Topic: Anger.

Madrid, this morning, 9 AM. I think most of the people in this forum live in Europe, so maybe you've heard about it already. Well: worst terrorist attack in the history of Europe, about 200 dead and 600+ wounded right now (3 PM, according to the radio) and getting worse and worse. In Atocha Station, probably the busiest in Madrid and Spain, at rush hour. Thank God the train didn't make it to the station (the bombs exploded a while before entering the building) because it could've been much, much worse. So far everyone I know in the city seems to be fine (alive, that is).

Due to a misleading statement from a political figure in the basque country it was rumored that Al-Qaeda was behind it, but the government has already dismissed that possibility. It has been confirmed that it was ETA, the so-called basque separatist (not sepatists! terrorists! nothing more) terrorist group.

I guess, damn, I *know* it's not the right place, but I wander around here quite often lately. I cannot work today anyway. Sorry Deckard. What a strange day.

Re: Anger.

I've just read it in a swedish newspaper.

It's tragic that innocent people often have to be the target of all these terrorist attacks :(


Re: Anger.

Thats horrible hmm


Re: Anger.

Oh, what a world we live in.

Its up to us to fix it you know.

Do, or do not.

Re: Anger.

It has been confirmed that it was ETA

They can't have confirmed it, ETA says it weren't them, they do not claim the attack as being theirs. Some political parties in Spain want it to be the ETA because it would be in their benefit when the elections are being held in April.

They found a detonaters and Koranic messages in a van.

It are now over 1400 wounded people and this morning they said 199 people died and there are still quite some people fighting for their lives.

12 MILLION! people joined in the street protests, 12 MILLION! wow..

6 (edited by zc923 2004-03-13 14:16)

Re: Anger.

jochem wrote:

They found a detonaters and Koranic messages in a van.

This should not be used as hard and fast evidence. I am not ruleing out Al-Qaida, all Im saying that if a group wants to shift the blame off of them, the eaisest way to do it is by "leaving" messagas in Arabic.

Do, or do not.

Re: Anger.

zc923 wrote:
jochem wrote:

They found a detonaters and Koranic messages in a van.

This should not be used as hard and fast evidence. I am not ruleing out Al-Qaida, all Im saying that if a group wants to shift the blame off of them, the eaisest way to do it is by "leaving" messagas in Arabic.

Yeah,  but on the other hand, most terrorist groups do such things to express their view or manifest their power. Their not just killing innocent people for fun, or to blame someone else for all of it.

But who knows?


Re: Anger.

Jansson wrote:

But who knows?

No one. Believe me.

People have used a tragidy to gain something. I rather not go into details, but think really hard.

Do, or do not.

Re: Anger.

Of course the confirmation that ETA was to blame I referred to was last thursday's. Right now most of us bet on islamic terrorism (Al-Qaeda). But noone know for sure, and it's very, very confusing. There have been declarations both from ETA (denying it) and Al-Qaeda (taking responsibility of the attack) but not "official" enough to be fully trusted. Elections ongoing.


Re: Anger.

Amazing that there's somebody else in Spain/Germany here. Hi SEM.

Well, there have been several important events going on in Spain lately, and since I've already come into some misconceptions on the matter, let me clear as much as possible out, so that you can get some firsthand impressions on the subjects, not the confusing things you read today on the newspapers, that might turn out tomorrow to be wrong.

Sadly, one of the most important events was the terrorist attack in Madrid. 201 lethal victims up till now, and at least 1300 injured, many of them severely. These are only numbers and might not even seem too high, but we're talking human lives here, don't forget it. Lives that will never be the same for them and their families. The numbers multiply then manyfold.

At the moment of the explosions I happened to be talking (by phone) to a friend in Madrid. After finding out what was going on, he hurried to the area and spent the whole morning trying to locate his wife, who was in one of the trains. I tried to keep in touch but it was almost impossible, and of course he was quite distressed at the moment. His wife survived, and he located her in a hospital, although severely disfigured and had to undergo several operations with unkown outcome, she will survive. The strenght and vital force of some people is extraordinary, and I managed to speak to her yesterday, and she sounded happy. I really doubt I would feel anything but anger if I was in her place. She's lost both legs.

