Re: conspiracy theory: this doesn’t seem to hold at all since these exlposions will surely help to re-elect the authoritarian party of Aznar. Despite their declining popularity, in these situations people want the guys acting tough, regardless of the merits of these policies…

Mat,

Eh, please do correct me if I’m wrong, but my understanding is that Aznar and the conservatives have suffered no more than the typical rate of declining popularity associated with actually having to hold power, and that this election was quite likely to go their way, bombs or no. (And war or no…)

I see this, BTW, as a solid cost-benefit basis for pooh-poohing the idea that this was done _by_ the government. I can see some heartless bastards doing such a thing if they’re going to lose big, but it would appear to be pointless (or even counter-productive) if you’re going to win.

Bernard Guerrero

Per what I just heard on RFI,
The detonator caps were found to have been made of copper, while ETA’s detonators have always previously been made of aluminum…that for this to have been an ETA job, they’d have had to have completely changed their modus operandi…

Beware the Javert Syndrome.

“The detonator caps were found to have been made of copper”

This seems to be the case, the explosives are not titadine either. Also an eta ’spokesman’ has attempted to disclaim responsibility. Lots of details, which you can read as you want depending what your bigger picture is. My feeling is more or less towards an eta ’splinter’ group, and a middle east connection. But it is only a feeling.

The problem with this case is that all the evidence that we have atm is of either motives, or modus operandi kind. You can pretty much say either of the two group accused could have done it. Another possibility is that it might be a third terrorist group that is behind this attack, buggered if I would know who it is though.

I’m probably missing something, but don’t we now have on the one hand a group that actively claims the massacre and another that says they have nothing to do with it?
Why insist on ETA? I can see no logic in an attack like this. Blind attacks are not the modus operandi of organizations that depend on the soft support of confortable constituencies. It’s self defeating. The ETA guys are mafiosi, but they are not idiots. If they wanted to prop up Aznar, they could have murdered a provincial police captain or commit one of the usual criminal acts that they do, which would have done the job nicely (if Edward’s scenario is true) without risking a complete estrangement from a majority of their base…
This is a different scale of madness alltogether.
So I have to point at the Islamists, although it seems that each islamist strike is done by a different, unknown until that time, group… but that’s the only guess on the table that sort of makes sense right now.

Talos, the group that “claims the massacre”: Abu Hafs al Masri Brigades, has little to no credibility. Most recently they claimed responsibility for the power blackouts in New York and Canada last year which turned out to have nothing to do with terrorism.

“has little to no credibility”

Again we have to be very careful here, since experts in middle east politics have also been pointing out thet they claim responsibility for the recent bombing in Turkey and the bombing of the UN building in Iraq. If they were responsibile for these attacks this would make the Madrid bombing a logical evolution for them. The letter also mentions the attack against the Italians in Iraq. So I think we need to be very careful.

I think the big problem is that people are positioning themselves ideologically on this, and this is the most dangerous part. Each person interprets each piece of new evidence following their own preconceived theory.

“Blind attacks are not the modus operandi of organizations”

The problem with this theory Talos is what were the people arrested in Burgos on the train on the way to another Madrid station on Christmas Eve actually doing? To all appearances they were going to cause an explosion in the centre of Madrid.

The name Omagh has already been mentioned.

Personally, I have always held in private the theory that they were ’shopped’ on xmas eve: that is that there is a ’battle royale’ going on inside the world of Eta with those who favour the referendum, and those who know no other objective than violence. Really everyone interested in this topic should get the video of ’The Boxer’ with Daniel Day Lewis, it should help a lot.

We should never underestimate how much the personal is indistinguisable from the political in Spain. Eta has a personal thing with Aznar (just like the Ira had with Thatcher). Aznar had the priority objective of getting Eta included in the same list of terrorists as Al Qaeda. My hunch is that some people around Eta have interpreted this as throwing down the guantlet, and have said OK we are indistinuishable from Al Qaeda then ’so be it’.

Many people like to say ’why distinguish between brands of terrorism’. Perhaps it makes them feel morally good and warm inside. I however consider this view foolish and dangerous. I fear the results of this conflation may have just been seen on the streets of Madrid. If we are to fight terrorism successfully we need to do it intelligently, with our eyes open, and without ideologically driven distortions of reality.

Edward,

I’m interested in what you said about the division within Spanish society over reactions to this bombing. You wrote that “this division continues to reproduce itself in the fact that one part of Spain wants to believe this to be true, while the other doesn’t.”

I’d like to hear more. Why does one part want to believe it was ETA and another part want to believe it was Al Qaeda? What exactly is the basis of this split?

Scott

for my answer to Scott, see comments on subsequent post.

Edward you mention Omagh… Now you can choose to dismiss the homicidal idiots of the “Real” IRA, when they claimed that this massacre was not what they intended (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/events/northern_ireland/focus/153629.stm ) but it is significant in the context of my argument that they felt the need to *apologize* - and we’re talking about people who were not exactly known for their pacifism.

