Originally posted by midwicket:
The atrocity quickly spawned a political spin contest, though neither side had a factual basis for their assertions. Within hours of the atrocity, Aznar focussed blame on the Basque outfit ETA, while Zapatero tried to pin it on Al-Qaeda. Aznar's message was calculated to increase support for his tough-on-terror stance. Zapatero's message, was calculated to persuade voters that Spain had stupidly picked a fight with people it had no beef with, and was paying the price.





True. Interestingly, initial evidence could point either direction. The timing of the attack was well planned to be sure. Not sure the "spin" made any difference though..I think they just "reacted"..

Really, had anyone actually applied some cognative effort to the situation, they would have concluded that NO FIRM CONCLUSION as to wish group was to blame could be reached so rapidy after the attack. All they REALLY NEEDED to realize was that a (any) terrorist group was obviously attempting to alter the results of an election that was leaning a certain way (in favor of the incumbantcy) toward the alternative (the socialists in this case).

Without ANY additional knowlege, to send a message to (whatever) terrorists that the people of Spain were not going to sucume to this tactic, the choice was clear...
Unfortunately, they made the other choice....

Jato,
Very nerve racking indeed that the same could happen here. Only difference is that we had 9/11 first. Before Iraq. American's KNOW we were attacked first. Bush has made the war on terror his centerpiece not just a "me too" campaign slogan.


1999 Amazon Green SVT Contour (#554/2760) "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." -Soren Kierkegaard (as posted by Jato)