The West's perception of the Algeria's hostage conflict

[Jedi_Mindset]

if you want to make it clear that you oppose violence, despite everything you've said, go ahead

We muslim are opposed to violence, but jihad means struggle (Not holy war as the west claims), jihad in terms of warfare is self defense and in the qu'ran we've alot of rules explaining this and how. During war we should not transgress (attacking civilians is haraam(Forbidden) and war should be fought to prevent killing of non-combatants intentionally. We are also told that we should strike with the same things as our enemy does however we muslims dont have warplanes, tanks et cetera, most of this weaponry are in the hands of arab dictators. And when using these things, we should also prevent civilian casualties. When prophet muhammed(saw) saw bodies of dead women and children, he(Saw) uttermost forbade it to kill them as they are non-combatants.

And we have ofcourse jihad e akbar which is the struggle against our nafs and desires. Sis Shaden is against violence, but something needs to be done to get rid of the western occupations of muslim lands, if US for example wants to withdraw its soldiers, stop support for israel and stop support for arab dictators then peace can be achieved with the US, however it is less likely they wont because its all for the security of 'israel' right?

 

[tearose]

And how is Jedi's default conspiracy theory more related? What's that got to do with racism?

It's related to the topic of the thread. You made your point in relation to a statement of mine which you quoted, and I felt your point was not an answer to what I had said. It was a different aspect of the same topic.

 

[tearose]

Jedi is trying to shift the responsibility from the hostage takers back onto westerners themselves. So yes, in effect he is providing an excuse for the real perpetrators.

I don't see how that equates to approval of the hostage takers. It is vital to highlight the injustices committed and the violence against innocents perpetrated by the West and to condemn the military intervention in Mali and the wider region.

 

[sister herb]

Salam alaykum

Victims were innocent civilians in Algeria - as well all victims like kind of happenings in the conflicts are. They were just workers of some company, with no contact to political issues. We should call they murderers as murderers - nothing else.

^o)

 

[sister herb]

Salam alaykum

killing innocent civilians - just same what is they religion or´what is they national background has nothing to do with Islam. It only murdering - all againts Islam.

If anyone defends it by religion - he/she should think a little more what religion really teach.

 

[جوري]

If anyone defends it by religion

Perhaps you can show me where anyone has defended the killing of civilians using religion?
Everything is plain and simple don't be baited by what the shill says or the words he puts in other people's mouth and yet he runs with utmost cowardice when the time comes for him to put his money where his mouth is!
We're merely stating that this is WAR and just like they give themselves the rights to drone innocent victims everyday, pillage, rape, falsely imprison and hold without trials others for thought crimes (if at all we can call it that) that they shouldn't in the least open their bazoo when their treatment is met in kind which I still don't think it is, as you're taking a bunch of freedom fighters without much by way of weapons, or artillery and comparing it to nations who have perfected the art of genocide with style. Read a little between the lines is all we're asking and don't be so quick to judge based on what the likes of him say.
One country's terrorists is another country's freedom fighter.. isn't that what they call their oh so brave boys when they go on gang raping 14 year olds and then covering their crimes up?

 

[sister herb]

Salam alaykum

I haven´t claim any here defends those whose murderers of innocent civilians. In any countries defence fighters shouldn´t never to so low as kill civilians. It is illecal by Islam at all.

If we think other defence fighters, they would never do so.

Those whose killed people in Algeria are not any kind of defence fighters, they only are murderers. If they like to call them as part of al-qaeda - then all al-qaeda is insults againt Islam.

 

[جوري]

Allah A3lam who they're-I sincerely don't know.… I don't care whether or not they are mercenaries. In fact we all know that the first recorded suicide bombing came from Christian soldiers during the Crusades to free The Holy City of Jerusalem from the control of Muslim armies. During the Crusades, the Knights Templar destroyed one of their own ships with 140 Christians on board in order to kill 10 times as many Muslims in the opposing fleet.

