Home > General > The war on terror and the war in Iraq

The war on terror and the war in Iraq

March 15th, 2004

The unexpected defeat of the Spanish Popular Party government has been attributed in part to the belief that by joining the US in the war in Iraq, Aznar raised Spain’s profile as a target for Al Qaeda ( which now seems most likely to have set the bomb)[1]. The same claim is being debated in Australia.

While there’s probably an element of truth in this, it misses the main point. Australia, Britain and other US allies were wrong to participate in the war in Iraq, not because it made us more prominent participants in the war on terrorism but because the Iraq war was irrelevant, and in important respects actively harmful, to the struggle against terrorism, represented most prominently by Al Qaeda.

fn1. This isn’t the only way in which the handling of the Madrid atrocity affected the outcome. The government’s rush to the judgement (seen as politically more favorable) that ETA was responsible was criticised by many, and contrasted with the refusal of the Socialist leadership to score political points.

The irrelevance of the Iraq war to the war on terrorism was evident to most observers even before it started. Even the Bush Administration, while it took every opportunity to insinuate that there were links between Saddam and Al Qaeda never made a categorical claim to that effect, by contrast with its clear assertions about WMDs.

The pursuit of irrelevant goals at the expense of urgent ones is harmful in itself. The Iraq venture has tied up much of the military resources of the US and its allies, which could have been used to follow through the initial victory over Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. Instead that country has been left to relapse into warlordism and, in some areas, Taliban control. More importantly, the Iraq war dissipated the huge resources of goodwill and credibility that were generated by the September 11 attacks.

But there has also been more active damage. The Iraq war, and the triumphalist and anti-Islamic attitudes of many of its supporters, particularly in the United States, played directly into the hands of the Al Qaeda propaganda machine, ever eager to claim direct continuity between the Western world and the Crusaders. Combined with the failure to apply any serious pressure on Sharon to settle the Israel-Palestine dispute (intense pressure was applied to the other side, resulting, among other things in the creation of the new post of Prime Minister, with the objective of sidelining Arafat), the Iraq war policy has greatly assisted the terrorists in collecting new recruits[2].
Worse still, the desire for war with Iraq has led the Bush Administration to make political decisions not to go after terrorists and their backers and arms suppliers where the result might be inconvenient for the coalition of the willing. This was pretty clearly the case in relation to Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. In the case of Pakistan, the situation was already tricky enough, between nuclear proliferation, the weakness and dubiousness of the regime and the near-certainty that bin Laden was hiding somewhere in the provinces but the need to secure support for, or at least acquiescence in, war with Iraq has meant that, until recently, little has been done on either front. The causes of the Administration’s softness on Saudi Arabia are many and varied, but again, unwillingness to risk an open breach before the Iraq war was clearly important.

Finally, and most disgracefully of all, there is the case of Abu Musab Zarqawi, the terrorist most probably responsible for the Karbala atrocity a week or so ago. For well over a year after the S11 attacks, Zarqawi’s group Ansar al-Islam was operating from a base inside the Kurdish controlled zone in Iraq, which was also part of the no-fly zone. The Pentagon drew up numerous plans for attacks on Zarqawi, but they were all vetoed on political grounds, according the NBC story linked here. There are various hypotheses about the precise grounds, all highly discreditable, but the most plausible is that a watertight plan would have required co-operation between US air forces, and Kurdish ground forces. This would have been most unpalatable to the Turkish government, which was being courted, up to the last minute, as a partner for the Iraq war[2]. So nothing was done, and by the time the camp was attacked at the beginning of the war, Zarqawi and most of his followers were gone.

To sum up, the key element of the case against Blair, Aznar and Howard is not that they’ve stepped to the forefront of the war against terrorism when prudence would have dictated leaving the Americans to fight it by themselves. Rather it’s that they’ve aided and abetted the Bush administration in its decision to use the war against terrorism as a pretext for settling old and unrelated scores, and that by doing so they’ve increased the danger facing both their own citizens and everyone else.

fn2. It’s true that bin Laden doesn’t care about the Palestinian cause, or approve of secular nationalists like Arafat, but he still benefits from the general view that America is an agent of the oppression of the Palestinians

fn3. Regular commenter Sebastian Holsclaw contributed part of this explanation, though he may well not like the way I’ve used it.