Well, that of course raises our indignation and our sense of impotence to levels you cannot imagine. At least mine, and that from all people I've talked to.

The second thing that happened, is that the government of the country tried to use this attack politically. They blamed the terrorist group ETA, which has been one of the targets and tools of their political campaign. Please note that I would NEVER condone murder of innocents, and my definition of innocents is much broader than that of the ETA terrorists, mind you.

Our spanish society has been during the last months/years split in two sides, and the way that the government has handled the country is not alien to this sepparation, only comparable to that of before our civil war.

They ruling party had an absolute majority and thus required not to give explanations to the other political parties... but many of us feel they forgot they still had to give explanations to ALL people in Spain.

Unlike in other countries, the fact that the government lied miserably to everyone in the attempt to win the election, was the last thing we could tolerate. Under these circumstances to most of the Spanish people, it was unacceptable that this goverment should receive the absolute majority... or any kind of majority. And of that I cannot feel less than proud.

I won't say that the new government is better than the one before, how could I know? In the end none of them really make what they promise. On the contrary, I should state that the prior government has created a status of economical growth during very difficult times to everyone. And yes, I do feel that some of their decisions weren't ethical... based on *my* ethics. But that's the problem with democracy: they don't listen to me *only* smile
Yes, I might think that the fact that more than half the population of the land was against the Irak war, should have made them think twice what they did... which they apparently didn't. But that is also part of the democratic game: not everybody thinks the same.

But I would simply have been ashamed to say I'm spanish, if after finding out that the government tried to manipulate the death of people to simply serve their interests, they would have been re-elected. And I assure you I am not the only one. The amount of people who decided to vote thought the same. And please note that the current government received almost the same amount of votes that they did last time. Less than a million less. More people were however moved to vote.

So please, next time you hear someone state that spanish people have caved in to terrorists, or that "now we can expect terrorists to dictate our governments", please try to explain them that although terrorism *must* be fought against, that ends do not justify the means. And that spanish people are strong enough to be able to recognize what's right and what's wrong and act accordingly.

Terrorists did not dictate our elections, but merely precipitated the loss of face of our government due to their own doing. I wish other countries were so bold to do the same, and I can think of no other thing that would make me feel prouder of bein spanish than the behavior and courage I observed in people both during the attack and during the elections.

And I'm sorry if I sound somehow too politized or too inapropiate, and it's truly not my intention to hurt anybody's sensibilities, but I guess I had to say it or explode.

Now I'm gonna wipe away my tears and don't you dare laugh at that.



Re: Anger.

I forgot to say: in the end (or the beginning) it turns out it was NOT ETA. Although it wouldn't have surprised me that they undertook such an action (violence is not alien to them, that is clear so far), they would have taken responsability for it. If anything, they characterize for being totally oblivious to people's feelings.

Of course, for some other governments it's much more convenient to say that this is Ossama Bin Laden and AlQaeda. Well, I for once, doubt it. I think it's LIKE AlQaeda, same reasons, same type of people, but I never really believed that this was the allmighty organization that they're trying to sell. At least, I won't believe it while it's the means some governments stay in place.

My bet is that it's a group of fundamentalist terrorists who probably came of Morocco (and not in any moment endorsed by either their government or their people, in Spain we do know what it is to have terrorists around, against which one can do nothing but chase them) and were inspired by the current events to hit one of their objectives.

And once again, like in the 11-S (although this time they were much better prepared) they hit hard on people who had absolutely no defence against them. It is obvious that this kind of acts do not imply any political benefit for the perps. The new government does not believe in a war against Irak, but that doesn't mean they don't believe in a war against the REAL terrorists, and to that effect, all possible measures will be taken, by the previous, the next, and any government that we might have.

That's it. Sorry it took so long :-)

Re: Anger.

