Vuelta cancelled ?

[B. Lafferty]

"Dan Gregory" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Howard Kveck" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:YOURhoward-
> [email protected]...
> >In article <[email protected]>,
> > Curtis L. Russell <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:45:56 GMT, Howard Kveck <YOURhoward@h-
> > > SHOESbomb.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >It seems pretty unlikely to have been an ETA
> > > >operation, as they've
> never
> > > >mounted an operation that has caused this kind of
> > > >damage (in terms of casualties and property).
> Interesting now that they have arrested Moroccans and
> Indians (a mobile phone which failed to detonate one of
> the bombs had contact numbers on the SIM card). Will Aznar
> and his right wing anti Batasuna clique lose the
> election?? Agur Dan Gregory
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-
> virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.615 /
> Virus Database: 394 - Release Date: 08/03/04

The election could play out either way from this. I'll bet
there are some security folks with the TdF who are less than
happy with the prospect of al
Q. or its minions operating so close.

 

[Alex]

Today he (and his designated candidate Rajoy) just lost the
national elections (in fact I think he would have been
beaten even more badly if he had participated himself).

The socialist party (PSOE) has won the elections in Spain,
together with spectacular ascent of a key regional party in
Catalonia. The era of neo-franquism (do you call it neo-
con?) is over (at least for the next 4 years).

BTW:

The PSOE has promised to repatriate spanish forces from Iraq
and reestablish the traditional cooperation with the leading
european countries (France and Germany). Ciao, ciao
coalitions of the willing Good luck!

If George W Bush wants him, we could send him Aznar (and his
incompetent government) in an express package. I hope this
is only a sign of what is yet to come in the USA...

Cheers, Alex.

"Richard Adams" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Dan Gregory wrote:
>
> > "Howard Kveck" <[email protected]> wrote in
> > message news:YOURhoward-
> > [email protected]...
> >
> >>In article <[email protected]>,
> >> Curtis L. Russell <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:45:56 GMT, Howard Kveck <YOURhoward@h-
> >>>SHOESbomb.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>It seems pretty unlikely to have been an ETA
> >>>>operation, as they've
> >
> > never
> >
> >>>>mounted an operation that has caused this kind of
> >>>>damage (in terms of casualties and property).
> >
> > Interesting now that they have arrested Moroccans and
> > Indians (a mobile phone which failed to detonate one of
> > the bombs had contact numbers on
the
> > SIM card). Will Aznar and his right wing anti Batasuna
> > clique lose the election??
>
> Fat chance. Aznar is extremely popular and quick results
> (rounding up 5 suspects) is a sign they get things done.
>
> ETA, if they have any brains at all, would take this
> past week as a hint that they've got nothing to
> accomplish and everything to lose if they do another
> bombing. Time for them to see the writing on the wall
> and pursue peaceful means.

 

[B. Lafferty]

"alex" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Today he (and his designated candidate Rajoy) just lost
> the national elections (in fact I think he would have been
> beaten even more badly if he had participated himself).
>
> The socialist party (PSOE) has won the elections in Spain,
> together with spectacular ascent of a key regional party
> in Catalonia. The era of neo-franquism (do you call it neo-
> con?) is over (at least for the next 4 years).
>
> BTW:
>
> The PSOE has promised to repatriate spanish forces from
> Iraq and
reestablish
> the traditional cooperation with the leading european
> countries (France
and
> Germany). Ciao, ciao coalitions of the willing
> Good luck!
>
> If George W Bush wants him, we could send him Aznar (and
> his incompetent government) in an express package. I hope
> this is only a sign of what is
yet
> to come in the USA...
>
> Cheers, Alex.
>
>
> "Richard Adams" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Dan Gregory wrote:
> >
> > > "Howard Kveck" <[email protected]> wrote in
> > > message news:YOURhoward-
> > > [email protected]...
> > >
> > >> In article
> > >> <[email protected]>,
> > >>Curtis L. Russell <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>>On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 07:45:56 GMT, Howard Kveck <YOURhoward@h-
> > >>>SHOESbomb.com> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>>>It seems pretty unlikely to have been an ETA
> > >>>>operation, as they've
> > >
> > > never
> > >
> > >>>>mounted an operation that has caused this kind of
> > >>>>damage (in terms
of
> > >>>>casualties and property).
> > >
> > > Interesting now that they have arrested Moroccans and
> > > Indians (a
mobile
> > > phone which failed to detonate one of the bombs had
> > > contact numbers on
> the
> > > SIM card). Will Aznar and his right wing anti Batasuna
> > > clique lose the election??
> >
> > Fat chance. Aznar is extremely popular and quick results
> > (rounding up 5 suspects) is a sign they get things done.
> >
> > ETA, if they have any brains at all, would take this
> > past week as a hint that they've got nothing to
> > accomplish and everything to lose if they do another
> > bombing. Time for them to see the writing on the wall
> > and pursue peaceful means.