Now can one dismiss the possibility of an ETA splinter group committing this atrocity? No, of course not. But if they were going to do it, there would be no point to the attack from their perspective, unless they claimed responsibility for it. Especially if, as you claim, their intent might have been to re-elect Aznar (and it didn’t seem like he would need much help), the fact that an Islamist group claimed responsibility, thus certainly increasing the Socialists’ chances, should have had them on the phone next minute making a counterclaim.
Instead, ETA calls to *distance* itself from the attack… I’m not sure whether there were any previous instances of ETA *rejecting* responsibility for an attack that was subsequently proven to be their handiwork (that’s a question: was there?)
Also technically, I doubt that a recent ETA splinter group could coordinate a perfectly timed attack to such an extent.

Again only time will tell.

As for the “Abu Hafs al Masri Brigades” I was of course wrong in suggesting that they were a “previously unknown” group – that’s what I first heard on the radio and didn’t check it any further. As Edward has pointed out they have also claimed responsibility for Turkey and the UN compound in Iraq, so they have a mixed record.
Having said that, there’s something “unreal” about this organization which I can’t put my finger on yet…

Interestingly, the only previous attack in Europe, that is similar in its bloodiness, cold bloodedness, its murderous intent and its indiscriminateness, is the Bologna train station massacre in the 70s… But I won’t get into that because I would then have to mention “Gladio” - and then the doors to a possible conspiracy theory, which I’m not at all eager to indulge in, will lie open.

“But if they were going to do it, there would be no point to the attack from their perspective, unless they claimed responsibility for it.”

I am hearing this, it does seem to make sense, but I prefer to wait, I think there may be more to hear. Surely next week things will get clearer. At the moment there are just too many things that don’t fit.

Every theory being offered has at least one fact too many to explain. I certainly hope I have at least ’corrected’ my original strong version. I am now going to try and exercise prudence.

“Also technically, I doubt that a recent ETA splinter group could coordinate a perfectly timed attack to such an extent.”

Actually it wasn’t quite perfect, but that is beside the point. I agree, if there is a hybrid model it would seem to fit the new outsourcing format perfectly: eta may have provided the manpower and the raw materials and someone else the brainpower.

A lot would seem to hang on whether the “Abu Hafs al Masri Brigades” have really done the things they claim to have done. But then using indirect reasoning, if they had then international intelligence would probably be able to confirm that, and then international security should be much higher. It isn’t *so* high, so someone other than the Spanish politicians must not rate them too strongly. Bottom line: we are still none the wiser.

Remember the ’commando’ who did this are still out there, and can strike again, so you have to imagine beyond the politics people must be taking this very seriously indeed. This is, of course, why police ’leaks’ are frequent, why various lines of investigation have been opened, and why I am entertaining doubts.

On the other side they are now inteviewing witnesses on the TV who saw the people from the van putting the rucksacks in one of the trains. They say that they were hiding their faces, but they make no suggestion that they were anything other than Spanish. I think we can expect much more of this as the days pass. there must be plenty of people out there with relevant information.

“(and it didn’t seem like he would need much help)”

I don’t know whether this part of my argument is a good one. I have always assumed Eta favour PP since they get the confrontation they thrive on. They have certainly assasinated prinicipally PP people, but have notably imediately assasinated someone from PSOE whenever there was any possibility of raproachment between PNV and PSE (the Basque nationalists and socialists respectively). Since a change in government would re-open dialogue with the peaceful nationalists it is hard to see Eta favouring this. Especially now they would find themselves incredibly isolated.

But don’t jump to the conclusion that the PP were walking away with a victory, the last polls indicated they had lost their absolute majorityand that PSOE were closing. Given that the other main beneficiary seemed likely to be Carod’s ERC, and that the old Catalan nationalist party CiU seemed about to be substantially losing ground (thus making an agreement with PP very difficult for them) we even had the surreal possibility opening up of the ’Catalan Formula’ reaching Madrid, and Carod in an agreement with PSOE.

Now some ideological views would say that Eta would love that. But think of it for a minute: Eta’s objective is undoubtedly all-or-nothing independence. In fact they are near to seeing that topic on the agenda due to the deterioration in the Madrid- Vittoria climate. So along come the PSOE and Carod with a new Federal structure for Spain, with Euskadi definitely inside Spain: now how could they favour that?

However, as I say somewhere else, what I may be guilty of is trying to apply too much logic to something which doesn’t have any.

I feel that your new president (has no huervos) by bringing his 1,300 troops back home. I do not think that this will keep al quida from bombing again unless he has made a deal with them. I am ASTURIAN and I know that it takes us to take care of Spain when it needs it. History has shown that. Estes Presidenti nos tuenes nadas por la libertaria de espana