So they'll do whatever.… It is war after all. However I am saying I don't care as to how they incur those losses if it changes the public opinion of their people enough to have them withdraw from these places.… and let's face it, they're not there in any part of the Muslim world out of the goodness of their hearts or because they're so principled. They're there to loot and imperialize. No one really got their independence and I have so many tales to tell especially of the French & British occupation of that particular spot in the world.

 

[sister herb]

Salam alaykum

I don´t think that Japanese or Norweigh natural gas engineers have to do much with Christian Crusaders hundreds years ago. What if stay at 2013 and crimes called murders of innocent civilians.

I no see any other reason to murder innocent people than some others whose understand about Islam nothing. They might say it was political - to me it will allways just as murder.

 

[جوري]

It is what it is a means to an end... Whatever they're thinking whether mercenaries or otherwise doesn't aggrieve me... They're not aggrieved by all the evil that they do or the ones which they stand idle watching without so much as a word against it.. why should I be aggrieved over what becomes of them? :Allah::swt: raises people based on their intent whether Japanese, Norwegians or from Kuala Lumpur. I am not here to judge, condemn or condone-I merely hope at the end western forces withdraw from all the places they're occupying and truly mind their own affairs and stop building their societies on the blood, sweat, tears and death of the poor whom they subjugate so freely and have not a word of remorse nor sorrow beyond 'collateral damage' to describe what they do.

 

[sister herb]

Salam alaykum

I too hope that from Algeria they could find engineers from Algeriens but if not, what is problems to bring´them from other countries like from Japan or from UK or USA or Norweign?

They will need to pay by they life because they countries make attack to other countries.

May Allah gives punishment to murderers what they deserve. Nothing else to say.

 

[syed_z]

Asalaam O Alaikum....

The Algerian Hostage conflict from an Islamic perspective is Haraam (Illegal).

There is no teachings in Islam which tells the Muslims to take hostage from among the unarmed civilians, especially those who have come to work in your land in peace.

Or unless they have found proof that these Western individuals have come disguised as workers but are actually undercover agents of the Western armies, which obviously here was not the case.


------------------------------------

Al Qaeda In the Maghrib (AQIM)

This group called Al Qaeda in the Maghrib was known as GSPC (Group for Salafist Preaching and Combat). This group had many people who dissented from the original GIA (Armed Islamic Group) which was the first group of Muslims who stood up against the Secular pro western regime of Algeria. The GSPC was formed by Hassan Hattab because he wanted to disown the GIA's killing of innocent civilians which was giving a bad name to their struggle against the pro western regime.

The GSPC later announced their alliance with AQIM after its leadership was replaced by violent people, and then AQIM started a violent campaign inside Algeria, thus lending peoples support to the secular regime of Algeria to crack down against this group.

There is no doubt that Algerian Intelligence might have infiltrated these groups with their agents to defame and destroy its original cause from within. But at the same time Intelligence agencies of the Muslim Governments keep these agents and do not kill them in order to use them for any further regional goals they might have.


By AQIM's attack on the innocent Western civilians on the gas plant, the group once again has proven its tendency towards Un-Islamic acts which they are known for and on top of it they have given a bad name to the Tuareg Freedom Fighters and their goal of establishing independent Azawad state in North Mali, which they had almost accomplished in gaining from the pro French Regime in Bamako, the capital of Mali.

They have made the foot steps of Amena Gas Plant attack appear to be leading towards North Mali, just as Sept 11th Attack the footsteps led towards Afghanistan. The Taliban rejected any involvement in the New York attacks just as the Tuareg Brothers are surprised about their being allegedly associated with the Amena Gas plant attack by the international media.

A group dissenting from the original MNLA called the Ansar Dine associated itself with Al Qaeda in the Maghreb not very long ago before this attack. Now this character leading Ansar Dine named Iyad Aghali is a very mysterious character who dissented because the MNLA refused to give him leadership. His dissension has come as a great news for the Bamako Government and the French Government who will definitely take advantage of this disent in their fight to 'liberate' north mali from Tuareg 'rebels'.