First- I'm new here, and really don't want to offend anyone as all have their views for their own reasons. But I to am getting frustrated by all the "misconceptions" about things going on in the world, and since you pointedly raised a couple of them- here goes.

The perception that "terrorists" chose your government:
Perhaps a good deal of blame on this comes from those in the press and those who spoke to the press following the incident. NO news broadcasts that I've seen have stated the issues that truly (if that is the case) led to a change in the government. ALL that is shown is "The percentage of people who disagree with the war in Iraq", and the "Firm commitment to remove soldiers from Iraq" by the newly elected officials. What this leads me to believe is that the former government was voted out because they choose to ally with the US and that as a result of the bombing, the new government was voted in because they will be removing their troops..... What is the world to think?

And I don't really think blaming the "local terrorist" is a fault. England generally stated it was the IRA, Russia it is always "Checychen Rebels", and in Israell it is Hamas (or one of its factions) perhaps it was hasty, but nothing many other governments do not do.

We (in the US) deal with major perception problems like no one else...All people see to this day is the death and dying going on in Iraq, but yet NO ONE seems to care that despite ongoing (but twindling) troubles, the country is going through a transformation like no other. People see our guys die or wave the weapons around, but few show them rebuilding schools, infrastructure, or anything else that is good going on...people see what they want to see I guess... sad

Perception is a hard thing to overcome, and unfortunately EVERY news story has an agenda, or a side to it, and the intended audience will get out of it only what the presenter wishes them to get.

The new government does not believe in a war against Irak, but that doesn't mean they don't believe in a war against the REAL terrorists.....

This seems to indicate that one thinks that the situation in Iraq at the moment is not effected by, or does not involve "REAL" terrorists....but one really does not know that now do they??

Do you really think at this point that it is the Iraqi army/government/civilians causing all the problems there??

To me the initial war in Iraq is over....what is left are the extremists who flooded the country after the government fell to kill americans and try to stake a claim on what is left (since Afghanistan can no longer be called home). I mean are Iraqi's really the ones blowing up Mosques and killing fellows Iraqi policeman and civilians??
(if so- very sad commentary on that society)

I think there is a "Strong" influence of terrorism there now...One might ask that if there was NO link between terrorism and Iraq, why would terrorists attack you for being there as an ally to the US?

One can argue the past ties, but one should keep in mind that Iraq was one of the few countries openly paying "rewards" for suicide bomber families (indirectly supporting them). And one cannot really "know" what a country is up to- Libya for example needed only time before they would of had nuclear ability (thanks to Pakistan- now that should scare the hell out of eveyone considering the influence extremist have in that country), but no one knew they were that far along. It is a judgement call that had to be made. Being passive cost this country 3000+ people and unknown billions in financial damages so maybe focusing on the "big picture" is what needs to be done. A choice is "go after them where they are, or wait until they come to you"....first time we waited- never again..

And while you "praise" your nation for voting out the bad guys- remember that up until upcoming elections- the Iraqi people have not had that opportunity...

As I noted- my intention is not to offend anyone, just trying to respond from a different point of view.

Every Day Above Ground Is A Good One!!

13 (edited by MarcB 2004-03-17 22:39)

Re: Anger.

Well, you're right that we cannot assess the real situation in Iraq from here.

However, from the independent and unofficial reports from most journalists there, the situation hasn't really improved since the fall of the former government. As a matter of fact, in spite of what GB recently stated, the very first independent poll shows that barely 39% of the people in Iraq want what they call the occupation troops to stay. about 49% of them want them to leave. And because the reconstruction there now is a joke, they are starting to feel that maybe past times were better. If that's the goal... well, by all means, stay there.

Last reports show that the companies that win most money are american and australian security firms, and that the so-called bags of terrorism (remnants of the former regim) are more and more deslocalized and renewed.

I do not think the former Iraqi government was a wonder of wonders, and I really don't feel much pain to see it gone, but there were certainly other ways to do so. This war has made things much worse than they were. You might argument that they will have freedom (which they don't have as well now), but you can't eat freedom.

