Pathetic Spain

[BornAgainPagan]

Excellent post ATL2CDG.

It is ironic that the "Love America or leave crowd" doesn't realize that this idea is unpatriotic to the core. History shows that "love it or work to change it" is much closer to patriotism than the aforementioned mantra from the glassy eyed Captain America's of this country.

America, love it, love it and change it, hate it and change it or shut up.

_______________________

Good for Spain and the courage of her new Prime Minister! Any cowardice is from the lame duck that caved to pressure from the US inspite of the majority of Spain's peoples being against Bush's invasion.

 

[kevdog]

Come on guys, everyone knows the US of A is perfect and that's the reason everyone hates us.

Of course the 270+ million Americans out of the 6+ billion in the world are superior. We are the master race and everyone else are just as stupid as the smelly French (who happened to support our war with Iraq 3 times more than the rest of the world by average).

Of course we have no problems at home like American bred terrorism, racism, corporate crimes, rape, police brutality, executing innocent criminals, homelessness, unemployment, obesity, inbreeding, murder, and ignorance...just to name a few.

 

[Tim47SIP]

Kevvy

Of course we have no problems at home like American bred terrorism, racism, corporate crimes, rape, police brutality, executing innocent criminals, homelessness, unemployment, obesity, inbreeding, murder, and ignorance...just to name a few.

Ya, and no other country in the world has the same issues. Wake up!

 

[CLCAP]

Norway for one.....hmm Denmark as well I think....how about Holland? What country (except for thirld world countries) has ALL these problems?

And - here's another one of Rummys foot in mouths:

http://www.moveon.org/censure/caughtonvideo/

 

[tele_pilot]

Regarding our "invasion" of sovereign Iraq; It was Iraq who invaded Kuwait, our response was a continution of the first war to which Saddam did not live up to his end of the agreement.

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

Bush and the United States should be very proud of Spain. They used the principles of democracy and freedom to influence their election.

Reportedly, upwards of 80% of the Spanish citizens were against sending troops to Iraq. The government sent them anyway. The negative consequences of sending the troops was the subway bombing.

The vast majority of citizens that didn't want their troops in Iraq, then voted the government out. Democracy, and freedom, in action. That's what Bush says he supports, and that's what we (the US) are supposed to be fighting for.

This also illustrates an interesting concept for the American public. Compared to the rest of the world, America is very conservative.

Europe has a wide range of popular attitudes, from far-right conservative, to far-left liberal. The US, overall, ranges from conservative to far-right conservative.

All of the large media outlets, on TV and in print, are conservative. They are all for maintaining the status quo, business is usual.

My friends tell me CNN stands for "Clinton News Network". I agree. CNN and Clinton are both conservative. Clinton is more conservative than Nixon. If Nixon were running today, his views would fit with the mainstream Democratic conservative views.

Cliff
ELP

 

[Snoopy58]

Democracy, and freedom, in action.

The terrorists change the outcome of an election (every poll before the bombing predicted Aznar would be reelected), and that's what you call it?

Unbelievable.

And sad. Approaching pathetic.

Call it whatever you want. One could just as well say that the US ranges from conservative to liberal, and Europe ranges from moderate-conservative to communist. You're absolutely correct that US Democrats are more conservative than many if not most European political parties, but there is a great deal of value in many of the things that the Euro-socialists have abandoned in their "sophisticated" move leftward. Things like backbone.

Next time terrorists murder hundreds immediately prior to a national election, ask yourself if they think they can influence the election that way. Then ask youself if the brave Spanish voters might have had anything to do with that perception.

Reward mass murder with favorable voting, what do you think you're going to get? Fewer terrorist bombings, or more?

Or is that just "democracy and freedom, in action" for you?

 

[amaineiac]

Reward mass murder with favorable voting, what do you think you're going to get? Fewer terrorist bombings, or more?

Or is that just "democracy and freedom, in action" for you?