Categories: General Tags:
  1. Factory
    March 15th, 2004 at 16:59 | #1

    While I agree with the arguments with regards to Bush doing things that are not helpful to the WoT [1], I disagree about Howard’s role. Australia is pretty stuck when it comes to allies, we only have NZ as a nearby stable democracy which would of any use in a war, Japan would be a good ally, but it is very pacifistic. All the rest of the nations in Asia just are not stable enough, or do not have the forces to be of any use.
    So there does have to be a certain amount of kowtowing to the US in our foreign policy. Howard’s way of implementing this is by sending the the official Australian Token Force ™. I don’t think any .au leader has much of a choice in this matter.
    OTOH the UK and Spain have far more choices, so I think the agument works much better against the leaders of those countries.

    [1] My ideal priorities: Democracy Promotion, Counter Terrorism. (in that order) (I do agree though that abandoning Afganistan and attacking Iraq did not help either of those goals)

  2. March 15th, 2004 at 17:38 | #2

    ” … contrasted with the refusal of the Socialist leadership to score political points.”

    You’re kidding, right?

  3. March 15th, 2004 at 17:57 | #3

    My thoughts exactly. I just wish I could express them as well.

  4. parallel
    March 15th, 2004 at 18:02 | #4

    I don’t think you have made a strong case that Iraq was a deflection from the WoT.

    Firstly, the prestige of a rapid victory might sway some people away from supporting Bin Laden. This would work better if some people on the left didn’t keep carping on about irrelevancies.

    Secondly, if they didn’t attack Zarqawi for fear of offending Turkey, wouldn’t that also apply if they just need Turkey’s assistance for the WoT? I mean, you have already said that offending allies was Bush’s major blunder.

    Third, you don’t know enough about the dynamics of terrorist recruitment to know if it has picked up or declined relative to what it would have been without Iraq.

    Fourth, you complain about not doing enough about Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (and I would add Iran to the list) but what do you suggest they do? Vague suggestions like “put pressure on” won’t cut it – the best pressure is the threat of military force and an apparent willingness to use it, unfortunately. I mean, if you have an alternative program that might have a better chance of success, that’s all very well, but it feels like you’re just complaining to hear the sound of your own voice.

    Fifth, terrorism does not equate to Osama or al Qaida. There have been extremist muslim organisations and cultures across the planet for the last forty years. There is no necessary connection to Head Office for them to function.

    Sixth, democracy promotion. I think Iraq is possibly the best chance we have of getting a foot in the door on this one. You may disagree, or think it’s going to fail, but how else do you propose going about it?

    Seventh, Palestine. You assume that the problem there is that the US won’t put enough pressure on the Israelis to reach a compromise. In fact, the real problem is that the Palestinians aren’t ready to give up their real goal, which is to destroy Israel – and I think Bush’s at least taking steps in the right direction there.

    To summarise – I disagree, sir. I don’t agree with everything Bush/Blair/Howard have done, and some of it has been mishandled, but I feel their overall strategy is more or less the best that could be done under the circumstances.


  5. March 15th, 2004 at 18:03 | #5

    Tim –

    Don’t be silly! Flashmobbing the PP HQ wasn’t meant to “score political points” – and happened without the knowledge of the Socialist leadership.

  6. March 15th, 2004 at 19:09 | #6

    I’d hate to see what an unprestigious victory would look like.

    (Sorry to carp on about irrelevancies.)

  7. PK
    March 15th, 2004 at 19:59 | #7

    Now that the dust has settled and we can look back, the strategic case for the war looks weak while the humanitarian case looks strong. Funny as the hawks generally supported on strategy and the doves generally on humanity.

    Of course, if the long-term goal of making the middle east peaceful and democratic comes to fruition, the strategic case will have been made. It’s still to early to tell though.

  8. March 15th, 2004 at 20:40 | #8

    i think both the strategic case and humanitarian case was, and is, strong hence my support.

    i moreover agree with most of quiggins points.

    one thing to point out though is that while invading iraq does divert resources away from the fight against stateless terror organizations, this doesnt mean iraq wasnt a better use of the military.

    everyone is in hysteria now about terrorism but thats just because post WTC attacks its the flavour of the month. lets not forget that iraq invaded kuwait only a decade ago, and most likely had plans to control saudi (and thus nearly the worlds total supply of) oil. iraq was and always will be a real strategic interest.

    this was to say nothing of the effect our sanctions were having on their civilians. you think a few thousand civilians dieing in WTC is significant, or 200 in madrid. lets talk about

    “Number of Iraqis estimated to have died through 1999 due to UN sanctions: 1.5 million.”