The cries of the Spanish protesters, "Your war. Our
dead" at Aznar should be used here in the US against the
Bush Junta. .

 

[Top Sirloin]

alex wrote:

> Today he (and his designated candidate Rajoy) just lost
> the national elections (in fact I think he would have been
> beaten even more badly if he had participated himself).
>
> The socialist party (PSOE) has won the elections in Spain,
> together with spectacular ascent of a key regional party
> in Catalonia. The era of neo-franquism (do you call it neo-
> con?) is over (at least for the next 4 years).

It's interesting that the left in Spain decried the attack
on Iraq because there was no connection to international
terrorism, yet immediately blame Spanish involvement in Iraq
for an attack by Al-Qaeda. I guess consistency isn't one of
their virtues, rather convenience.

After an attack by the Islamists, the American response was
"Let's Roll".

The Spanish was "Let's Roll Over".

Enjoy your life as a hostage.

--
Scott Johnson / scottjohnson at kc dot rr dot com

 

[Alex Rodriguez]

In article
<TK24c.15539$%[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

>However, no matter who is responsible, this will cause some
>rather sleepless nights for organizers of all three major
>tours. You don't need 10 or so bombs to end a tour. One car
>bomb would do the trick quite nicely and I have a
>recollection that there are thousands of cars parked along
>the routes of the tours.

Are the tours an attractive target for terrorists?
-------------
Alex

 

[Alex Rodriguez]

In article
<[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...

>if it was ETA, then they've done something very stupid.
>what surprises me (and makes me doubt it was them,
>regardless of the hysterics of the PP) mostly is the scale
>- they've been a kind of mickey mouse outfit ever since the
>cease fire ended, and all of the idealogues and brains left
>the organization. they've been more mafia than sepratists
>since then.

Some say it was a cooperative effort between ETA and some
other better organized terrorist group. Maybe ETA didn't
realize what it was getting into. Pretty foolish of them if
that is the case.
--------------
Alex

 

[Kyle Legate]

Top Sirloin wrote:
> alex wrote:
>
>> Today he (and his designated candidate Rajoy) just lost
>> the national elections (in fact I think he would have
>> been beaten even more badly if he had participated
>> himself).
>>
>> The socialist party (PSOE) has won the elections in
>> Spain, together with spectacular ascent of a key regional
>> party in Catalonia. The era of neo-franquism (do you call
>> it neo-con?) is over (at least for the next 4 years).
>
> It's interesting that the left in Spain decried the attack
> on Iraq because there was no connection to international
> terrorism, yet immediately blame Spanish involvement in
> Iraq for an attack by Al-Qaeda. I guess consistency isn't
> one of their virtues, rather convenience.
>
They appear to be correct, though.

 

[B. Lafferty]

"Top Sirloin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> alex wrote:
>
> > Today he (and his designated candidate Rajoy) just lost
> > the national elections (in fact I think he would have
> > been beaten even more badly if
he
> > had participated himself).
> >
> > The socialist party (PSOE) has won the elections in
> > Spain, together with spectacular ascent of a key
> > regional party in Catalonia. The era of neo-franquism
> > (do you call it neo-con?) is over (at least for the next
> > 4 years).
>
> It's interesting that the left in Spain decried the attack
> on Iraq because there was no connection to international
> terrorism, yet immediately blame Spanish involvement in
> Iraq for an attack by Al-Qaeda. I guess consistency isn't
> one of their virtues, rather convenience.
>
> After an attack by the Islamists, the American response
> was "Let's Roll".
>
> The Spanish was "Let's Roll Over".
>
> Enjoy your life as a hostage.
>
> --
> Scott Johnson / scottjohnson at kc dot rr dot com

Don't let facts get in the way of your beliefs.
1. No links between al Q. and Iraq.
2. Attacking Iraq in has not made the world safer from
terrorism (US Government assessments).

