Surprised that nobody have posted about this..

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 12, 2004, 7:41 pm

Kind of surprised that nobody has posted about the bombs in Madrid. The whole attack reaks of al-Qaida imho. It is not ETA's style at all and would be suicide for them if they did such an attack. Not really surprised that the Spanish government tries to blame ETA though, would be a nice way to get rid of them once and for all.

Sirton · Post by **Sirton** » March 12, 2004, 7:50 pm

Its obvious why most people on this board dont post about events such as this....it doesnt go with there hatred.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 12, 2004, 8:13 pm

i am betting that the above post contained improper use of words and lots of CAPS.

i think the reason nobody posted on the bombings is that there isnt really anything to discuss about it. its terrible and hopefully they'll catch the people who did it.

i wouldn't be surprised if it was an Al Queda affiliated group at all.

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » March 12, 2004, 8:23 pm

Was obviously very surprising. My dad who has a spanish sadelite said that Spain is 90% sure now that its Al Qaeda, and they found some evidence supporting so in the van that supposivly triggered the bombs.
It doesnt seem like there were any suicide bombers though, but then again the ETA never intentionally kill civillians, being that they phone in and warn citizens that theres going to be an attack 30 mins ahead of time.

Akaran_D · Post by **Akaran_D** » March 12, 2004, 9:18 pm

Interesting bit from a florida news outlet:
http://www.local6.com/news/2917852/detail.html

Full article:

In comparing the Madrid bombings to the 9-11 terrorist attacks in the United States, there are some numerical ties.

There were 911 days in-between the terror attacks in Madrid and Sept. 11, 2001 -- or 9-11 as it has become known -- when al-Qaida-backed terrorists slammed planes into the Pentagon, a field in Pennsylvania and the World Trade Center towers in New York, destroying them.

The Madrid bombings -- which happened on 3-11 -- also came 2-1/2 years to the day after the 9-11 attacks.

Siji · Post by **Siji** » March 13, 2004, 4:08 am

Whether it's Al Queda or not won't matter. The Bush administration will push the "fact" that it is; actually, they already are. There's absolutely NO evidence of any kind that it's Al Queda related at this point, but it's the first thing to be brought up.

Helps with his "I know Al Queda!" stance in hoping people will want him for a second term.

As a disclaimer, I'm not saying it's not or is related to them. But I'm not going to blindly believe it is until there's proof. What the hell does Al Queda want to screw with Madrid for anyway? Not exactly the top of the list that I can imagine them attacking.

Drolgin Steingrinder · Post by **Drolgin Steingrinder** » March 13, 2004, 6:48 am

Siji, Spain was - is - almost as staunch a supporter as the UK of Bush's "WAR ON TERROR" and current spanish Prime Minister Azabal (sp) has been very vocal in european media about stamping out Al Qeyda and Saddam Hussein. So on a list of non-US targets, yes, Spain would be up there.

I'm just waiting for bombs to go off in London and Copenhagen now

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » March 13, 2004, 11:48 am

Drolgin Steingrinder wrote:Siji, Spain was - is - almost as staunch a supporter as the UK of Bush's "WAR ON TERROR" and current spanish Prime Minister Azabal (sp) has been very vocal in european media about stamping out Al Qeyda and Saddam Hussein. So on a list of non-US targets, yes, Spain would be up there.

I'm just waiting for bombs to go off in London and Copenhagen now

BTW, thats just the government, not the people that support the "war on terror"

Runcade · Post by **Runcade** » March 13, 2004, 1:36 pm

[/quote]BTW, thats just the government, not the people that support the "war on terror"

[/quote]

I don't think Al-Queda cares much who they kill in that regard. the government and the people are about the same.

Sionistic · Post by **Sionistic** » March 13, 2004, 3:15 pm

Whether it's Al Queda or not won't matter. The Bush administration will push the "fact" that it is; actually, they already are.

A day or two after the bombing, they had colin on nightly news stressing that they do not know who it was yet, and where actually saying they were suspecting ETA.

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » March 13, 2004, 3:24 pm

Sionistic wrote:
Whether it's Al Queda or not won't matter. The Bush administration will push the "fact" that it is; actually, they already are.
A day or two after the bombing, they had colin on nightly news stressing that they do not know who it was yet, and where actually saying they were suspecting ETA.