    “Percentage of them children: 50. ”

    from http://zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=3385

    note this is what the left, the main base of the anti iraq war, is claiming.

    other sources claim less:

    “It seems awfully hard not to conclude that the embargo on Iraq has been ineffective (especially since 1998) and that it has, at the least, contributed to more than 100,000 deaths since 1990”

    from http://reason.com/0203/fe.mw.the.shtml

    that article goes someway to disclaiming the higher figures and is probably more accurate. either way, theres probably some 100,000 people dead as a direct result of sanctions. and since we had to have sanctions while saddam was in power, he had to go.

  9. March 15th, 2004 at 21:08 | #9

    As to your reference to Ansar al-Islam, I don’t think an attack on this group would have upset the Turks. The proximity to the Iranian border may have been a problem, also the complex factional infighting between the Kurds may have been another problem.

  10. Neville Chamberlain
    March 16th, 2004 at 14:58 | #10

    Good to see the Spanish people have more sense than the confounded British in my day. They took up with that damn warmonger Churchill and as a result many millions of lives were lost in the years that followed. I offered them peace in their time!

  11. March 27th, 2004 at 04:42 | #11

    From 11-M to 14-M:
    A report on the Social-Communist media coup détat
    to topple the pro-US Spanish Government


    Entity Person E-Mail
    US Government George W. Bush
    Richard Cheney [email protected]
    [email protected]

    Democratic Party John Kerry [email protected]
    [email protected]

    British Government Tony Blair [email protected]
    Conservative Party Michael Howard
    Michael Portillo [email protected]

    Spanish Government Jose Maria Aznar [email protected]

    Spanish Foreign Affairs Ministry Ana De Palacio [email protected]

    Spanish Embassy in Washington Javier Ruperez [email protected]

    Spanish Embassy in London Santiago de Mora Figueroa y Williams [email protected]

    CNN Lou Dobbs [email protected]

    Becky Anderson [email protected]

    Richard Quest [email protected]

    Rirchard Quest [email protected]

    Larry King [email protected]
    [email protected]

    CNBC Larry Kudlow and Jim Cramer [email protected]
    Lou Rukeyser [email protected]
    Wake up Call [email protected]
    Squawk [email protected]
    Closing Bell [email protected]
    Maria Bartiromo [email protected]
    Washington Post Management [email protected]
    New York Times Management [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    Wall Street Journal Management [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]

    Financial Times Management [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]

    The Times Management [email protected]
    [email protected]
    The Daily Telegraph Management [email protected]

    Antena 3 Matias Prats [email protected]
    El Mundo Management [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]

    Onda Cero Management [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    Cadena Cope Management [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected],
    [email protected]
    TVE Management [email protected]
    ABC Management [email protected]
    [email protected]
    La Razon Management [email protected]
    [email protected]

    [email protected],[email protected],[email protected]






    CONCLUSION page 11


    The objective of this document is to report in chronological order all type of testimonies from Spanish nationals, either living in Spain or working as expatriates around the world, on the coup détat, led by the pro Socialist-Communist PRISA Group (SER Radio Station / EL PAIS Daily / CNN plus) on the Spanish elections in the aftermath of 11 M.

    The report is addressed to the US and UK governments and media. Both countries are, by far the leading countries of the civilized world. Spain, while having made a lot of progress under Jose Maria Aznar, does not yet meet such criteria. We would like your administrations and leading media stations and newspaper to look into this simple report independently to conclude if the last general elections in Spain were indeed democratic or not. Those who have contributed to this report do think they were not. On Monday 15th March there were socialist voters who were seriously stating that Bin Laden should have a monument in Spain because the bombings led to the Socialist victory. No wonder why Carlos Mantilla, an elected conservative member of parliament clearly stated that Mr. Shoemaker (Zapatero in Spanish) was the president of Bin Laden. Her daughter was reportedly attacked by the social-communist demonstrators who took to the street to adulterer the elections result.

    As of 15.55 on 11th of March Spanish intelligence reports did highlight the reasons why ETA would be behind the attacks. This invalidates PRISA Group´s accusation, 100% coincident with the Socialist Party’s spokesman, that the government was hiding information. The government was far too transparent to the media and disclosed the information as and when it was being received.

    What in reality happened is that PRISA GROUP feared that the 11 M massacre would bring a landslide conservative victory. Therefore since the very moment of the massacre, early in the morning the radio program of a leading socialist journalist like Iñaki Gabilondo started to call up the audience to avoid giving a punishment to the Socialist Party for their electoral coalition with pro ETA regional parties.

