Ciao!

Terrorism's real, and terrifying. Smash it where we find it, I say.

I wore an "Espan(y)a" t-shirt I picked up in Spain, all day yesterday as a show of support. It's a simple gesture, but Spain fills, like you said, a special place in world history.

These acts will hopefully galvanize resolve to quash terrorism. Hopefully without becoming mired in the "unjust American foreign policy" debate, which is, in many cases, in my opinion, cloaked anti-Israeli sentiment.

What irritates me most about the "we deserved it" debate is it's moral callousness. We wouldn't argue that a woman raped "deserved it" for any reason. So why do it for countries?

The 9/11 "we deserved it" debate was insipid. We'd supported the Afghans against the Soviets, defended Kuwait & Saudi Arabia against Iraq, been an ally of Egypt, tried to play arbiter in the Middle East — an area we never colonized (unlike the British, French, Germans, Russians, Italians, Spanish). So. Why did we "deserve" 9/11? A stupid argument.

If there's an argument that Spain "deserved" this because it supported the US in the war on terror, then that's also insipid, too. It's like that little rodent John Pilger; they're not anti-war, just on the other side. As Stalin once bragged: there are "useful idiots" out there.

What if it was ETA and not Al Quaida? Analysis of the explosives have pointed to ETA vs. Al Quaida. A similar terrorist act by ETA had been prevented just a few months ago ... .

On one hand, it doesn't matter who did this, of course. That's why terrorism is a global problem, not a problem of this group v. that group.

On the other hand, ETA has denounced involvement. ETA tends to make their attacks public, w/ very public claims of responsibility. ETA also has never done an attack of this magnitude/type (they tend to use person-targetted car bombs). And most analysists have pointed out that even terrorsit groups have a "logic" they tend to follow. So. If this was ETA, it's a radical departure from their previous tactics. Which, of course, is important to know. If it was ETA. There is evidence that perhaps some ETA & Al Qaeda connection. Which fits what we've known for a while — terrorist networks cooperate (again, why terrorism's a global problem).

I'll wait for a formal inquiry to decide. But. ETA denied responsibility & the attack violates their previous operational parameters. Al Qaeda claimed responsibility & the attack fits their modus operndi.

recent developments:

Spain received a video from al Qaida claiming responsibility.

Spain’s intelligence service is said to be "99 percent certain" that Islamic terrorists were behind the Madrid train bombing.

It increasingly appears that al Qaida is culpable.

The first link doesn't work. Here's the url:

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=WYFIDKP0CO0XKCRBAEZSFEY?type=topNews&storyID=4561766§ion=news

And now we know that whether it was ETA or Al Quaida - may make a difference. The spanish Conservatives have just lost the election to the Socialists. That is considered as a backlash from the Al Quaida attack (it seems now certain that it was Al Quaida and arrests have been made). Spaniards seemingly seem to hold the government responsible for the attack by Al Quaida as the government had gotten Spain involved in the war in Iraq against popular will.

I'm not sure if that interpretation — that al Qaeda means a loss for the PP — is necessarily the only one. Even so, blaming Aznar for the attack is ridiculous. Blame al Qaeda. Recent al Qaeda attacks were foiled in France & Germany — not coalition members. What people need to learn is that al Qaeda doesn't care about who you are (pro-war, anti-war, or whatever). They hate the West's liberal values. Period.

Hmm, can you offer an alternative explanation for the surprising loss?

I think it would not be fair to blame Aznar either for the Al Qaeda attack. But maybe for the information flow about who it was after the attack. Rumors had been going on right from the beginning, as you pointed out, still he insisted it was ETA. That needed to be corrected by Saturday ... and it became apparent that information had been withheld. And that made the difference in the end. This caused a loss of trust in the current government.
Of course the influence is then just indirect, not direct (even though some Spaniards may just blame unjustly Aznar for the attack), still ... without the attack by Al Qaeda I think Aznar's party would have been the winner in the election.

I think you're right, Melanie. But there is an alternate explanation: higher voter turnout. PP votes weren't much changed from 2000. But voter turnout was extremely high. Higher voter turnout tends to favor the left (in almost any country) and might explain the slight increase in PSOE votes.

Yes, I think the Spanish government did a poor job handling information. And if it was deliberate, that's terrible. But. I suspect it was more panic, confusion, and wanting to say something. Plus ETA has a history in Spain ... even regular citizens immediately suspected ETA.

I only hope that Spain doesn't capitulate to al Qaeda demands. If so, then the terrorists network (and all other terrorists) just learned that they can topple a government or get their demands met through violence against civilians. God help us all.