Continuing to increase its presence in North Africa. This emerging jihadist stronghold should be of particular concern to European countries on the other side of the Mediterranean, lest they find themselves with a second "Al-Qaeda Pipeline" (if "construction" isn't underway already).
"Al Qaeda north African wing claims Algeria bombs," from Reuters, August 21:
LONDON (Reuters) - Al Qaeda's north African wing has claimed responsibility for two car bombs in Algeria which killed 12 people and wounded 42 this week, the Al Jazeera television network said on Thursday.
Wednesday's bombings at Bouira, 90 km (56 miles) southeast of Algiers, were claimed on behalf of Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb in an audio recording by a group official called Salah Abu Mohammad, the Arabic broadcaster said.
They followed a spate of attacks by the group, including a bombing on Tuesday that killed 48 people and ambushes on Sunday that killed 11.
The group, known until last year as Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat, has claimed several earlier attacks including the twin suicide bombings of U.N. offices and a court building in Algiers in December 2007.
The urban bombings reflect new tactics first adopted in 2007 by the militants fighting to set up purist Islamic rule in the North African country, a key oil and gas supplier to Europe....
Interesting phrase in that last paragraph - 'purist Islamic rule'.
We're getting there, getting there...a little closer to the recognition that it is not heresy, not some weird aberration, but Islam, Islam, Islam, pure Islam, undiluted down-the-line Islam, 100 % proof, that is the problem.
"...Salafist group for preaching and combat.."
Something seems wrong with the phrase above (from the article). Preaching and combat don't seem to belong in the same title, but then I don't subscribe to the cult that follows these rules.
Just absurd.
"...Salafist group for preaching and combat.."
I noticed that also Charlie.
It makes more sense if the 'and' is taken out of it.
Continuing to increase its presence in North Africa. This emerging jihadist stronghold should be of particular concern to European countries on the other side of the Mediterranean
................................
And yet The Economist had a ludicrous article last month on the EU push--led by France--for a "Mediterranean Union".
The cover featured a paunchy, middle-aged man with extremely poor posture (Europe), standing on the Mediterranean shore looking South at the wonderful new frontier of Turkey, the Levant and North Africa.
The article did briefly touch on Jihad--although they never used the "J" word, and seemed to consider "terrorism" and "Islamic extremeism" to be two entirely unrelated things. Mostly, they talked about poverty and lack of infrastructure.
Still, they seemed to think that aging Europe would be wise to invest in the young, vigorous (not my description) side of the inner sea.
They gave the story the cute title, "Club Med". That there might be any sort of danger or real downside to this "union" seemed entirely beyond the imagination of the author and his editors.
By the way, "Salafist group for preaching and combat" is my all time favorite goofy Jihadi terror group name--it's even better than MILF. I only wish its consigning to the dustbin of history was because it had been squashed, and not because they had adopted a more prosaic moniker.
"...Salafist group for preaching and combat.."
Aside from awkward phraseology, what's so odd about this? These might seem to be two different things to us, but to them it is not inconsistent to lump them together.
...undiluted down-the-line Islam, 100 % proof, that is the problem.
Posted by: dumbledoresarmy
While you are exactly correct, that is an insult to good old 100 % proof liquor.