    When the news about the Arab tape found in a van came up the PRISA Group counter-reacted to ask the Spanish people to vote against the government thus guaranteeing that the conservatives would lose the majority which could be sold as a good result for the then irrelevant Socialist leader Shoemaker. Whereas PRISA Group violently denies this accusation the truth of the matter is that by Thursday night (11-M) even its radio station sports programs were asking the people to vote for the Socialist to punish the government for the bombings. They used a very effective language i.e. the right wings have to be punished thus mobilizing the left wingers who ultimately took to the streets to make the elections everything but democratic.

    Because the government was far too transparent and truthful on Thursday night, and Friday, the PRISA group decided to seek an alteration of the result of the elections by launching a ferocious attack on the government and publishing and releasing all kind of news and personal comments from their commentators Friday, Saturday and Sunday to influence the Spanish average voter which normally is uneducated, misinformed and does have poor capabilities to differentiate on what the key facts are. Versus the key issue which was the fact that the Aznar administration was dead right in supporting President Bush war against terror, which indeed should have yielded more votes to the conservatives in any other EU country (including France and Germany), PRISA started from the very Thursday to state that an Al-Qaeda´s authority of the bombings would cause that the people would vote for the Socialists.

    On Saturday night when the demonstrations organized by the socialist regional governments of Andalusia, Castile, Aragon and the Madrid based socialist HQ, throughout the so called reflection day (when no information should be given in favor or against any political party) Mariano Rajoy, the conservative candidate, was forced to come up in TV to denounce the illegal maneuver and stop the demonstrations. It was not enough, Charles Butcher (-Carlos Carnicero= Charles Butcher) a leading PRISA commentator stated that Rajoy was asking for a coup détat and feared for the security of the demonstrators. That highlights the repulsive intentions of all the PRISA sponsored journalists.

    As of 9 am of Sunday morning CNN+ spent several hours with special news programs about the demonstrations to further coerce the popular vote. People went to the polling stations shocked and coerced. The results were a crock of shit because Mr. Shoemaker profited from an unexpected 2 million voters who turned up to the polling stations responding to the PRISA Group´s maneuver to vote against the government. During the whole day in Spain we could see all over the country left wingers taking to the streets and writing in graffiti “Aznar murderer, 200 dead” this was the reference to the 200th death which was made public the same Sunday 14 M.

    We would therefore ask all of you to look into this report independently because otherwise the Spanish democracy is dead. On 16th of March Mr. Shoemaker was dead fast to highlight that the international media had not understood the result of the Spanish elections because in his view the people wanted changed. That was a false and cynical statement because for change to occur there has to be a major swing in the vote which did not happen. Mr. Shoemaker received 3 new million votes, 2 of them from the left wingers and most of the rest from first time votes. The Conservatives hardly lost ground because the approximately 700,000 votes they lost were not a swing for the socialist but a mixture of vote erosion, disappointment and fear of voting because of what was happening in the streets.

    In short we would like you to look into this independently and suggest further courses of actions. One of them could be to call up an independent enquiry in the US and the UK on the grounds that, with the existence of a war on terror (something that the socialist Javier Solana denies) and with the evidence of a massacre aimed at toppling the US Government the most powerful media conglomerate, and the Socialist Party and its regional governments, broke the law to ultimately achieve the same objective as the terrorists: to bring the pro-US government down.


    In Spain polls cannot be made public during the last week of the electoral campaign to avoid influencing the voters. It has however transcended that the government machinery was able to measure the political temperature on a day-to-day basis. The very morning before the blasts the Conservative Party was ahead of the Socialists in as many as eight points. The scenario for a new absolute majority was therefore very plausible.

    For those who might reject our reference to the government’s polls we have picked below a number of daily polls on qualified websites. Please note that we picked the below ones because they were reliable: i.e. the same computer could not vote twice.

    Daily Polls up to March 11th, 2004

    11 March 2004
    Results on the question:
    What did you miss during the electoral campaign?

    25 % 1. To see Mariano Rajoy in the TV debate

    9 % 2. To see Aznar in the rallies

    46 % 3. Mr. Shoemaker’s idea of Spain

    20 % 4. The Socialist Party’s economic program

    10 March 2004
    Results on the question:
    What is your opinion on the fact that Localia TV station will broadcast a film against the Conservative Party before the elections?

    9 % 1. It is OK, freedom of choice

    57 % 2. Polanco, PRISA owner, pays back the favors with broadcasts

    28 % 3. The Conservative Party deserves such a bloody nose

    6 % 4. They are obliged, it is their cinema specialty

    9th March 2004
    Results on the questions:
    What do you think of Rajoy´s campaign?