Spanish Intelligence is leaning towards Muslims as perps...The rest of the administration is still leaning towards ETA...

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... losions_dc

Then again it would suit the administration if it were ETA I reckon...

Siji · Post by **Siji** » March 13, 2004, 3:53 pm

Drolgin Steingrinder wrote:Siji, Spain was - is - almost as staunch a supporter as the UK of Bush's "WAR ON TERROR" and current spanish Prime Minister Azabal (sp) has been very vocal in european media about stamping out Al Qeyda and Saddam Hussein. So on a list of non-US targets, yes, Spain would be up there.(

My bad. I've never heard anything about Spain in any of the news that I've heard to date.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » March 13, 2004, 5:26 pm

Siji wrote:
Drolgin Steingrinder wrote:Siji, Spain was - is - almost as staunch a supporter as the UK of Bush's "WAR ON TERROR" and current spanish Prime Minister Azabal (sp) has been very vocal in european media about stamping out Al Qeyda and Saddam Hussein. So on a list of non-US targets, yes, Spain would be up there.(
My bad. I've never heard anything about Spain in any of the news that I've heard to date.

Don't you recall Britain and Spain being mentioned by Bush during a special summit? Although I think Spain was a throw-in country to make the coalition look better instead of it being just the US and Britain, it must have pissed Al Queda off.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/ ... er.update/

ALLIED IN THE AZORES: President Bush said Sunday that the opportunity for a diplomatic solution to the confrontation with Iraq would end Monday, calling it "a moment of truth for the world." Bush made his comments after a brief summit in the Azores with British Prime Minister Tony Blair and Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 13, 2004, 5:59 pm

Siji wrote:Whether it's Al Queda or not won't matter. The Bush administration will push the "fact" that it is; actually, they already are. There's absolutely NO evidence of any kind that it's Al Queda related at this point, but it's the first thing to be brought up.

Helps with his "I know Al Queda!" stance in hoping people will want him for a second term.

As a disclaimer, I'm not saying it's not or is related to them. But I'm not going to blindly believe it is until there's proof. What the hell does Al Queda want to screw with Madrid for anyway? Not exactly the top of the list that I can imagine them attacking.

No evidence. How about the fact they claimed it?

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » March 13, 2004, 7:28 pm

Midnyte_Ragebringer wrote:
Siji wrote:Whether it's Al Queda or not won't matter. The Bush administration will push the "fact" that it is; actually, they already are. There's absolutely NO evidence of any kind that it's Al Queda related at this point, but it's the first thing to be brought up.

Helps with his "I know Al Queda!" stance in hoping people will want him for a second term.

As a disclaimer, I'm not saying it's not or is related to them. But I'm not going to blindly believe it is until there's proof. What the hell does Al Queda want to screw with Madrid for anyway? Not exactly the top of the list that I can imagine them attacking.
No evidence. How about the fact they claimed it?

Heh yeah no one but Al Queda can write notes...

...I'll wait for direct evidence to be sure...But I'll lay odds it was Al Queda...

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 13, 2004, 7:51 pm

You forget, Midnyte and his fellows don't need evidence

Crav · Post by **Crav** » March 13, 2004, 7:51 pm

Five arrested in connection with the bombings( link ). Three Moroccans and the two others have Indian passports.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 13, 2004, 8:35 pm

The spanish government doesn't want to blame Al'Queda until after the elections this because if a lot of people stay convinced that ETA was responsible then they will get a lot more votes because the current government is popular for their hardline stance against ETA. If it turns out Al'Queda is responsible then they are going to lose a lot of votes because the majority of spain is very much against the war on islam that the US is currently conducting and this is just going to look like a backfire.

A government politicizing tragedy is obviously nothing bush though.

Drolgin Steingrinder · Post by **Drolgin Steingrinder** » March 13, 2004, 9:20 pm

I do think there's more to it than that, Kyou. My sister is working in Barcelona at the moment and she says that there are two schools of thought: One that hopes it's ETA because the idea that two seperate organized terrorist groups operating in the country is too scary to think of, one that hopes it's not ETA because the idea the Basque separatists should change their targets to random civilians and become a broader, less political (at least in their choice of targets) terror group is too scary to think of (a sort of "Well at least *our* terrorists are civilized!). I don't know for sure why Azbar is focusing so hard on ETA, though. Not even sure he does himself.