Who could have predicted appeasement wouldn't work? Don't they have history books over there?

By going out and arresting all those savages, they brought it on themselves. Maybe they should have come up with a resolution denouncing the removal of Saddam, announce a mandate that islam as now the national religion, and rounding up and kill all the non-believers. I'm sure if they do that, there won't be any more terrorist attacks over there.

 

[100LL... Again!]

Okay then,


___________________________________
It's the conservative arrogance such as yours (the mentality of 'If you don't think exactly like me, you're not a real American') that is fracturing this nation to its core.
___________________________________

I submit that you would cede unacceptable levels of our sovereignty by capitulating/appeasing foreign opinion.

___________________________________
Why do you think liberals are up in arms at the moment? One reason is because of egocentric individuals such as yourself questioning our loyalty and 'patriotism'.
___________________________________

Liberals are mostly globalists. If you are not, point in your favor. Litmus test: Are you in fovor of the world court and global taxes?

___________________________________
I hate war. I hate death. I hate the destruction of homes, businesses and places of worship. I hate the flaunting of law, both domestic and international. I hate extremism in any form.
___________________________________

Apologies for being pedantic, but the word you meant to use is 'flout'. (No flame, correct me where necessary, my usage is not always perfect.)

The US should always act in its own interest, and according to its own values. "International law" is a highly subjective concept. Look at it this way. You and I are equal under the law in ths country. If I egg your car, you invoke the law (legal right), and call the cops (legal mechanism), and have me arrested, and then sue me (civil procedure) to recoup. You are not legally entitled to take these actions into your own hand, right. (Some folks do, but that is beside the point).

In other words, the government is a 'higher body' who administers the law between legal equals.

International Law is not like this. International Law is whatever the independant nations agree on. We can enter and leave treaties as we see fit, as can other nations. You and I cannot do the same with our own legal system. We can only change the laws to which we are subjected by legislative procedure. Voting and activism, essentially.

Globalists want a GLOBAL GOVERNMENT that would be similar to how the E.U. is structured. The U.S would lose much of its sovereignty in this situation. I don't trust the international community (essentially the UN) enough to hand over this power, even ONE LITTLE BIT.


---------------------------------
He supported the right to burn Old Glory in protest.
---------------------------------
Your opinion, or did he say this to you explicitly?

Flag burning is not speech, by the way, it is expression, a distinction the founding fathers were quite familiar with. The idea that all expression is speech is a modern perversion of this particular right.

 

[100LL... Again!]

---------------------------------
He highlighted the importance of the rule of law, not of the rule of a man. He advocated free, vibrant and open political dialogue from all points on the spectrum. I know all about honor, country and valor; a uniform and blind allegiance do NOT equal these things - the courage to stand up for what I believe, in defense of those that cannot utter the words, is a closer approximation than what you would have me believe.
---------------------------------

And I don't think that weakening our country to participate in an international popularity contest is very patriotic, either.

---------------------------------
You speak of me 'demean[ing] those who protect [my] freedom'. I have nothing but the utmost respect for those valient men and women serving on the frontline. While I may hate what they must do, I recognize and value the price that thousands have paid for my right to desent.
---------------------------------
There is little more noble than a veteran. Even if they didn't want to go, the fact that they did is enough. Also 'dissent' is the word you meant to use.


---------------------------------
G.W. Bush has done little to protect my freedoms and country.
---------------------------------

Until you get the same security and intelligence briefings that he does, you and I cannot offer much more than opinion on this point.

---------------------------------
He has order innocent soldiers and officers to violate the fundemental right that the U.S.A. has fought so long to protect: the sovernreignty of a nation, the respect and recognition of a government.
---------------------------------

Your use of the word innocent is kind of embarrassing, but anyway...

The fundamental values of this country is preservation of life and liberty, and rule of law. Preserving another nation's sovereignty is not really high on that list, if it runs counter to our need to secure our own rights.