Read about this character, rest is up to you to decide.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-18814291


There is no doubt that the Algerian regime will also be getting a share of the war on terror fund that is going to be pledged by NATO allies, because the Amena Gas Plant attack took place on their soil. That fund will 'help' Alegria fight its war against terrorism inside Algeria as well as help the Malian regime against the Tuareg 'rebels'.

 

[Independent]

Excellent post syed. Apologies if this one is overlong but the situation in Mali/Algeria is so complicated.

Just because a group announces to the world that is fighting for ‘Islamic’ objectives and Sharia law, that doesn’t mean that's their true or most important motive. The key leader, Iyad Aghali, has been a player in the region for a long time. In the past he was associated mainly with the Tuareg independence movement. At various times he has been at war with both the Algerian and Mali governments but made deals with both of them. His real motives are enigmatic but the one common factor is personal power for himself.

During the time that he made a deal with Mali he was sent as a member of Mali’s diplomatic staff to Jeddah and it’s the Saudi connection that seems to have made the difference. He was radicalised and, as a result, recalled by the Mali government. He returned as a hardliner who had put his days of partying, music and poetry behind him, and hijacked the Tuareg rebellion that was already under way.

However, in the attempt to take over the whole country he has overplayed his hand. As a result the French have also sent troops and the tide of war has turned dramatically. Aghali is therefore once again cynically looking for a ‘deal’, as he has done so many times in the past.

Mokhtar Belmokhtar

Mokhtar is the man behind the attack on the Algerian gas plant. Previously a member of AQIM (Al Qaeda in the Maghreb) he has now formed a separate group. As part of AQIM he shared in a long history of kidnapping for ransom and cigarette smuggling. From a financial point of view, they are considered to have been some of the most successful hostage takers in the world. They attacked targets in various countries including Algeria, always looking for western hostages (worth more to ransom). In September 2010, the group took seven hostages from a uranium mine in Arlit, Niger, and kidnapped four European tourists in Mali in January 2009. Killing hostages was not the prime aim, except to ‘force the pace’ in ransom negotiations.

This recent attack follows a similar pattern except that this time, they have introduced a new ‘Islamic’ political objective. It’s not clear from events whether they meant to get trapped in the plant, or whether they expected to take the hostages elsewhere. Either way, the ‘Islamic’ justification is a new description for old behaviour and looks like opportunism.

The Tuaregs

The Tuaregs are big losers in this because their bid for an independent state now looks further away than ever. Had the Islamic hardliners not hijacked their rebellion they might have succeeded in creating a semi-independent state in North Mali (which you can choose to view as a good or a bad thing). But when Aghali continued the invasion into the south that possibility ended.

It's always difficult because Tuareg territory cuts inconveniently across many other countries (just like the Kurds). In the past they made their living from cross-Saharan trade in gold etc but today, they have been reduced to cigarette and people smuggling, as well as tourism. The hardliners’ destruction of an internationally famous tourist site in Timbuctoo in an outburst of religious zealotry will not help them.

Tuareg ambitions have always been political/secular in the past but now they may be associated with Al Qaeda.

Who wins, who loses?

The Tuaregs lose heavily but the biggest sufferers in the short term are the Malian people. Besides the casualties and the refugees, one of the world’s poorest countries is now a great deal poorer. Algeria will also suffer if attacks on its energy infrastructure continue. If they became severe enough, you could see an economic collapse and another Arab country collapsing into chaos.

Even the Islamic hardliner groups lose in the short term, because they’re going to get kicked out of all their recent gains. On the other hand these groups thrive in political and economic chaos, so they may benefit in the medium term.

All together, the invasion of Mali by Islamic hardliners has been a disaster for the country and was probably motivated as much by personal gain as any sincere religious objective. This is a local war that has been hijacked by international groups (Al Qaeda influenced) with wholly negative consequences for all concerned.