There are more ways to skin the terrorism cat than by war
that makes billions for the MIC, as the Spanish Socialist
leadership has pointed out. Or as a friend of mine in Baton
Rouge said, "Ya don't need a shotgun to kill a mosquito."

 

[Callistus Valer]

> Are the tours an attractive target for terrorists?
> -------------

one claymore could cripple cycling in europe. now
that Spain has shown that violence works, expect
more violence.

 

[Top Sirloin]

Kyle Legate wrote:
> Top Sirloin wrote:
>
>>It's interesting that the left in Spain decried the attack
>>on Iraq because there was no connection to international
>>terrorism, yet immediately blame Spanish involvement in
>>Iraq for an attack by Al-Qaeda. I guess consistency isn't
>>one of their virtues, rather convenience.
>>
>
> They appear to be correct, though.

They were correct on which assertion?

--
Scott Johnson / scottjohnson at kc dot rr dot com

 

[Top Sirloin]

B. Lafferty wrote:

> Don't let facts get in the way of your beliefs.
> 1. No links between al Q. and Iraq.

www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2004/02/040212-
al-zarqawi.htm ?

> 2. Attacking Iraq in has not made the world safer from
> terrorism (US Government assessments).

It's really difficult to prove that something _didn't_
happen because of something we did.

Colin Powell said in 2002 that we'd judge our success in
Iraq by what doesn't happen, not by what does.

> There are more ways to skin the terrorism cat than by war
> that makes billions for the MIC, as the Spanish Socialist
> leadership has pointed out.

That's right, you can always appease the enemy and hope
you're the last one killed.

Of course, Spain can expect more bombings as soon as the
suspects in custody are put on trial as a reminder of their
new status as Al-Qaeda's *****.

--
Scott Johnson / scottjohnson at kc dot rr dot com

 

[Trg]

Top Sirloin wrote:
> Kyle Legate wrote:
>> Top Sirloin wrote:
>>
>>> It's interesting that the left in Spain decried the
>>> attack on Iraq because there was no connection to
>>> international terrorism, yet immediately blame Spanish
>>> involvement in Iraq for an attack by Al-Qaeda. I guess
>>> consistency isn't one of their virtues, rather
>>> convenience.
>>>
>>
>> They appear to be correct, though.
>
> They were correct on which assertion?
Both assertions. There WAS no connection between Islamic
fundamentalist terrorism/Al Qaeda and Saddam's Iraq. Now
that the iron fist of Saddam is gone and the place is up for
grabs, Al Qaeda sees a great chance to turn the place into a
fundamentalist country and a real breeding ground for new
terrorists. Attack Spain and get them to withdraw.

 

[B. Lafferty]

"Top Sirloin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> B. Lafferty wrote:
>
> > Don't let facts get in the way of your beliefs.
> > 1. No links between al Q. and Iraq.
>
>
www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2004/02/040212-
al-zarqawi.htm
> ?

Nice try but not at all reliable. In case you've forgotten,
even George Bush has admitted that there was no evidence of
any link between Al. Q., Saddam regarding 9/11. Further
there has been no evidence of any relationship between al Q.
and Saddam other than mutual hatred and loathing.
>
> > 2. Attacking Iraq in has not made the world safer from
> > terrorism (US Government assessments).
>
> It's really difficult to prove that something _didn't_
> happen because of something we did.
>
> Colin Powell said in 2002 that we'd judge our success in
> Iraq by what doesn't happen, not by what does.