Additionally, since no one could argue that saddam was legitimately elected, we are not treading on the sovereignty of the Iraqi citizens (no matter how they choose to see it), since we aim to install REAL representative government, with an emphasis on human rights. Anyone who thinks Bush wants to permanently occupy Iraq is a LOON. Hence, even though we invaded Iraq, we are returning power to the citizenry, while removing a bloodthirtsy dictator. Personally, I would rather live under a dictatorship run by GWB than saddam any day (given only a choice between the two). Wouldn't you? GWB is a pretty nice guy, even if you all think he is the Antichrist.

 

[100LL... Again!]

_____________________________________
He, without justification, provocation or authentication, invaded a sovereign nation, deposed its government and occupied its borders. Saddam Hussein is irrelevant. If another country invaded us, overthrew our government and controlled our country, we'd be up in arms. We have no right to wage war on a country and people who pose no threat to our soil or our citizens. NO evidence of WMD has been found. NO links between Iraqis government and Al-Queda have been proven. NO threat existed.
_____________________________________

"Saddam is irrelevant". How utterly convenient.

Ummm, apparently you missed four or five articles in European newspapers detailing Al Queda's travels to Iraq. CNN won't mention this, of course. Also Abu Nidal was in Baghdad, where saddam was attempting to recruit him.

As far as the WMD's go, again, no one disputed his PLANS TO OBTAIN THEM. Clinton categorically stated that given the opportunity, saddam would obtain and use them against the US.
Perhaps you are willing to wait until we has fully developed weapons before we take action. Personally, I think anyone who holds their fire while their enemy reloads is an idiot.

_____________________________________
I never denied a threat existed; I oppose the manner in which that threat is being handled. War begets war. Death begets death. Hate begets hate. Since the 'war on terrorism' began, I've seen little positive change in muslim extremists beliefs or desires; doesn't that tell you something?
_____________________________________

Yes. It tells me that they hate us no matter what we do, and that appeasement is a road to more trouble. I am sorry that you are such a fan of this method. Therefore, it falls to those who have the intestinal fortitude to take the bull by the horns and fight them, rather than waging a defensive law-enforcement style war, counting on the odds being in your favor that you won't be one of the unlucky ones to suffer under the next attack.

Frankly, if you want to argue against war on any other grounds, I at least can say that it is your opinion that I disagree with.

However, the idea that we should not take this action because it will make our enemies madder smacks of the most craven type of cowardice that I can think of. Cringing and whining, not wanting to deal with the bully head-on.
I don't careif Bush makes them madder. He is also making them deader.

By the way, I do not hate them. I recognize their implacability, and therefore realize that an enemy such as this cannot be negotiated with. Don't tell me who I hate, please.

Also your "war begets war..." spare me the platitudes. You know what a platitude is, don't you?



____________________________________
I see the reality. Our government's handling of the situation is what repulses and terrifies me. Can you really blame the extremists for their anger (not their actions; nothing justifies the killing of innocents)? The U.S. has time and time again bled the Arab world and its Islamic people. Time and time again the U.S. forced its ideas and its culture on a people unwilling and unable to accept them. I don't need you to help me see that too many in the U.S. are convinced that 'it's our way or the highway.' Not everyone wants to drive an SUV, smoke Marlboro's, drink Budweiser and go to church only on Easter and Christmas. This is a BIG world and there thousands of different beliefs, ideas, cultures and dreams.
____________________________________

Just beacause we know the reason why they are angry does not mean we should avoid angering them. Just beacause there is a reason for their anger does not mean it is JUSTIFIED. We need to do what is right and to H*LL with their opinion. See above point.
Perhaps we should not arrest criminals, since it obviously 'angers' them.

When did we 'bleed' the arab world? Give me TWO examples.