The very first failure here is the misunderstanding between philosophies. These lands are really different, and while mid-term goals can be achieved with effort, there's NO short-term solution, whatever you might think.

Regarding the first point (I just noticed now I am being a bit disordered), well the difference is that the government KNEW that it hadn't been ETA, and they FORCED the press and even the UN to say so. Please note that this is not an opinion, it's a fact. Just today we could read the complaint that the associated press agencies presented against the former government. It's all written, but I guess that won't make the news much further than Spain.
And of course the news you get are manipulated, aren't they all? Even what I write is manipulated, consciously or unconsciously, but as long as many people can understand that it might be that this election is not how some want to paint it, that's enough. Spanish people is not coward, that I can assure you, I have lived that.

So essentially, yes, you are right, due to the press treatment of the events, one might (maybe must) be led to missconceptions, and that's precisely the reason why I write about it. Generally I don't waste much time with political things, I hate politics, I'd even go as far as to say that any politician who actually wanted to be a politician should never be allowed to be one.

No offence taken. And mind you, all my opinions about the Iraq war are only opinions, I can't be too sure about the facts there, as can't be anybody. My point goes mainly towards what's happened in Spain, not towards what's happened/ing elsewhere (but Germany, Poland and Denmark, where I now move around, that is).

14 (edited by Simple Exploding Man 2004-03-18 12:49)

Re: Anger.

Hola Marc smile. These last posts have been very interesting to read, and I fully agree with what's stated your first message. You pointed our several issues I dared not touch, at least until things calmed down a little bit.

1. About the "turn of events":

Oh please, do not turn this into a discussion about Iraq's war, that was not my intention --I just had too much in my mind and tried to give to the not-spanish people in this forum a view of what was going on in the country. About Iraq, I think we can all agree in that while it may or may not have been necessary (pointing out all the issues in Iraq does not help, because many other countries are in a similar or worse situation) it was not a *bad* thing. If Iraq finally turns into a civilized country, that is, more than before, the change will be positive. Naturally.

But Spain had no business there. Moreover, the majority of the spanish population was strictly AGAINST it, and practically noone actively supported it. Please remember that the U.S. acted on their own, with some allies, but this was not a "world against Iraq" thing unlike in the early 90's. I still don't know whether this was a war against Saddam, terrorism, for oil (hey! I've heard it so many times...), for the Iraqi people, to find those WMDs, or a mix of all and then some more. And most people feel about as confused as I do.

In the end, as MarcB says, we cannot assess the situation in Iraq from here. Even being there it would be hard to tell.

2. About Spain:

Just a few more things. The party in government was voted out, and the attack was the trigger, but the situation here is a bit more complex, and I do not have the time nor (specially) am the right one to do it. But let me extend a little bit to clarify a few things... Actually, they did not lose as many votes as one might think. Looking at the numbers, what really happened is that, first, *more* people took part in the elections this time, to vote for the socialists for a change in the government (most changes are due to demerits on the party in power, and not because of the potential of the opposition), and second, others that planned to vote parties without actual possibilites of "winning" changed their votes for the same reason. It may be rage, but it's not cowardice. And definitely noone thought this was the right choice to dodge attacks in the future. As far as I know, we have been dealed with terrorism more than any other civilized country in modern history except, possibly, the UK (and the US after 9/11). The spanish people are used to it, and we know turning our heads is not the solution.

I said rage. Why rage? It is not only that the government imputed the attack to ETA, which in the end was not true (or so it seems, I still have my doubts). It's HOW the did it. When I first saw the images in the morning (I happened to turn on the TV while having breakfast by chance, and I usually don't) I thought it was ETA. It had to be, bacause... for heaven's sake, who else? And it was acceptable for the government to blame it on them without thoroughly investigating the zone first. Moreover, there were antecedents that made one think that ETA had been trying to do something of this magnitude before. But by mid-day some reasonable doubts came up, and by the next day nobody knew for sure that ETA was responsible anymore. And then the real "campaign" started, with the party in government going so far to state that those doubting of ETA's responsibility were "anticonstitutionalists" (a traditional offense here, for historical reasons, and a grave one) and even "anti-spanish". Looking indignant, like it was high treason! More and more new leads came up but they insisted. Part of the press (specially public TV) was tightly controled and they kept in tune with what the government said, even ignoring new facts.