********. Intelligence analysists from every Western
European country and the United States have all said that
the threat from al Q. and related Islamic
extremist/terrorist organizations is greater now that before
the invasion of Afganistan. The CIA and DIA both concluded
and stated publicly that the invasion of Afganistan caused a
major dispersal of al Q. operatives throughout the near,
middle and far East. There was no presence of al Q. in Iraq
prior to the Coalition of the Willing's invasion, but there
sure is now and they may well be leading a fundamentalist
revolution. Does Iran and the fall of the Shah ring any
bells for you?

>
> > There are more ways to skin the terrorism cat than by
> > war that makes billions for the MIC, as the Spanish
> > Socialist leadership has pointed
out.
>
> That's right, you can always appease the enemy and hope
> you're the last one killed.

No one is talking about appeasing terrorists. That is a
dishonest straw-man argument offered up by you and Neo-Con
ideologues to increase fear and try to discredit anyone who
disagrees with them. Fighting terrorism is about
intelligence and surveilance, not oil wars to increase the
profits of the MIC and its friends.

>
> Of course, Spain can expect more bombings as soon as the
> suspects in custody are put on trial as a reminder of
> their new status as Al-Qaeda's *****.

We can all expect more terrorism until the root causes are
addressed. Poverty and exploitation in the name of
Westernized models of development (that don't benefit the
world's poor) will only breed more terrorists. It's a huge,
complex problem that Bush and the Neo-Cons have clearly
bungled in Iraq and at home via underfunding of security on
both national and local levels. Make certain you have lots
of duck tape and plastic wrap. You're going to need it.

 

[Top Sirloin]

B. Lafferty wrote:
> Fighting terrorism is about intelligence and surveilance,
> not oil wars to increase the profits of the MIC and its
> friends.

> We can all expect more terrorism until the root causes are
> addressed. Poverty and exploitation in the name of
> Westernized models of development (that don't benefit the
> world's poor) will only breed more terrorists. It's a
> huge, complex problem that Bush and the Neo-Cons have
> clearly bungled in Iraq and at home via underfunding of
> security on both national and local levels. Make certain
> you have lots of duck tape and plastic wrap. You're going
> to need it.

Dammit, you're right. All we need to do is find them and
give them a hug. They'll give up on their decades long war
of terror then!

--
Scott Johnson / scottjohnson at kc dot rr dot com

 

[Charles Hizark]

"Pippen" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<EG74c.7258$C51.57378@attbi_s52>...
> "Callistus Valerius" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:[email protected]
> hlink.net...
> > With a Spanish civil war on the horizon, and with
> > possibility of roadside bombs, I doubt if they will hold
> > the Vuelta this year. And maybe some
> route
> > changes in the TDF, in order to avoid the war zones in
> > the south.
> >

At this point it's really pretty ridiculous to postualate a
cancellation of the Vuelta. Spain is not Afghanistan, if the
chose to cancel Vuelta then they wuold be giving into the
terrorists.

>
> Yeah, I hear they are also canceling Easter, Christmas and
> my Birthday...
>
> -p

 

[Ryan Cousineau]

In article <[email protected]>,
"alex" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Today he (and his designated candidate Rajoy) just lost
> the national elections (in fact I think he would have been
> beaten even more badly if he had participated himself).
>
> The socialist party (PSOE) has won the elections in Spain,
> together with spectacular ascent of a key regional party
> in Catalonia. The era of neo-franquism (do you call it neo-
> con?) is over (at least for the next 4 years).
>
> BTW:
>
> The PSOE has promised to repatriate spanish forces from
> Iraq and reestablish the traditional cooperation with the
> leading european countries (France and Germany). Ciao,
> ciao coalitions of the willing Good luck!
>
> If George W Bush wants him, we could send him Aznar (and
> his incompetent government) in an express package. I hope
> this is only a sign of what is yet to come in the USA...

I am always gravely reluctant to address politics in non-
political newsgroups. It's a sign of moral weakness. But
I'll keep this short, and somewhat Vuelta-relevant.