------------------------------
You're not fighting terror; you're fighting a global movement of hatred towards the imposition of 'the American dream' and the Christian faith. The extremists are sick of us flooding their countries with missionaries, Coca-Cola and Britney Spears. Imagine how you would feel if, in a non-violent manner, thousands of Hindu missionaries flooded your home state, while Perrier was forced in your face and 400 lbs opera singers graced billboards all around? We need to let these people lead their lives the way they want and quit fostering the hatred and disgust they have for us.
------------------------------

This old line? You can get the kiddies down at the Jr. High to buy this, but you and I BOTH know this argument is entirely specious. You sounded logical, if misinformed, but are now entering the realm of delusion.

The actions of American (and Western European) corporations are beyond my control. First of all, you could not force this commercialization on people unless they want to buy it, deplorable as large corporations are.

Besides, this is a red herring. This is their publicly stated reason. It gives self-loathing Americans something to flagellate themselves over.

The real reason: Our VERY EXISTENCE is offensive to them. Even if we reeled in every Coke Machine and Blockbuster Video and stopped exporting our (crappy) Hollywood output, they would STILL hate us. Do some research if you do not believe me.

They will not be satisfied until we are a muslim nation (one of Bin Laden's demands, in case you didn't know).

By the way, did you know that one of the reasons bin laden is so mad was the presence of the US military on saudi soil during the gulf war? even though our presence was WELCOMED by the saudi government. Not to mentioned the Kuwaiti people who were spared a terrible life under saddam. I suppose you would have liked to use sanctions there, too.

______________________________
Get over your latte-laden dream image of liberals. We're not the only one's that 'chatter', as you put it - just tune in to FOXNews. Conservatives are known for flapping their jaws too. Neither side has it right. Neither side is perfect. Neither side will 'win'.
______________________________

We all know this. The right is MORE right than the left in this case, however.

____________________________
There is nothing shameful with desent. George Washington and thousand of British colonists desented again the British Crown. Abraham Lincoln desented again the bigots. Roosevelt desented against the tide of facism and imperalism. Jesus desented against the Romans and the elite Jewish priesthood. Desent is a right and, to a degree, a patriotic thing to do. I'm sorry you feel that we should all be blind sheep to the government, but my pity is not going to change how I feel.
____________________________

I am not a blind sheep to the gov't. I like Bush because he does what I WANT to see happen. When he does things I do NOT like, I criticize him. Illegal immigrant issue, for example. What the heck is he thinking?

 

[100LL... Again!]

I'm sorry your irrational hatred of Bush blinds you to some of the good he is doing.

Remember, Churchill was the ONLY European leader who saw Hitler as a threat. Took a lot of flack for it, too.

I know which side you would be cozing up to during the ramp-up to WWII. Not an insult, you see, but mere probability.

Most of Europe was fooled. Odds are, you would have been one of them. Your self-assuredness on this issue makes me see why it would have been so.

Thank GOD for GWB and his determination to do what is right no matter what.

 

[GogglesPisano]

ATLguy - get the he11 out of my country. I'm buying.



Liberals are generally cowards that are unable to see it.

You have no concept of honor, country, or valor.

There are fates worse than death. The life of a craven coward is one.

You demean those who protect your freedoms and country (such as GWB), because you are too afraid to fight for those freedoms.

You mollify this cowardice by pretending that 'no real threat exists'.

I can't make you see a reality that repulses and terrifies you.

I don't want to fight terror because I am afraid that "they'll get me". I want to fight terror because t is the RIGHT THING TO DO.

This is something liberals are psychologically incapable of understanding. Their idea of the 'right thing to do' is anything that keeps them safley drinking lattes as members of the elite chattering class. Even as soldiers die for ther freedoms.

Ungrateful, and shameful.

Thank you Col Jessup. BTW, did you order the Code Red?

 

[100LL... Again!]

You're DA** right I did!!


What's going on here?

 

[ATL2CDG]

LL100... Again et al.:


*sigh*

You're right.

I'm wrong.