And all of that was too much to bear. It was not the strike (noone can stop that kind of terrorism, you may stop them once or twice, but there is no way to "nip the buds" here, specially when dealing with international terrorism). It was the lies and deceits. They have been operating in such a way for years, but during the last days it was, as I said, too much to bear. Let's say many people woke up, and many others took an unprecedented, one-time-only *true* interest in politics.

Let me add one more thing. The PSOE (the party of the new government) was contrary to the participation of Spain in the Iraqi war and its reconstruction. They planned to retire the troops in the case they were to win, which was unlikely a few days ago. And they'll do it. That is not cowardice, it is fair, and in that point the spanish people agree, as they agreed before the attack. And if Al-Qaeda or whoever it was targets another country, well, I won't be proud of it, because we, ALL of us, are the targets of this kind of terrorism, that looks for nothing but its own interests and benefits.

PS. It is true that the treatment of the attack and its consequences has not been very well *read* by the international press. Oh well...


Re: Anger.

Ehhh I'm not so sure that the troops will be retired. Already the international tide of media exposure is starting to allow for a compromise of the government over that. Well, that's the part about politics, which I strongly hate.

The whole point was to raise a voice against the now called neocon voices started mainly from the USA. Not only from there though. Fortunately many other people have felt the same and at the very least, we have managed to make people think about it, that it's not so "simple" as the media stated at first.

Amazingly, and back to subject, now the former spanish government start to say that the voting was manipulated and that it hasn't been fair and they'll fight it... on the next election. Perfectly respectable democratically, but demonstrating a total lack of insight and analysis. I had them for much more intelligent people, but I guess hard times show what you have inside.


OTOH, I agree, the Iraqi war is something different from this election, but not totally sepparated. What I still cannot see is how the h*** the USA politicians are stating that this war has helped deterr terrorism. It's obvious that it wasn't so, and there's at least 196 spanish dead bodies that prove the contrary. But as long as you shout about something else, people stop thinking about the obvious.

Sometimes I think that G.Bush must be grateful that the USA secret services trained the former nucleous of AlQaeda integrists. Otherwise he would already be looked at as one of the worst presidents in history, strictly judging from what he's done for his country.

The most important failure of the USA politicians (they keep doing it again and again) is that they lack the capability to understand people who are on another frame of reference, therefore every time they try to solve something, they create a new and different problem.

Of course, it could be argued that for the opposite reasons, the europeans never act on anything. Not without reason.

Mi kingdom for an average!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Re: Anger.

IMO the troops will come back. Maybe sooner, maybe later, and I'm sure it will take some time, but I guess they will eventually come back. Of course there is no need to rush, nor do I think it would be appropiate. The fact that the new government does not share some points of view with the US one does not mean we have to cut all ties immediately.

And of course every country has to be united against terrorism.

What I don't understand, and going back to the topic (sigh), is how people can be so easy to manipulate sometimes. Now it seems Al-Qaeda stated that there will be no more attacks in Spain until the new government clarifies its intentions. Are we playthings or what? Terrorists, specially the ones of this kind, have no principles to speak of. For one thing, it is well known that the spanish people were against spanish participation in Iraq, but nevertheless they are the ones who suffered the attack (it would be different had it been directed to the military of the politicians, as ETA often does --the deaths would be the same but circumstances would be different).

Are we playthings or what?


Re: Anger.

Nope, the thing with terrorism is that the rules of play are totally different. I can assure anyone that the terrorists who managed this mass-murder, did not even have in mind changing the government. They simply wanted to hurt.

The reasons why such people comes to exist, and how they can be manipulated into doing those things is quite complex, but they do think they are doing the right thing, which is obviously not the case.

