The Rain in Spain Falls Mainly on the Slain

[Comrade]

Originally posted by Bry
Okay, Comrade, for the sake of a laugh, why don't you walk me through those events and pronouncements that I lived and listened to.

Spain is in Afganistan. Don't you remember the plane crash in Turkey that killed fifty some Spanish officers in Turkey? They were in route from Afganistan.

How can you act so self-righteous and still be wrong?

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/enduring-freedom_orbat-03.htm

This is the most recent OOB (Order of Battle) in Afghanistan as far as I've been able to research, and there ARE NO SPANISH TROOPS THERE TODAY, can you see that clearly now?

We can agree that Spanish troops died in a crash over Turkey in May of 2003 while returning home from Afghanistan. What matters in this discussion is the present so please join me here.

It is stupid to talk about the lack of funds that a president elect has not yet had the chance to pour into the war in terror.

No it’s not, we know Spanish monetary support today is nil and there will be little reason for a leftist Spain support any proxy US effort in another nation while the US remains at the center-right.

Everything that was pronounced in the "left" media proved to be accurate. The same can not be said of Aznar's government. If you think it's normal for the president to be making phone calls to news papers to tell them what information they should or should not publish, you and I probably have deological differences more basic than what has or has not happened in Spain.

No I don’t think it’s normal, in fact the very notion of Aznar attempting to lean on these two particular newspapers is ludicrous.

Let’s go back to your own link about this:

“El Pais, which was preparing a special edition on the attacks, received several calls directly from Aznar, its reporters confirmed. The editor of the Catalan-based paper El Periodico said Aznar called twice. Aznar "courteously cautioned me not to be mistaken. ETA was responsible," the editor, Antonio Franco, wrote in an editorial Tuesday.”

Do you think "Several reporters" at El Pais were all individually contacted, part of some conference call, or is this just a rumor without any real credible source?

Franco is at least a name behind the claim. Being “cautioned” by Aznar is spun as some sort of threat, clearly. Since this is revealed on Tuesday after Aznar was actually voted out it’s one of two things:

1. A bone-chilling close call with Aznar who threatened this paper in no uncertain terms not to mistake Al-Qaida involvment.

2. Tying up the ongoing campaign to advance the “lies” of the Aznar government, a propaganda effort now making personal allegations into Aznar while he's down and defeated. It's good print for the left in power isn't it?


http://tools.search.yahoo.com/langu...news.yahoo.com/040316/202/3p843.html&lp=fr_en

Rough translation:

El Periodico had decided to change its title into evoking the Al Qaïda claim, "in spite owing to the fact that I continued to think that a chief of government could not allow himself to take the risk to be mistaken on such a subject in a conversation with a newspaper editor, and while thinking of ridiculous and to the international damage carried in Spain if what the chief of the government said on the ETA was not true", Antonio Franco adds.


This almost sounds like Franco was watching out for Aznar, but you and I know better, don’t we? Both papers set out to gut Aznar from day 1, did they not?

You have two sources from the two most popular left newspapers, you with me?

Copy and paste this link to your browser for Aljazeerah's take on both.

"ttp://aljazeerah.info/News%20archives/2003%20News%20archives/November/30n/Spanish%20media%20question%20high%20price%20being%20paid%20in%20Iraq.htm"

“What are we doing over there in the face of opposition from the majority of the Spanish population and all political parties save for the (ruling) Popular Party?” asked Catalan daily El Periodico.”

El Pais, Spain’s most widely read daily, provided a blunt editorial entitled: “Spain is paying a high price” for the decision of Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar to commit a 1,300-strong force to Iraq.

As for what Aznar said in public, before, you say, the phone calls were made to newspapers, He was distincly and inequivocably linking the attacks to ETA. I heard the speech myself, in Spanish. If you want to debate the exact content of the speech, feel free to present the text in its entirety. Until you are able to do that, your insinuations about the voracity of what I know I heard and lived are uninteresting.

Well you’ve been duped. Many also believe they heard Bush distinctly and unequivocally call Iraq a “Clear and Present danger”, and have read way too much left propaganda to even check the text of the SOTU itself.

So here’s the text as of Anzar one and only public statement on the day of the bombing:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3503184.stm


No “ETA” in there.

The whole text is entirely without conjecture either way. If you still somehow feel this is not accurate then you deny left propaganda has altered your perceptions. Again, this text is on record, and is more credible by far than any source you have provided..