I am a blind, unintelligent, moralless, spineless, ungrateful excuse of a human and I have no right to plague your country.

To honor your wishes and your offer for assistance, I'll take a check made to 'CASH' in the order of 50,000$US in order to cover my divorce, settle all outstanding debts and start a new life in a country worthy of my horrible existence.

If you are unable to provide said check, I ask that you:

Stop your flaming hatred for different opinions;
Learn that everyone doesn't think like or agree with you;
Understand that, as for the moment, this is still a 'free nation';
Not insult or berate an individual and his/her beliefs of which you have little to no knowledge; and
Take yourself and your compatriots out the an isolated corner of the Nevada desert and start whatever little war-gamish, Budweiser-induced authoritarian regime you desire and leave the rest of civilization alone.

That's right; ask God to bless Bush and his administration. I fear that come Judgement Day (should there ever be one), they'll need all the help they can get.

*sigh*

I hate spewing crap like this, but unfortunately, it's the only way to talk to people like you. You hate people with thoughts of peace. You hate people with an education. You hate people that are open to different ideas and cultures. You hate the rule of law. You want to deify your conservative figureheads, spit upon their liberal counterparts and act like yours is the only way. You think that the military is the ONLY way of life and that those who choose not to serve are cowards and disgraces to America. You watch your FOXNews and think 'this is the world.' You completely fail to understand that there are 6 billion other people on the planet and the vast majority of them think NOTHING like you. Yet, your way is the only way.

*sigh*

There is so much I want to say, but I mind is going fast than my hands.

To try to bring this to a close, you and I are different. We will, under all like circumstances, will never think the same on the topic at hand. I'm going to shoot words of peace, understanding, tolerance and diplomacy and you're going to retaliate with words of war, unpatriotic, ingratitude, lazy and weak. Notice the two different approachs? I look at the issue; you look at the person.

I'm sorry I don't agree with you. 8 years agao when I was a page for the US House, I would have been right behind you cheering the whole way. But, at some point, I changed (you'd probably call it 'turned into a p*ssy). I don't know what caused the change. Maybe it was my experiences in college. Maybe it was dating a French for a year and visiting a different culture. Maybe it was a really, really bad shot of vodka. I don't know. I really wish we could all agree and everyone was happy and safe. However, that will never happen. You'll never see me more than a pansy liberal. I'll never see you more than a war-mongering bigot.

C'est la vie, as the French say.

I can't and won't argue with you anymore. My wife is about to leave me. I have debt collectors at my door. I haven't had natural gas in my house in over a month. And I've been plagued with the worst case of food poisoning I've ever had for the past week and a half. No matter how much you hate me, no matter how horrible you may think I am, I will not return it. I pity you. There is an incredibly beautiful, amazing world out there, and, much like my poor mother, you refuse to even listen to the other side. You refuse to understand that Saudi Arabia and Jordan will never be democratic federal republics, like you U.S. You fail to grasp the concept that the more countries we invade and the more cultures we destroy, the more we're going to p*ss people off. You just want to have your SUV, your wide screen TV and your Bible at your side. That's fine. Have those things. Live your life the way you want. Enjoy your world, your dark, cold cave.

So, to wrap it up, when can I expect your check?

TysV

 

[100LL... Again!]

You throw the word hatred around very liberally, don't you?

I love peace. I hate war. But I know that war is sometimes required. You can't love your way out of every situation.

I drive a 13 year old economy car on purpose. I do not own a TV. I do not watch sports. I volunteer to help the less fortunate. I give a fair percentage of my monthly income to various charities. (Some religeous, some not). My material possesions would all fit in a medium-sized bedroom, other than my car.

I do not own a gun. I seldom drink.

I have close friends of several different races and religions, including atheists.

I am usually in the lowest tax category every year, due to my consistently poor paying pilot jobs. (No complaints, just stating facts).

I LOVE the rule of law. Liberals hate it. Your favorite president, bill clinton, issued more executive orders than any president in recent history. By a wide margin. He invoked executive privilege WAY more times than Bush has.