And yes, fighting terrorism is not an option, it is a need.But fighting it correctly, which is the ultimate interest of all of us (even that of the terrorists, even if they don't know it) means a much harder and complex effort than simply invading a country or even simply killing a whole country, which is another form of terrorism, just for those doing the invasion or destruction but for the invaded or murdered.

This is exactly the same situation as the 11-S, where the terrorists hadn't even dreamed of all the "success" they were going to have.

As long as the tools available for mass destruction are available one way or another, they will be used. And as long as there are so extreme differences betweed countries, there will be resentment. Unfortunately, we can't do much about the one or the other (as citizens or even as government members), but there are other steps that can be taken.

IMHO helping really solve the israeli-palestinian situation would do much much more to improve world-wide stability than any war will do.

And yes, it's a shame how we have come to a point where the medias manipulate the individual. But what's hardly news, is that governments use the mediums available to manipulate their own country. Not that long ago, they used the church to achieve their own goals, and thus corrupted great part of it. We have not yet come to that point with the press... but we're almost there. Look at Italy, which is a democratic country.

Our society is ill, and slowly declining, but that's the story of societies, they emerge strongly, then they conquest and then they evolve, dying in the process.

SInce the 11-S and the incredibly bad management that G.B. has been doing with that situation (and don't think that politicians can't be manipulated themselves), I've always said that we've witnessed the begining of the end of the USA supremacy over the world. It'll take years, and I'm unsure who'll be next, but that period is clearly coming to its conclusion. Let's hope we've learnt something in the process and it gives us all the possibility to evolve to something better.

But just in case, enjoy life today... who knows what tomorrow will bring smile

18 (edited by middleground 2004-03-18 17:05)

Re: Anger.

OK- not going to go into all the little jabs at the US and GB (as usual this seems to always turn out as our fault) but I do ask one more item:

No one has yet to respond to:

middleground wrote:

I think there is a "Strong" influence of terrorism there now...One might ask that if there was/is NO link between terrorism and Iraq, why would terrorists attack you for being there as an ally to the US?

Why would Al-Queda attack Spain?
Do you think it was merely "your turn" or something?
Simply because the former government allied with US?
Is it the same reasoning they bombed the hotel in Bagdad yesterday??

All the responses have been to defend what/why the government changed, and that is all fine. But at some point one needs to look at WHY the attack occurred in the first place...and once you do I think more will begin to see the battles being fought are fought on opportunity rather than geography.

Oh- The references to "fighting terrorism correctly"...I think it is indeed more than just killing the terrorists where they live. But unfortunately (I think) it is a two-pronged approach:

1. stopping the current terrorists now (as I seriously doubt they can be taught anything other than hatred).

2. teaching the next generation (which requires get rid of those doing the teaching).

What else is a small boy to think when all he is taught by his parents is to hate and kill "the infidels"...However- provide the child with a safe environment, food in the families belly, a decent education, an opportunity once educated, and the freedom to decide their own destiny and quite possibly the cycles of hatred in this world will stop.

Now all will constantly disagree about item one, the means to the end, and fine if you don't agree with the method the US choose to achieve this. But I don't see how people can disagree with the need for item two, and IMHO the US is not the ones stopping this from happening... Who is at this point?? my guess is see item one.

And finally- big time agree on a resolution to the Israelli/Palestine issue woould indeed go along way to make the world a better place..

Edit- and yes, unfortunately we are all play things in this situation....

Every Day Above Ground Is A Good One!!


Re: Anger.

Nope, that's a flawed argumentation, point two is what the US are CREATING.

First things first: if invading Iraq was such a good jab agains terrorism, how can you explain that NOW every country is afraid they might attack their land? Including the USA, that is. Terrorists should be hiding and trembling and not finding any possibilities to organize themselves.

If you understand that the reason why they are able to find refuge in other lands (which happens, mind you) and do the teaching to children, is not because people everywhere is evil and hate americans, but because the perception of what americans do is hardly the perception of what americans see that they are doing. Most people in Iraq feel they have been humilliated by... the occidental occupation troops. Not by Saddam.