    35 % 1. Good, it has progressed throughout the 2 weeks

    24 % 2. Good, he is calmed and defends his program

    29 % 3. Regular, it lacks pushing

    11 % 4. Bad, he is boring

    8th March 2004
    Results on the question:
    Will the poll results, which offer a Conservative majority, change during this week?

    19 % 1. No, most people made up their mind already from the beginning

    3 % 2. No, it depends on which poll you refer to

    36 % 3. Yes due to the undecided voters and those who do not tell whom they will vote for

    42 % 4. Yes, and in the end most of the useful vote go for the conservatives

    5th March 2004
    Results on the question:
    Do you relieve the electoral poll f the CIS, the official state agency?

    9 % 1. Yes, they get it right most of the time

    30 % 2. Yes it is clear that Rajoy Hill win

    37 % 3. No because it was short of predicting the absolute majority of the Conservatives in 2000

    24 % 4. No, Mr. Shoemaker is coming back

    The results of the above questions speak by themselves. There was no case for any other result than a landslide conservative victory. However what happened is shown below, a 3 million additional voters for Mr. Shoemaker (from 7.9 to 10.9) million brought in by the media coup détat.

    Party Votes Percentage Seats Votes Percentage Seats Votes Percentage Seats

    (Socialists) 10.909.687 42,64 % 164 7.918.752 34,16 % 125 9.425.678 37,63 % 141
    (Conservatives) 9.630.512 37,64 % 148 10.321.178 44,52 % 183 9.716.006 38,79 % 156
    CiU 829.046 3,24 % 10 970.421 4,19 % 15 1.151.633 4,60 % 16
    ERC 649.999 2,54 % 8 194.715 0,84 % 1 167.641 0,67 % 1
    EAJ-PNV 417.154 1,63 % 7 353.953 1,53 % 7 318.951 1,27 % 5
    IU 1.269.532 4,96 % 5 1.263.043 5,45 % 8 2.639.774 10,54 % 21
    CC 221.034 0,86 % 3 248.261 1,07 % 4 220.418 0,88 % 4
    BNG 205.613 0,80 % 2 306.268 1,32 % 3 220.147 0,88 % 2
    CHA 93.865 0,37 % 1 75.356 0,33 % 1 – – –
    EA 80.613 0,32 % 1 100.742 0,43 % 1 115.861 0,46 % 1
    Na-Bai 60.645 0,24 % 1 – – – – – –


    Thursday, March 11th

    • 9 am.: Spaniards who on their way to work and are listening to SER radio station in the car report that this station starts to coerce the popular vote by stating that if ETA is behind the bombings this should have no effect on the people’s vote. Note that the station is trying to defend the Socialist Party because of its electoral coalition with ERC a left wing nationalist party who had political talks with ETA.

    • 15 hours: The US correspondent of La Vanguardia, a Barcelona based pro Socialist newspaper, comes out in CNN to state that, assuming it is ETA who is behind the bombings, the government (assuming the Conservatives will win) will have to reach a political consensus with other parties to define the territorial model of Spain (?). Please note that despite the fact that the death toll is already at 173 the pro-socialist media continues to make political implications out of a terrorist act.

    • 21 hours: The SER Website gives credibility to the authority of Al Qaida despite the fact that the E-Mail sent to London belongs to a group which

    a) has in the past claimed responsibility for the previous week attacks in Baghdad (false), Istanbul in 2003 (false) and New York black-out (false as there was no terrorism there)

    b) the intelligence service sources tell CNN London that there is no credible link between that group and Al Qaida

    • 23 hours: EL PAIS website is fast enough to translate the E-Mail in Spanish and post in Word for everybody to download it. Despite the responsibility claim not being credible and despite the overwhelming fact that the E-Mail does not claim responsibility for the attacks but enjoys the result of the massacre, EL PAIS and SER start over and over with Al Qaeda´s responsibility. The snow ball rolling effect has started, the Word document is multiplied and sent to thousand of E-Mails throughout Spain.

    • 1 am (Friday) A popular SER station sports program deliberately ask its commentators to openly speak on the vote direction as a result of the bombings. The effective language of “the right will suffer” (when the government is liberal and conservative” if Al Qaida is behind the bombings. Notwithstanding that the death of 190 people at the time does not matter what matters is to talk about the political consequences.

