Letters to the Editor
-
Re:Re;Re: Spanish Defiance?
Sorry, but I can't help myself.
At the time of the last general Spanish election, the details of the Madrid attack were still only beginning to become clear.
But what had become very clear was that the incumbent Spanish administration had used the attack to politicize against ETA (the Basque insurgent/terrorist/independence/call-the-jerks-whatever-you-want-to organisation) by holding them responsible for the attack while witholding growing proof to the contrary.
So even though the vast majority of Spaniards were opposed to the invasion of Iraq from its beginning, the massive changing of minds in the immediate run-up to the election did not react to terrorists' actions as much as to the administration's.
The message sent by those voters that changed their mind was simply "You lie to us, you retire."
If you want to call this defiant, go ahead; if want to call 'em cowards, do more homework.
Peace.
-
The reason for the Spanish reversal
Hi
Being Spanish I can tell you the main reason why people turned on the Conservatives. Firstly they supported a war that was very unpopular in the public opinion. When they then tried to blame it on ETA right after the bombing (to avoid the Iraqi war being brought up in the politics) they were caught red-handed lying. Not a good position to be in just before the elections.
-
Post-publication acknowledgment from the author
Post-publication note from the author:
Numerous readers have taken further issue with my response to John Dellaportas's letter regarding the Spanish reaction to the Madrid bombings, pointing out that surveys have consistently shown the Spanish turned against the conservatives not because of Al-Qaeda, but because the government lied about the attacks. Officials tried to blame home-grown Basque separatists for the explosions, and voters reacted angrily once the truth became clear. That's much more defiance, one could easily contend, than American voters were able to muster in the face of our own leadership's falsehoods and so-called "bad intelligence."
-
Not defiance, not fear, but a healthy dose of outrage and betrayal
The Partido Popular as led by Spain's own mini-dubya, Jose Maria Aznar, lost the 2004 election not because of Spaniards' reluctance to face al-Qaeda but rather the outrage at having been blatantly lied to by their government.
From the very beginning the attack bore no resemblance whatsoever to the typical ETA bombing. The intelligence apparatus recognized this immediately, had information pointing to Islamists and so informed Aznar. Yet their great leader still saw the need to use the candle light protest march (a highly charged and emotional affair) as an opportunity to try and rally public support for the Constitution. This was a pathetic and meanspirited slap at those with separatist tendencies and it was shamelessly exploitive.
To sum up: there was a horrible attack and loss of life, the government lied, the government decided to overlook reliable intelligence, the government tried to exploit the outpouring of grief and support to further it's own agenda. Sound familiar?
Spanish sentiment was no doubt slanted against involvement in Iraq from the start, but the prevailing attitude was more along the lines of, "this war is a bad idea and i wish we weren't there, but at least it's not some sort of major commitment". The spanish were very supportive of our efforts in afghanistan. Yet we here in america see fit to constantly chide them for what we perceive as their cowardice in the face of adversity.
It seems to me the Spanish are simply wily and smart voters, and they don't appreciate it when someone pisses in their ear and tells that it's raining. On a side note, I've been to Spain 3 times in the past year. I found the security measures they've taken on trains and airplanes to be reasonable and unintrusive.
-
Mallard
Ahem. I enjoy your column - I'm not a pilot, and I wouldn't usually question your expetise - BUT - I was always under the impression that a SEAPLANE is a regular land plane with pontoons replacing the landing wheels. I've seen pictures of lots of ordinary planes from Piper Cubs to a DC-3 converted to seaplanes with pontoons. A plane like the Grumman Mallard with a fuselage shaped like a speedboat hull, and designed from the start for water operations, is a FLYING BOAT, isn't it?
Andy Hayes
Great Falls MT