What do you think that happens when you institute a full militarized society, that is prepared to defend themselves against the raging threat of terrorism? Israel. And tell me what happens when people have nothing more to loose because they're taken everything away, and they are killed one by one? Palestin. Add two and two.

A militarized solution is an oxymoron. You can only achieve that by killing everyone who doesn't think like you. Might as well drop the nuclear bombs, FWIW. But don't think you'd be free of terrorism even then. There has been terrorist groups every time, and never have they been perceived as such a threat as now. Why? I think the answer is something I'd rather not tell. Mainly cause it would serve no purpose to engage in that discussion, cause there's nothing we can do about past facts but to get angry, either with someone else or with one another. Which serves no purpose but decrease our health status :-)

However, I would like that you get to your own solution about that, if you're interested. The track is: why did the 11-S mass-murders happen? And let me remind you there was no Iraqi war back then.

Just as a matter of apology for the "jaws against the US", that's my personal problem, cause I cannot forget that the US trained the main AlQaeda leaders, they placed Saddam in a power position, and due to their attempts to influence the rest of the world solely to their economical benefit, have gone down to a very weak moral position in the rest of the world while they used to be admired. You might say that the USoA are my fallen youth idol land, and I see no interest there to recover the past situation.

And no, we are not all play things in this situation, as long as we can still be critical and act individually. Collective results come sometimes as a surprise, or just look at the recent spanish elections. The latest poll shows that 2 out of 3 spaniards *wanted* the previous government to leave, but 80% of them didn't think it was possible. Now, the attack in Madrid changed the fact that those who wanted the change went out and voted instead of passively waiting in front of the TV (which, mind you, *I* did, shame on me). It's always a long shot, since although individuals trend to align with the right thing, an groups trend to align with the most egotistical thing, but fortunately, there's flukes. And these flukes can change the outcome totally.


Re: Anger.

Oh, I had yet forgotten to answer why Spain was attacked?
NOBODY can say, of course. Me, I can only speculate.

First thing, you need to know about the background between Morocco and Spain. The two lands don't have much sympathy for each other, but they need to work together:
* Spain fishes at Morocco's seas. That's the economical reason why Spain as a country is interested in Morocco.
* Spain has two cities in Morocco's natural territory, that's the political reason why Spain is interested in Morocco.
* Morocco is much less developed and produces much less richess than Spain, therefore spanish companies can outsource in Morocco and thus lower their costs, while Morocco notices a small but steady flow of money.
* Spain is the natural bridge between Morocco and Europe. That's the political reason why Morocco is interested in Spain.
* Both lands are really neighbours, and like it their governments or not, when you get to know your neighbour, differences erode and you are more receptive to see him in a positive light. Therefore, regardless of governments, democratic neighbours are usually (notice the usually, please) destined to understand one another and to benefit from each other.
* Both lands have their own terrorist and separatist groups. Each of them as fanatic as the other, none too eager to put bombs on their own land unless attacking determined "political" objectives, but not so reluctant if the civillian lives lost are outside "their land".

I am afraid that all proves I can produce about those facts would be either in Spanish or French (I can't read arabic), probably there are newspapers that have translated articles or so, but that would be much harder to find. Now, what I've said here are known facts, ok? From now on starts my speculation, more or less reasoned and more or less wrong. This is made from taking known facts and giving an explanation that suits them and my "feeling" of the situation.

For the past years, it has suited fine to the spanish government that there were terrorist groups in Morocco. Not that they have been actively promoted, but they have been tolerated and not actively prosecuted. A sample of that is the bombing in Rabat which has found burocratical obstructions in all leads that passed through Spain.
Of course, that doesn't generate simpathy, but has given the government a lever with which to press for fishing rights, which are diminished every year by the Moroccaner government.

On the other hand, Spain has a large base of inmigrated moors, either legal or illegal. Most of them come looking for work or just pass through to upper countries in europe.