Anyone thinking that now that Spain has overturned its
government (and this is apparently a huge upset; right up
until the bombing, the incumbents were polling in the lead)
it is safe from the hungry maw of Al Qaeda terror had best
recall that Bin Laden spoke of the "tragedy of Andalusia".
You know, that would be the conquest of Muslim Granada by
Ferdinand and Isabella, the fatal blow to imperial ambitions
in Europe by Muslims, at least until today.

http://slate.msn.com/id/1008411/

Now, back to bike racing: the Vuelta is a very symbolic
event in Spain, and terrorists like symbolism. But calling
off the Vuelta would be a sign of cowardice far more sure
than even the reddest Spaniard could tolerate. It will of
course run.

--
Ryan Cousineau, [email protected]
http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine/wiredcola/ President, Fabrizio
Mazzoleni Fan Club

 

[Robert Chung]

Ryan Cousineau wrote:
>
> I am always gravely reluctant to address politics in non-
> political newsgroups. It's a sign of moral weakness.
>
> Anyone thinking that now that Spain has overturned its
> government (and this is apparently a huge upset; right up
> until the bombing, the incumbents were polling in the
> lead) it is safe from the hungry maw of Al Qaeda terror

1. No one thinks that the election results make Spain safe
from terror -- at least, no one who has been following
the situation seriously.
2. The ruling party was polling ahead, but it was close.
3. The best way to view the vote is as a repudiation of
governmental dissembling, not as appeasement to
foreign terror.
4. You should continue to be reluctant to address
political issues.

 

[Howard Kveck]

In article <[email protected]>,
"Robert Chung" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Ryan Cousineau wrote:
> >
> > I am always gravely reluctant to address politics in non-
> > political newsgroups. It's a sign of moral weakness.
> >
> > Anyone thinking that now that Spain has overturned its
> > government (and this is apparently a huge upset; right
> > up until the bombing, the incumbents were polling in the
> > lead) it is safe from the hungry maw of Al Qaeda terror
>
> 1. No one thinks that the election results make Spain safe
> from terror -- at least, no one who has been following
> the situation seriously.
> 2. The ruling party was polling ahead, but it was close.
> 3. The best way to view the vote is as a repudiation of
> governmental dissembling, not as appeasement to foreign
> terror.
> 4. You should continue to be reluctant to address
> political issues.
>
>

A possible 3a: It could also be seen as a repudiation of
a government that failed to protect the country from a
terrorist attack.

--
tanx, Howard

Q: Why did the metalhead cross the road?
R: Because he's a gullible moron who'll buy
anything with a skull on it.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

 

[Howard Kveck]

In article <[email protected]>,
Top Sirloin <[email protected]> wrote:

> That's right, you can always appease the enemy and hope
> you're the last one killed.

Scott, The Spanish population was fine with trying to defeat
AQ in the months after 9-11 - they sent troops to
Afghanistan (and lost 62 in a plane crash). Public opinion
turned (and rather heavily) when the target became Iraq. It
seems they recognized that Iraq was a distraction (and
diverted time, people, money and any other resource you'd
care to name) from the battle that was already engaged.
Public opinion ran overwhelmingly against attacking Iraq,
and Aznar ran a risk going against that.

I think that saying that (by giving Aznar the shoulder)
the Spanish people have elected a group of "appeasers"
misses the mark. One of the first things (newly elected
PM) Zapatero said was that he was not letting up on the
battle against terrorism, and there's been no evidence
that he or his party will do anything but continue that
battle. Besides, Europe has far more experience with
dealing with terrorism over the last few decades - they
take it very seriously. As for the (apparently) new
problem of Islamic terror, they have more to worry about
on that front than we do simply because of proximity.

Al Qaeda has several goals, and I'd say that one is to
divide the western nations and isolate the US. On that
front, the Bush admin. has done a bang-up job of
accomplishing that goal for them.

--
tanx, Howard

Q: Why did the metalhead cross the road?
R: Because he's a gullible moron who'll buy
anything with a skull on it.

remove YOUR SHOES to reply, ok?

 

[Robert Chung]

Howard Kveck wrote:
>
>> 3. The best way to view the vote is as a repudiation of
>> governmental dissembling, not as appeasement to
>> foreign terror.
>
> A possible 3a: It could also be seen as a repudiation
> of a government that failed to protect the country from
> a terrorist attack.

I don't get that impression. Here's something that sorta
puts the election in context: http://www.salon.com/news/fea-
ture/2004/03/16/spain/index.html