I’ve already gone into detail on the timeline on the other thread here:

http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=4220

 

[Bry]

Thanks for finally clueing me in on what an oob is. You're right, Spain no longer maintains a presence in Afganistan. Unfortunately, that happened on Aznar's watch, as has everything in the last eight years, and does not support your argument. If you want to criticize an incoming leaders policies, I suggest you wait untill after he takes office.

Aside from stating flatly that any claim about Aznar calling newspaper editors to affirm the culpability of ETA is "ludicrous", in spite of ample evidence to the contrary, you seem to have nothing to offer. El Pais is the most respected Spanish newspaper. It's the Spanish equivalent of the New York Times. You can cast gratuitous dispersions on their veracity if you like, but you can't seem to back them up.

as for the exact text of Aznar's communication, you are right. He conspicuously avoided naming ETA, but as I said in the other thread, it was clear who he was talking about. Even in the translation you offer, he says "No negotiation is possible or desirable with these murderers who have so often sown death throughout the geography of Spain.. " Perhaps you were thinking Al Qaeda has commited terrorist acts throughout the geography of Spain on a regular basis? BTW, the elipses are not mine, the communication is truncated.

On Friday, the next day, Aznar said:"con dos dedos de frente en España, después de 30 años de terrorismo, ante un atentado como el de ayer tiene que pensar lógicamente, razonablemente, que tiene que ser esa banda la autora". Any intelligent person in Spain, after 30 years of terrorism, confronted with a bombing the likes of yesterdays, must think ligically, reasonably, that the author must be this band. BTW, ETA has historically been referred to as "the band". Al Qaeda has not. You got it wrong. I wasn't duped, and neither were the Spanish people. Anything else is just crying in your sheets.

 

[nbdysfu]

Originally posted by Bry
[El Pais] It's the Spanish equivalent of the New York Times.

have they too recently hosted Noam Chomsky editorials?

 

[Bry]

That would be what editorial sections are for, no? posting opinions? For the record, every single editorial published in El Pais Friday after the bombing was addressing the ETA question. Your questioning of the voracity of El Pais (and the NY TIMES) as respectable new outlets, is absurd.

 

[Comrade]

Originally posted by Bry
Thanks for finally clueing me in on what an oob is. You're right, Spain no longer maintains a presence in Afganistan. Unfortunately, that happened on Aznar's watch, as has everything in the last eight years, and does not support your argument. If you want to criticize an incoming leaders policies, I suggest you wait untill after he takes office.

I believe Spain will pattern it's policy based on similar socialist governments in Europe, and will provide little support for the US while it remains led by the right. Funds for Afganistan and Iraq can only help the US position, and so this party shall refrain from being a benefactor to advancing US power.

Sensible policy for a socialist.

Aside from stating flatly that any claim about Aznar calling newspaper editors to affirm the culpability of ETA is "ludicrous", in spite of ample evidence to the contrary, you seem to have nothing to offer. El Pais is the most respected Spanish newspaper. It's the Spanish equivalent of the New York Times. You can cast gratuitous dispersions on their veracity if you like, but you can't seem to back them up.

Most respected by the left, perhaps. Clearly left of center though!

Since the anti-PP bias has been a daily theme and feared not for Aznar one whit, what is up with the threats? The chief editor wants to indicate this and I'm only wondering how much of his BS spin is believable. He did this on purpose, to make it ominous. This is why I doubt the veracity of these claims. There is an agenda at work.

as for the exact text of Aznar's communication, you are right. He conspicuously avoided naming ETA, but as I said in the other thread, it was clear who he was talking about. Even in the translation you offer, he says "No negotiation is possible or desirable with these murderers who have so often sown death throughout the geography of Spain.. " Perhaps you were thinking Al Qaeda has commited terrorist acts throughout the geography of Spain on a regular basis? BTW, the elipses are not mine, the communication is truncated.

Well Islamic Fundamentalist once sown death in Spain too!

Point here is that if you have to think about who is supposed to be the terrorist in this speech, your inference was never for general consumption. Subtle references are lost on the public, so why try to make them?

BTW, ETA has historically been referred to as "the band". Al Qaeda has not. You got it wrong. I wasn't duped, and neither were the Spanish people. Anything else is just crying in your sheets. [/B]

I see this reference, let's agree there were indeed sporadic attempts to affix ETA to the bombing, of some advantage to the PP apparently.

Without going into the other thread on why these occured, what really is the motive supposed to be in downplaying Al-Quada?

Are the Spanish assumed to be appeasing cowards?