, now can you stand up and be a real muslim?

Answer...?

Hi all;

If you find yourself in a HOLE, stop digging!
Much of what this character has said makes no sense! No use explaining to somebody who thinks s/he knows!
Little knowledge is indeed dangerous!
Thank you!
Yani

zaki7 you make me say what i never said. one dead person is a disaster. the death of 150 is a disaster aswell.
but it's not relevant when you study terrorism.

are you playing dumb with me to make me look bad?

i'm not sensible to the number of dead people when i try to understand terrorism. 150 or 1500 it's the same as 1 or 2... it stays a terror attack.

it's like fishing... when you study the life of a fisherman. you care more about his education, his motivation, his objectives than the actual results he gets. of course, the results he gets are interesting to study. but there is no need for a accurate numbers. you can use a simple system of "satisfactory" "more than expected" "less than expected"... and such...

but numbers arent relevant.
but the quality is relevant.

exemple:
a terrorist attack killing 150 women and children
another terror attack killing 150 soldiers

you see that? if you look carefully, both killed 150 people... but one is more "positive" than the other.
killing 150 soldiers makes it a military operation...a successful one... and not a terror attack.

but a terror attack killing 145soldiers et 5kids is in fact a military operation with collateral damage... even the americans do such things.

so we have to see through the differences of a kamikaze attack and a terror attack...

we have to be sharper than that. and i'm sorry, but the number of casulties isnt relevant in such study...

You still haven't answered my question:

Let me ask you a very simple question: do you think kamikaze will go to paradise or hell? if you're going to answer like : I don't know, only God knows, I will reply Yes not only God already knows but he also clearly told you what stance you should have as a muslim regarding this, now can you stand up and be a real muslim?

Answer...?

zaki7 honestly i dont know... only god can tell for sure.

but i think that the kamikazes are victims aswell. they really believe that it's the only way. so they are victims of someone else.
someone sent them to do the attacks.

and i think that god judges people on what is in their hearts, and not only on the results of their actions. i dont see a good god punishing people for doing what they think is right. what they really think is right.

and i think (not sure at all) that the real responsible would be the man who sent them to do that. or who forced them to do that.

and this man could be a madman ...crazy and irresponsible of his actions, or an evil mind trying to confuse them...

but i really dont know, i think that we are so far from the human logic... that only god can really solve this mystery. it's a case per case judgement, and only god could do such things... it's way too complex.

so i think that some of them could be in heaven... what they did is wrong, but some did it with good intents.

it's the sad part in the story. they arent pure evil people who were living in happiness and woke up a morning and attacked people for fun... something happened to them. i dont see a happy human being doing such things... you need a lot of injustice, a lot of suffering, a lot of ... i dont know... madness to do that.

but i think that you better ask someone who knows more about religion than me.

Why am I not surprised? Only God knows heh? Well God told you, why don't you follow his teachings for once and come up with the one and only answer to this question?

your non-answer only proves my point which is that you are driven by political motives and do not care about what the religion preaches when it does not fit your political arguments. that's all that there is.

Your justification about God not punishing people who perpetrate crimes just because they are convinced that what they're doing is the right thing to do is the most stupid thing I heard so far. Sorry to be so blunt but it is true. In that case, God will not punish Hitler or Staline or anybody else for that matter. Everyone who does something bad or good thinks he is doing the right thing... That doesn't male his action righteous.

And there is no such things as "the guy who sends them is the only responsible", those people have brains and are adults, God will punish them, it is clearly stated in the Koran. Whether you agree with that or not is not relevant. If you call yourself a muslim, you need to recognize that. If you don't you're cherry-picking what suits your political ideas, it is your right too, but don't say you're following Islam...because you're not... It is as simple as that.