Some of these people are respected members of the community, but integration takes time, cause there are lots of prejudices on both sides, and the speed of inmigration flows, "overflows" the speed of integration. Besides, it's not the best economical moment you've ever seen, and unqualified jobseekers have a great deal of insecurity. Most of the newcomers arrive illegally trying to find a job to survive them and their families (which they try to bring to Spain as soon as they can). However being illegally in Spain, asides from the inherent lack of security, allows them little or no rights.

Where leads all this? To lots of people who come searching for a better life, some good and some bad (like everywhere I guess) but all foreigners. If even the locals turn sour due to the difficulty to plan a future in the land, how would that be different with foreigners? Some have nothing to loose, so they simply turn to easy money: delinquence. Therefore the amount of delinquent foreigners grow, and the perception of the locals is that all foreigners are delinquents.

This generates lots of mistrust, and ressentment. Lack of integration and ghetto-like residential habits for foreigners. Some of them are forced to go back to their land, where they seed resentment (as you'll understand, those who go back aren't the happy ones!).

Also note that most of the islamic terrorism comes from relatively well-established citizens. Universities are favourite recruitment sites both because people are young and easily influenced and because there they have access to details about how the rest of the world is and how their land is seen or evolves or whatever (I'm not that sure of how that is exactly, cause this is hard for me to imagine, so don't come hard on me on this point, I should simply state that most planning and seeding terrorists are literate people... relatively literate people).

So, we have resentment and we have now a model that inspires them, the so-called "AlQaeda organization" has jumped to the news due to their 11-S "success" (that is, they succeeded in jumping to the news and generating more hatred). They simply follow that model, and find justifications where they can.

You must understand that hathred feeds on injustice, but goes much further away. Therefore fighting it with injustice (or more hatred FWIW) leads to essentially much more hatred than you had before. High motivated people who want to do something "for their people" will always be easily redirected towards hating outsiders. That happens even in democracies, and to you and me and to everyone. Only not at these levels because we have a different background and objectives.

So, if instead of feeling abused as countries, they could redirect their own efforts to make their lands better, they'd do it. However they see no solution and therefore resort to violence. And that's what's happened in Madrid.

This murders are much more related to what happened in Casablanca on May the 16th. Most likely they are the same group. I wish more was known about what happened there and why, but it didn't make the news, and Morocco is NOT an ally of the USA or something like that.

Besides, it is hardly an objective of terrorists to change other people's mind unless they can be totally aligned with their own, which is usually a flawed reasoning that never works. In this case, it is highly doubtable that a group radicated in Morocco would want to stop the war in Iraq by attacking one of the allies of the USA. It's much more likely that they *could* easily attack in Spain and therefore searched for an argument to do so. But note that had it been France the country nearby, that would have been the objective, and the reasons, the opposition of the government to the religious "rights" of the muslims.

So, no, the objective of terrorists wasn't stopping the Iraqi war. The reason why Madrid was bombed is obvious: press coverage and ease. They can easily move around, and fly back. These aren't suicidal attacks, I remind you, this people do not want to die, but to do damage.

So, no, sorry, the Iraqi war has only given them a reason to justify their attack. The global behavior of the whole Western world is what leads to the hatred of the ground people who are manipulated by extremists. Not that much different from what happens in the USA, or in Spain or everywhere else. Democracy per se is no solution unless the right tools for development are implemented.

Who wants freedom when they don't have bread, and their neighbours throw away the food, not allowing them to even gather the rests? You just want to hurt them.

We all carry a part of burden in this situation. Of course not something that justifies this barbaric situation, but we are nevertheless somewhat guilty. Life is never white or black or so easy as most politicians would want us to think, therefore I refuse to think in those terms and that's my way of fighting for a better world, which I consider legitimate, mind you.

And last but not least, I would like to make something very very clear:
I am always in for a polite debate and I regret if I sometimes become too personal, but I assure you it's nothing negative in this case, since I have come to appreciate the persons behind the opinions exposed, even as though they are not mine... or better said: because they are not mine. Broadening my horizons always makes me feel like I've accomplished something. So thank you for taking the time to read this, and for your eventual reply. Disregard any offensive "jaws" as rethorical figures if necessary :-)