Lalanae · Post by **Lalanae** » March 13, 2004, 11:26 pm

Winnow wrote:

Tom Selleck!

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » March 14, 2004, 1:16 am

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... eu/spain_4

They now have a video tape as well in which Al Queda claim responsibility...still anecdotal but stronger...

Arundel Pajo · Post by **Arundel Pajo** » March 14, 2004, 1:17 am

Lalanae wrote:
Winnow wrote:
Tom Selleck!

That must make GW Steve Gutenberg. Figures.

...And Tony Blair can be Ted Danson. This pic is *so* begging for a "Three Men and a Baby" photoshop job.

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » March 14, 2004, 3:00 am

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 14, 2004, 3:48 am

oh god

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 14, 2004, 12:09 pm

excellent Dregor, haha.

Lalanae · Post by **Lalanae** » March 14, 2004, 3:28 pm

ahahahah

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 14, 2004, 3:33 pm

even as an infant he has that smug "I know something you don't know" look on his face.

Lalanae · Post by **Lalanae** » March 14, 2004, 3:46 pm

he's smug because he just poo'd in his pants

maybe that's the same reason he's smug all the time...

Xzion · Post by **Xzion** » March 14, 2004, 11:13 pm

Damn 3 days ago the popular party was expected to win pretty badly, and now this comes along and they get there asses handed in the election.

Kelshara · Post by **Kelshara** » March 14, 2004, 11:43 pm

Well intelligent people don't take kindly to actions like the Spanish prime minister have done. Now to see if the American people follow up!

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » March 15, 2004, 1:01 am

Kelshara wrote:Well intelligent people don't take kindly to actions like the Spanish prime minister have done. Now to see if the American people follow up!

It doesn't work that way in the US. If the Sears Tower gets leveled it's 4 more years of Bush.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » March 15, 2004, 7:52 am

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3512144.stm

Interesting point about AQ having influenced the outcome of an election.
And whether or not the decision to withdraw Spanish troops from Iraq was taken before the election, the timing now is going to draw accusations of capitulation caused by the bombings.

My initial reaction on hearing of the bombings last week was that it was AQ rather than ETA. The "rumours" of it being AQ didn't surface until the following day, though, and there was a "expert" on BBC breakfast news decrying the "scaremongering" of those spreading these "rumours" "irresponsibly". He actually went as far as saying it would cause a panic among the general populace. The patronising wanker. Much egg on his face now I would suspect.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 15, 2004, 11:44 am

analyst that i heard doenst think their are any groups active in Europe at the moment except for Al Queda that could have had 10 coordinated bombs detonated by cell phone like this.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » March 15, 2004, 12:12 pm

ETA have denied involvement and AQ have made a convincing claim of responsibility. Usually this is more than enough to attribute a terrorist attack to a group. Why not this time?

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 15, 2004, 12:32 pm

also from what i've heard, ETA is usually pretty eager to take credit for stuff....sometimes even stuff it didn't do.

Lugon · Post by **Lugon** » March 15, 2004, 12:45 pm

AQ wins, Spain surrenders is what the headlines should say. Fucking cowards. Obviosly not all, but clearly a majority.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 15, 2004, 1:19 pm

i think a few things are missing from this discussion.

for starters, the support for the War in Iraq was not really there amongst the population of Spain. It was extremely unpopular actually.

secondly, while conservatives in the US certainly feel like the war in Iraq is about defending the West from terrorism, that opinion is not widely held in Europe.

So to say well, the Spanish have now lost their resolve to fight terror because they are no longer interested in helping hte US in Iraq misunderstands the situation. In Spain, it is more likely to find somebody who feels like pre-emptive war in the Middle East weakens their country in the "War on Terror".

There were millions of people out protesting terrorism in the days following the bombing. People took this bombing very seriously there.

ALso the polls before the election showed the Prime Minister winning, but losing his majority support. SO while the result of the election was still surprising, it is reflective of a trend that had already been noted. Just the severity of the downtick in his popularity subsequent to the bombing is what is surprising. Critics of the PM felt like their government tried to quickly blame ETA before evidence was there to strenghten themselves politically in the days before the election.