    Friday, March 12th

    • SER station reports over and over that there might be a kamikaze body within the trains thus increasing the speculation against the government to unsustainable levels. To date this has not been confirmed. It is disgusting to read this kind of information the very last day of the electoral campaign. This evidences a will to topple the pro US government.

    • By contrast CNN Website and CNN International in London continue to state that , in the absence of credible claim responsibility, ETA is logically the main suspect behind the bombings.

    Saturday, March 13th
    • Through E-Mails and SMS the socialist and communist militants are called up to demonstrate in front of the Conservative Party Headquarters in every major Spanish city. Even in Bilbao, the Basque Country, where socialist and conservatives go hand in hand because of terrorism (they are both ETA targets) the demonstrations take place. The socialist militants did show the SMS received to the conservative militants asking them to demonstrate in front of PP´s headquarters to overthrown the government despite of the illegality of the demonstrations during the reflection day.

    • Logically Mariano Rajoy comes out in TV to denounce the illegality of the acts and ask their organizers to stop it. However the medicine of PRISA Group is to further manipulate the situation as follows

    – CNN plus (the Spanish associate of CNN) broadcasts the reply from the Socialist Party to Mr. Rajoy. The speaker is Mr. Rubalcaba a Socialist veteran who served in the Felipe Gonzalez’s governments who had 23 corruption cases open when they left office in 1996. Rubalcaba does not respond to Rajoy´s requests but defends the fact that “the citizens need to know the truth before voting”, therefore he further co-operates in the left wing crusade to topple the pro-US government

    – Charles Butcher, a leading SER commentator, states that he fears for the demonstrators physical condition as Mr. Rajoy´s intervention could lead to a coup détat. This is a repulsive comment which furthers evidence the maneuver orchestrated against the government: PRISA has caught the government and the whole Spanish society defenseless during a day allocated to reflection and are unwilling to give in, rather they manipulate any calls from the government to restore order

    Sunday March 14th
    • CNN plus prepare an indigestive breakfast for the Spanish. From 9 am (when the polling stations open) they broadcast over and over the demonstrations against the government. The people go to vote coerced and in state of shock. .

    • As news of the 200 death come up many communist and socialist militants take the streets and with graffiti write “Aznar murderer you have 200 people dead”, voting in Spain becomes anything but democratic

    Monday March 15th

    • 11 am: 2 socialist voters greet each other in a financial institution. One of them tells the other that they should make a monument to Bin Laden and then another one for the victims. The other one replies that she does not care for the victims, the monument should go for Bin Laden as he had given them the electoral victory.


    Our last testimony received which quotes Bin Laden is not a joke. La Razon and Libertad Digital.com, respectively a non governmental newspaper and a website, have alerted that there existed Al Qaida documents issued in December 2003 which stated that a massive terrorist attack would bring the Spanish government down and place the Socialist in power.

    Whether PRISA GROUP management likes it or not, the terrorists achieved their objective of toppling the pro-US government and they helped them to do so.

    Therefore a US led independent investigation should be made or the Spanish democracy will never have proper health because the terrorists were able to rule.

    Mr. Shoemaker has started wrong footed by quickly (i.e. right after his victory) reiterating that he will pull out the Spanish troops out of Iraq as opposed to talking about the victims (duly reminded to him by a Washington Post editorial). John Kerry should teach him a lesson of principles.

    Spanish association of expatriates,
    March 22nd 2004
    New York, Washington, London, Madrid, Amsterdam, Brussels


    From 11-M to 14-M:
    A report on the Social-Communist media coup détat
    to topple the pro-US Spanish Government


    Entity Person E-Mail
    US Government George W. Bush
    Richard Cheney [email protected]
    [email protected]

    Democratic Party John Kerry [email protected]
    [email protected]

    British Government Tony Blair [email protected]
    Conservative Party Michael Howard
    Michael Portillo [email protected]

    Spanish Government Jose Maria Aznar [email protected]

    Spanish Foreign Affairs Ministry Ana De Palacio [email protected]

    Spanish Embassy in Washington Javier Ruperez [email protected]

    Spanish Embassy in London Santiago de Mora Figueroa y Williams [email protected]

    CNN Lou Dobbs [email protected]

    Becky Anderson [email protected]

    Richard Quest [email protected]

    Rirchard Quest [email protected]

    Larry King [email protected]
    [email protected]

    CNBC Larry Kudlow and Jim Cramer [email protected]
    Lou Rukeyser [email protected]
    Wake up Call [email protected]
    Squawk [email protected]
    Closing Bell [email protected]
    Maria Bartiromo [email protected]
    Washington Post Management [email protected]
    New York Times Management [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    Wall Street Journal Management [email protected]