Quote
LeMask
zaki7 honestly i dont know... only god can tell for sure.

but i think that the kamikazes are victims aswell. they really believe that it's the only way. so they are victims of someone else.
someone sent them to do the attacks.

and i think that god judges people on what is in their hearts, and not only on the results of their actions. i dont see a good god punishing people for doing what they think is right. what they really think is right.

and i think (not sure at all) that the real responsible would be the man who sent them to do that. or who forced them to do that.

and this man could be a madman ...crazy and irresponsible of his actions, or an evil mind trying to confuse them...

but i really dont know, i think that we are so far from the human logic... that only god can really solve this mystery. it's a case per case judgement, and only god could do such things... it's way too complex.

so i think that some of them could be in heaven... what they did is wrong, but some did it with good intents.

it's the sad part in the story. they arent pure evil people who were living in happiness and woke up a morning and attacked people for fun... something happened to them. i dont see a happy human being doing such things... you need a lot of injustice, a lot of suffering, a lot of ... i dont know... madness to do that.

but i think that you better ask someone who knows more about religion than me.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/26/2006 06:11 by zaki7.

zaki7 i'm not god... i dont know everything.
i would look stupid saying that they would go straight to hell...

god's judgement isnt in my range. and if you have a better exemple go ahead.

and i dont give a damn about your opinion, you are just another dishonest person...

you make dumb conclusions and insult honest people who talk to you honestly without making schemes...

and what i said isnt justification for terrorism. it's my view on the judgement. i dont see god putting someone in hell for a mistake. or worse, putting a crazy man in hell...

you have to know that people go crazy... endoctrinement is like being crazy, when you are blind, we cant get mad at you for hitting a wall...
god is supposed to be good, perfect and generous. i dont see him as a harsh punisher...

crazy people deserve mercy... if you are a heartless person, then why should i care?

"dude", I asked you a simple question, you know the answer as every muslim on earth does, you don't want to spit it out. fine with me but I beg to pardon, you're the one hitting a wall ...

How sweet, now you're giving me a lecture on how God doesn't punish people, you must have not read the Coran I guess. God WILL punish anyone who kills, killing is one of the greatest Sins. "Whoever kills one soul is like if he killed the entire humanity", you know that verse don't you? Or you just choose to ignore it and hide behind "Only God knows..." teaching us the "Lemask flavor of Islam"? even when God clearly states what is the punishment for assassins. You prefer to side with terrorists instead of following the path of God, it is your right, but please don't be lecturing us anymore on Islam then because apparently you don't know an iota on religious matters.

And yes I am indeed a heartless person when it comes to people strapping bombs around their belt and going to assassin normal citizens who happen to pass by, sorry I can't love somebody who does not respect human life. You love them, perfect, why don't you join them?

This is pathetic to see in 2006 people trying to justify the unjustifiable and going to the extent of ignoring God's message to make a political point.

Ok killers are going to paradise, what's next?

zaki7 what is wrong with you? when did i say that god will reward people for killing innocents?

i said that i dont see god punishing a crazy man who is irresponsible of his actions.
and i dont see god punishing an idiot for doing a mistake.

it's a matter of intents, good people do good things following their knowledge.

take a Palestinian kid, how can he know that kamikaze attacks are evil? everybody tells him that the kamikaze candidates are brave men, that the Israelis are evil, that a kamikaze attack is a heroic action...

how can god be mad at a person who grew in such climate? how god can be angry against a man who doesnt know? who was endoctrined and lost touch with what we call "reality"? or "normality" or "sanity" or "Islam"?

how can i be mad at a man who does something because of his faith, because he thinks that god asked for it.

how?

it's SAD... but why it's sad? because honest people are doing wrong things thinking it's good, and hurt innocent people and provoke more harm on it's people...

this is the SAD thing... what is sad is when good people do bad things thinking it's good.

so i blame the situation... and i'm sure, that if you lived the same lives as them, you would do exactly the same... or even worse...
it's a very sad situation... it's hard to deal.

and only a moron or an extremist would say that he knows exactly how god would deal with them.

i just voiced a "version" that seems logic to me.

Well I must have missed something then. In God's word, there is 1 place for punishment and 1 place reward that is Hell or Paradise. Mmm, let me break it down to you the kindergarden way. You say that God will not punish killers if they think that's what they're doing is the right thing to do. Good, well if he doesn't punish them then they won't go to hell, where are they going to go? 2-1=1 and that 1 is paradise, so you're basically saying that these people are going to paradise. Please explain to me if I misunderstood, may be there is some third place between Hell and Paradise I am not aware of...