Al Queda can claim a victory though. Whether they did or did not shape this election, all that matters is that their bombing will be widely perceived to have changed the election, and as a result they have shown they are still a powerful force.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 15, 2004, 1:23 pm

kyoukan wrote:The spanish government doesn't want to blame Al'Queda until after the elections this because if a lot of people stay convinced that ETA was responsible then they will get a lot more votes because the current government is popular for their hardline stance against ETA. If it turns out Al'Queda is responsible then they are going to lose a lot of votes because the majority of spain is very much against the war on islam that the US is currently conducting and this is just going to look like a backfire.

BTW Kyoukan basically predicted this outcome. Good job

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » March 15, 2004, 1:33 pm

the timing now is going to draw accusations of capitulation caused by the bombings

Spain surrenders is what the headlines should say. Fucking cowards.

Right on cue.

Lugon · Post by **Lugon** » March 15, 2004, 1:35 pm

Note: My comment is not necessarily part of a pro or anti Iraq position but I don't think anyone can argue Osama is probably sitting in some cave with a big smile on his face. Although I fear should Kerry win in November he'll have an even larger smile as Kerry starts bringing all our troops home.

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » March 15, 2004, 1:48 pm

Lugon wrote:Note: My comment is not necessarily part of a pro or anti Iraq position but I don't think anyone can argue Osama is probably sitting in some cave with a big smile on his face. Although I fear should Kerry win in November he'll have an even larger smile as Kerry starts bringing all our troops home.

Wait, so an exit plan is a bad thing?

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » March 15, 2004, 1:58 pm

I thought moving the handover of power in Iraq to June of this year was part of a plan to bring US troops home early.

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 15, 2004, 2:53 pm

Lugon wrote:Note: My comment is not necessarily part of a pro or anti Iraq position but I don't think anyone can argue Osama is probably sitting in some cave with a big smile on his face. Although I fear should Kerry win in November he'll have an even larger smile as Kerry starts bringing all our troops home.

or maybe he'll, you know, actually use them to find bin laden instead of stealing oil from Iraq.

yay, another fucking retard in current events. the south must breed you people like vermin.

Midnyte_Ragebringer · Post by **Midnyte_Ragebringer** » March 15, 2004, 4:01 pm

There already is an exit strategy. We don't need Kerry to bring our troops home. They will come home when the job is done.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 15, 2004, 4:17 pm

since when did Kerry adopt Dennis Kucinic's "bring them home now" plan?

A: he didnt.

Lugon · Post by **Lugon** » March 15, 2004, 4:25 pm

Your statement is pure blind hatred of Bush and his policies. I have a million things myself I'm pissed at Bush about as well and given the option there are many people I'd choose to vote for over him if I could. I'd vote Clinton back over Bush, I'd vote Lieberman over Bush, I'd vote John McCain over Bush, but I don't have any faith in Kerry given his history. And while I may not be able to stand Bush on some issues, Kerry is a tool and I'm not going to let stupid blind hatred of Bush or his policies lead me to voting for someone I consider a worse option. I'm sorry, but you're never gonna see me in the polls showing support for Kerry solely based on the fact he's not Bush.

Lugon

Lugon · Post by **Lugon** » March 15, 2004, 4:35 pm

Last reply was to Kyoukan.

To Voronwe: If Kerry gets in the white house he'll use the first tiny excuse he finds to pull out of not only Iraq but Afghanistan as well. Or, he'll do it quietly after declaring some fake finality and in 10 years they'll both be bigger hell holes than they ever were and our children will end up back over there doing the job all over again under some future president. Kerry stinks of cut and run whether he's said it or not. Only time will tell but count this as my official prediction if Kerry wins.

Lugon

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » March 15, 2004, 4:58 pm

Thanks for clarifying that your statement was not based on any facts in particular, but moreso on your ability to sniff out liars as well as your talent to simply predict the future.

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » March 15, 2004, 5:03 pm

CALL ME NOW!

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » March 15, 2004, 6:13 pm

well you know how decorated war heroes always have that reputation for cutting out and running as opposed to the brave draft dodger that is in the white house right now.