    The Boston Globe Management jacoby@globe.com
    Business Week Management businessweek.subs@qss-uk.com
    Financial Times Management help@ft.com

    The Times Management foreign.news@thetimes.co.uk
    The Daily Telegraph Management corporate.affairs@telegraph.co.uk

    Antena 3 Matias Prats noticias@antena3tv.es
    El Mundo Management internet@el-mundo.es

    Onda Cero Management labrujula@ondacero.es
    Cadena Cope Management linterna@cope.es,
    TVE Management direccion.comunicacion@rtve.es
    ABC Management cartas@abc.es
    La Razon Management cartas@larazon.es


    The objective of the current Appendix is to reflect the published news which further evidence the existence of a social-communist coup détat as we stated in our report. In order to so, we have translated some articles from Spanish to English. Some of them are in full and some of them are partial to highlight the overwhelming evidence.

    In as much we have no connection whatsoever with the publishers of these articles, and given that our report was sent prior to the publication of these articles, we double our request for a US/UK led enquiry on the health of the Spanish democracy. A Coup Détat deserves a proper response which is an independent international enquiry to conclude whether or not the 14-M elections were conducted in pure democratic terms. We think they were not and therefore raise our legitimate right to seek the help from the 2 greatest nations in the world.


    A statement made by Gaspar Llamazares, the communist leader of the left wing party Izquierda Unida (IU) published in Digital Freedom (LibertadDigital.com in Spanish).


    A literal translation of the above article is as follows:

    Llamazares boasts of having contributed to organize the demonstrations against the Popular Party (PP) on 13-M

    The IU leader says that the bully of the PP Headquarters during the reflection day was a civilized and popular action. In fact, he admits that “only a prudent element led me not to go out to the streets”. With regards to the organization of the demonstrations which were divulged as spontaneous, Llamazares showed pride in having contributed to re-send the SMS that he was getting in his cell phone. He afforded to launch a message to Jesús Cardenal (Spanish General Attorney) “Avoid getting your hands involved in this issue”.

    Digital Freedom (Agencies). According to the Agency Europa Press, Gaspar Llamazares, the IU leader, has defied the Spanish General Attorney, Jesús Cardenal, to “chase him” after he has recognized that he was himself one of the links to generate the illegal demonstrations against the PP´s national, regional and local headquarters all over Spain during the reflection day (13-M).

    Such a statement starts to confirm that strategy of breaking up the reflection day alter the Madrid massacre was everything except spontaneous (adjective used by Mr. Shoemaker). In the images that CNN plus broadcasted the spontaneity was presented with black and red banners stating “Peace”. However the slogans in the street were quite different and less pacifist such as

    PP murderer
    This has happened to us for having a fascist government
    You fascists are the terrorists
    And a long list of other insults

    Far from being a massive spontaneous congregation in Madrid and another PP headquarters all over Spain, many political leaders seem to have contributed, at least as intermediaries, to the organization of the demonstrations. The first one to acknowledge it and being proud of it has been the communist leader. In addition, perhaps led by the smooth penalty i.e. 1,800 Euros, or by the protection of the Catalonia’s Regional General Attorney, Llamazares has challenged Jesús Cardenal stating “if he wants to chase me, let him do it”. However he added that Cardenal should not get his hands into this issue but leave it for the upcoming (Socialist appointment) General Attorney.


    As stated before we are a group of independent business men who have nothing to do with the media. After we sent our report to George W. Bush and Tony Blair on 21st of March (Eastern Time, 22nd of March UK time), the Internet has published the below articles in the Weekly Digital (elsemanaldigital.com in Spanish). El Mundo has been a big contributor to these articles by denouncing the manipulation of the PRISA Group in a very, very detailed chronological order.


    As can be seen in the annexes to this Appendix, SER Radio Station panicked when they learnt of our intention of translating EL Mundo´s chronological order.