It does clearly look from your point of view that you sympathize with those savages and low life specimen. One time, they're poor crazy gentleman misunderstood by the society and thus their actions are justified and they won't be punished for them. Another time, you call them "crazy" and as crazy sickos, they should not be punished, etc, etc...

The difference between my point of view is that you say "I don't think that God will punish them" and you don't provide any religious justification for your argument. I do...

When the church was burning scientists on a stick along with their "devilish" books, they were thinking they were doing the right thing and that was the will of God. Does that make them right? Absolutely not. Same thing for your kamikaze friends. All extremist and fanatics in all religions and from all walk of life are 100% convinced that they are following the will of their God, whether they are muslims, jews or christians, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THEY WON'T BE PUNISHED. If it was up to me, they'll deserve the Death penalty one by one. I have zero tolerance for these guys. The victims here are the dead civilians and not the perpetrators, it's realy very simple to comprehend if you think about it enough.

Hi everyone,

An interesting article on Der Spiegel related to this discussion :

[www.spiegel.de]

This guy was doing business with hashich. Then deliver his brother to save the rest of the family as he is claiming.Finally he found a job working as an agent. It is better to have his brother in Jail than dead.
Since then Alkaida members have stickers on their cars. Do not trust even your brother.
How about that Chelhman



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/27/2006 02:47 by Krim.

zaki7 i dont see god punishing for actions...

i rather see him punishing people about the essence...
good intent = good person
bad intent = bad person

good people to heaven, hell to egoist people...

and there is many levels in Paradise, and hell isnt eternal...

and for god sake, you arent god, so you better shut it, you talk like if you knew exactly what he would do.

and this Nasiri dude passed exposives between Morroco and Algeria, i saw many articles about him. it's very interesting. he said many important things about terror, he gave a "nice" explanation about the terrorists (the ones who want to convert people, and the others who want to defend their people by using terror)...

Quote

"I believe that the Americans and all the rest should get out of our country and stay away. I believe that they should stop interfering in the politics of Muslim countries," he writes in his book. "They should leave us alone, and if they don't they should be killed, because that is how one deals with invading armies and occupiers."

damn, i agree on that, no chit chat with slavers...

I "better shut up"!? hehe, sorry I don't shut up "dude". You're going to have to do much better than that for me to think about shutting up.

In the meantime, stop playing with words, "intent"?. Punishment is based on what you do, not on what you think is right or wrong. If God tells you do not touch the Apple, and your intent is good and you go touch the Apple, then it is a Sin and YOU WILL BE punished depending on the Sin importance, killing a human life is right there on top in Islam. there is no intent BS. The message is clear and is written for everybody to understand, including you. If you want to sway away from that message, fine, just don't use Islam for that purpose, call your religion paganism, or LeMAsk religion but please don't misuse it to harm others. That's all.

Oh and please do not shut up and keep on sharing with us your "lightening" ideas ... frankly ridiculous...

zaki7 no zaki...

it's my own interpretation of "Inama al a3male bi niyate"... the intent is VERY important.

and crazy people dont get punished. because they lose touch with reality and dont recognize what is good or bad.
stupidity isnt a crime. being naive isnt a crime.

and what if i told you that god told you to touch the aple? and that you do it? would you go to hell or to heaven?

the question is right here, what if your mom rised you telling you that Israelis are evil people, that kamikazes are heroes, admirable good men, that they are victims making a huge sacrifice for you...

how you would be at 20 in such climate? how? but i dont think that you would be an "evil man"... but a confused man.

i blame the situation, we have to stop first the Israelis, and put a UN force there to protect them from abuses and calm the things up. and then, let the "moderate" Muslim countries intervene to help the Palestinians.

and about Iraq, we need first to send more "trusted troops", i dont know... Iran could be good i think (except with the Sunnis and the Kurds), to stop the recruitement of new terrorists...

or something of this kind, i'm not really a geotactician... but we need more trusted people.

the problem is that people lost faith in the future...