I watch FOX news maybe once every month or so. I listen to rush limbaugh once every 6 or 7 months, if someone else happens to have him on.

See how many of your assumptions were wrong?

And a correction: I have respect for well-reasoned opinions, no matter how incorrect I may feel they are. I respect intellectual honesty, which is not an inherent characteristic of either conservatives or liberals, but of the person individually.

But your assertion that America desires to enforce its lifestyle on the rest of the world is such a shopworn peice of liberal dogma that you should be embarrassed to think anyone believes that.

Do I want to go around killing people willy-nilly? Of course not.

The need to stamp out terrorists exists becausse we must not shirk our responsibilities to protect freedom. Cringing and hoping that appeasement will cause them to leave us alone will never work. It is not necessary to kill every terrorist to win this war. We must show them that their cause is unwinnable. You must break their spirit.

Why did the japanese finally surrender at the end of WWII?
They saw NO possibility of winning. Did any of them suicide bomb us after that? Nope. We broke them. They could not envision victory any longer, and they gave up the fight.

This is the only way to stop terrorism.

The fear is on the side of the appeasers. You will meet few people in your life who are less afraid of terrorism than I am.
First of all, I trust God to protect me (laugh if you like, but he has before). But even if it is my time to go, I know where I am going. So what's to be afraid of?

Terrorism must be fought because good people must not lay down and let evil people have their way with the innocents of this world. If you had your way, I suppose saddam would stil;l be in power, and he would still be trampling all over the human rights of his citizens. All to satisfy your your compulsive need to worship the chimera that is 'international law'.

I'd rather have the whole world hate me and know that what I am doing is right, then have them approve of me and know I sold out.

Don't forget, the majority of Iraqi citizens feel that they are better off now than before the war.

You are so blinded by your distaste for conservatives that you refuse to see the many successes happening every day in Iraq.
The good there is definitely outweighing the bad, but I don't think you want to know that.

All I know is this: The rape rooms and mass graves are closed in Iraq. A corrupt food-for-oil program is no longer depriving the Iraqis of their basic needs. Saddam's bid to restart his nuke program is over. The Kurds won't be gassed again. The Marsh Arabs will likely have their wetlands restored to them. Saddam is no longer offering $25K to palestinian suicide bomber's families.

Bet you didn't know this: Iraqi infrastructue is now operating at a higher level than before the war began. Teachers are free to develop their own curriculums. The press is free.

But all this really doesn't matter to the liberals.

No, they spin the reason Bush wanted this war into one of the most loathesome accusations possible.

I have a stack of newspaper articles at home that is over an inch thick, with nothing but good news from Iraq. Is there bad news? Yes. But there is more good than bad. Why is this not acknowledged?

It is so the leftist demogogue machine can continue its attack on America's strength until it succumbs to global government.

You are an unwitting tool of that effort.

Sad.


--------------

Incidentally, I have no intention of dethroning Surplus1 as the king of the long post. This is an abberation for me. Much to the delight of some, I am certain. This is what happens when you get 4 off in a row.

 

[UpNDownGuy]

Back on target...

To kind of break this down to the lowest common denominator: Spain got rid of the government that let the attacks happen in the first place!!! Hello!!!! McFly??? It's called "failure", and it was rewarded in the correct manner: How about somebody else give it a try? Can we draw any similar comparisions to the US political situation?