    Because the recipients of this report are high calibre individuals we will not translate any of those documents fully but leave it open for the investigators to do so. We simply highlight below from EL Mundo and EL SemanalDigital.com articles what constitute flagrant examples of a media coup détat. These are the following (we do apologize for some insults but it is their language not ours):

    • On Thursday, 11-M, when the official number of deaths had not yet reached 45, SER´s director of news programs, Daniel Aido, instructed two reports to privilege the theory that the bombings authority was confusing. When one of the reporters replied that it was obvious that ETA was behind the bombings because the President of the Regional Basque Government had come out at 9.30 am to make ETA responsible Aido responded as follows “If it is ETA, PP will win by landslide; if it is Al Qaeda we can win the elections. Therefore, as from now, the bombings authority is confusing”

    • All the “exclusives” divulged by SER came from “top management” and with precise instructions at all times on how and how many times should be repeated or paraphrasing Carlos Llamas, anchor of the news night program, “Crush the issue until we crush the PP”. The SER reporters did not play any role in obtaining the famous “exclusives”. The brilliant investigation team was just one person, Antonio García Ferreras, permanently in phone contact with two people, Rafael Vera former Secretary of State under the Socialist Government (who thereafter served in prison because of profiting monetarily while performing such a role) and the Socialist Party spokesman Alfredo Perez Rubalcaba. The staff informed us that Vera passed the information, Rubalcaba transformed it in ammunition against the government and Ferreras passed the message on to Daniel Aido.

    • The story of the “kamikaze”, posted the SER Website on 11 M, never had any basis. Many SER reporters knew of the origin of the story and the intention: to bias the authority of the bombings towards Al Qaeda and to create doubts on the official version of the government. A SER journalist complained to Daniel Aido that divulging information whose source was unknown (except by the “investigator” Antonio Garcia Ferreras) and not contrasted with third parties. The literal answer from Aido was “ We have to press on because we are running out of time (in reference to Sunday’s elections) therefore those who are scared can go home” When the journalist suggested to make a telephone call to his own sources of information to contrast the news, Aido literally said to him “Fuck off”

    The E-Mail sent to us by SER radio station does not specifically deny any of the above.

    We reiterate that our reports are independent and therefore urge the US administration to help the Spanish democracy out.

    Spanish association of Expatriates,
    March 25n 2004
    New York, Washington, London, Madrid, Amsterdam, Brussels



    Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2004 23:03:53 +0100
    From: hora25@cadenaser.com Add to Address Book

    Subject: RE: Fwd: 14 M: A report on the Spanish elections
    To: “Spanish Expatriates”

    por qué no traducen al ingles estos dos textos y se los envian también
    su lista de distribución? Sería un gesto de honestidad por su parte.


    Desde el viernes 19 circula un documento, falsamente atribuido a
    de la cadena SER, que pretende descalificar la actuación de esta cadena
    en relación con el atentado del 11-M y el esclarecimiento de los
    El documento vio la luz en el programa La mañana de la COPE, y fue
    posteriormente por varios confidenciales sin la menor comprobación
    su autenticidad. La falsedad se propagó también mediante correos

    La SER consideró su difusión una burda maniobra intoxicadora que no
    el menor comentario. Lamentablemente el infundio ya ha saltado a El
    de Lugo y a la primera página del Diario de Valencia, periódicos que lo
    recogen sin la menor caución profesional.

    El documento es una fabulación absoluta, y todo lo que en él se afirma
    la primera a la última línea es una patraña destinada a dañar el
    de esta cadena de Radio y el de sus profesionales. Semejante maniobra
    inscribe en la campaña de desprestigio contra la SER y otros medios del
    Grupo PRISA, puesta en marcha, a partir del resultado electoral del 14
    marzo, por sectores que se han visto perjudicados.


    Ante los infundios y los ataques, sin ninguna base, al trabajo de los
    de esta casa, hemos de ratificar que todos hemos cubierto jornadas
    para informar estrictamente sobre los acontecimientos que se han
    en este país desde el pasado jueves 11 de marzo.
    Desde el momento en que tuvimos noticia de los atentados del 11-M,
    estado al servicio, únicamente, del derecho a la información que poseen
    los ciudadanos.

    Después de un trabajo absolutamente responsable para trasladar a los
    lo que estaba sucediendo y los datos que sobre los presuntos autores de
    la matanza hemos podido conocer y comprobar, en el ejercicio impecable
    nuestro oficio, nos parece repugnante el linchamiento que se quiere
    de quienes como nosotros contamos únicamente la verdad, como se ha

    No somos nosotros quienes debemos responder ante los ciudadanos de este
    país por explicar los hechos tal como fueron, sino aquellos que por
    inconfesables nos han elegido como cabeza de turco.

    Ni hemos manipulado la información, ni nos dejamos manipular.
    lo contrario es un grave insulto

  12. gordon
    March 28th, 2004 at 21:04 | #12

    Does this mean we are in for another Spanish Civil War?

Comments are closed.