ATL2CDG: Thank you for providing a reasoned discourse. You're absolutely correct of course; you don't have to love Dubya to be a good American. In the same vein, thinking Dubya is the worst excuse for a President we've ever had doesn't make you a liberal. It just means you have standards for the Presidency somewhat higher than plankton. I am in that latter category. I'd love to vote for an honest Republican. Instead my choice is plankton, so I'm voting Kerry. Or Hillary. Or Satan. Anybody but the present moron.

rumpletumbler: You are a punk. Why don't you do something in aviation, anything at all, before you open your cake-hole? Better yet, go to work with me for a day, when I fly the young men and women to Kuwait. Go ahead, talk to them. It's a 5, 6 or 8 hour flight. You'll meet some of the finest people you've ever met in your life. Get to know them, and ask yourself if their lives are worth risking in Iraq. Ask yourself why they aren't going to Afghanistan to deal with Al-Qaida, the REAL front in the war on terror. Even better, get within arms reach of me and equate anti-Bush with coward.


People seem hung up on Spain's vote as a "victory" for terrorism. I have trouble connecting the dots myself. The people didn't want to go to Iraq; the government did so anyway. The people expected protection against terrorists; the government failed.

As Donny Trump is so fond of saying: You're fired!!!

 

[Snoopy58]

The victory for terrorism was that before the mass murder, there was essentially zero indication that the voters were going to remove Aznar, despite their disagreement with his actions in Iraq. Before the bombings, voters were going to retain him. After the bombings, they fired him. The terrorists wanted him gone. They got what they wanted, by means of mass murder.

Think they'll try that again?

Pathetic Spain.

 

[ATL2CDG]

Snoopy58:

And your ignorance on this matter shines.

Aznar was not up for reelection. No matter the outcome of the Spanish parlimentary elections, Aznar was not going to be prime minister again.

The question at hand was the popularity of Aznar's political party. I'm not sure from where you got your information, but polls both before and after the attacks showed his party was on the verge of loss. It held a slim lead in some polls; it was far behind in others.

The people, for whatever reason, choose to not give his conservative party the reigns again. Was the cause the rail bombings? No. Were they a cause? Most certainly. However, I can assure you that the highly unpopular participation of the Spanish military in Iraq, the continually faltering economy and the conservative government's failure to settle the issue of Basque separatism weighed more heavily on the minds of the electorate.

Before making rash assumptions about the voting patterns of another country, I would highly recommend that you study the topic a bit more. The Spanish people voted for a change. It was democracy in action. And I'm happy to say that we in America will experience the same in a few months. Will Bush or Kerry be victorious? Who knows. However, with nearly 80% of the voting population participating in the recent Spanish elections, I would dare to say that the forecasted miserable 45% turnout expected in the U.S. will have many people say 'pathetic America.'

TysV

 

[Snoopy58]

From the Wall Street Journal:

On this March 11, 2004, Europe lived its own September 11, the horror of Manhattan all over again.

Except this time the assassins can proclaim they have won. It took them three days to sway popular opinion. The Popular Party of Jose María Aznar, the expected winner, got trounced. "Punished!" they said. But by whom? What's the point of political campaigns, meetings, reports, programs and debates if within a few hours, the bombing of packed train cars can reverse the result? This final landslide, which no polls had predicted, is entirely due to the Atocha station catastrophe and the terror it spread. How could the terrorists not assume that they are the decision-makers, and that terrorism is now stronger than democracy? If the Socialists brought to govern Spain keep their pledge (made before the massacre) to withdraw from Iraq, they will confirm the killers' innermost conviction: Crime pays--and the greater the horror, the more efficiently.

"But of course not," object the wishful thinkers, Mr. Aznar lost because his alliance with George W. Bush was unpopular. Nonsense! The alliance was just as unpopular three days before the elections, but the Popular Party was still favored then, and his opponents did not hope to win back many "antiwar votes." Without the bombs, without the bloodbath, the shouts of "Aznar assassin" would have sounded ludicrous. But Madrid's ground zero panicked the minds and awoke the demagogues, ready to invert responsibility. Were there not already weak minds--Lenin's "useful idiots"--who eagerly claimed that Mr. Bush and the CIA had planned the fall of the Twin Towers? [/COLOR]

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004848

"Democracy in action?" No, that is terror-induced panic in action. That you cheer it is sad, sad testimony about you.