Mario Soares i al Qu'uida: ?no fotis!

Soares no sols ha perdut l'oremus sin? el cap?Dialogar amb Al Qu'ida? ? No fotis! Els integrants han matat 3000 americans, 202 espanyols, 200 australians, innumerables iraquis declarat una guerra sin cuartel i vols negociar.

Honestament En Mario penso que es temps que callis i pleguis perque realment les paraules no capten amb la realitat i no puc estomacar l'insult als morts, a la democr?cia a la societat oberta i realment tolerant amb vostres proposits. Es impossible negociar amb aquests conelluts i francament m?s aviat acaben amb una bala en el cap o en pres? per que els queden de la vida el m?n es amillorar? immediatment. Que m?s m'imprenya es come vost? s'ha irresponsbilitzat devant dels atemptats. ?Com pots preconitzar el rendiment? M'horritzaria pensar que hagu?s passat al Portugul si hauria adoptada un actitud semblant en '74 De cap manera es negociar? amb Al Qu'ida i soc al primer a denunciar vostra imbelicitat tan grossa.

Propstes per l'orientaci? pol?tica antiterrorista que Zapatero hauria d'adoptar.

Ahir, escrivi un correu a Dan en reposta del seu que em donava la no?tica que un del autors del massacre havia sigut arrestat a la frontera holando-belgica. Dan havia predit que els autors s'escaparian molt probablement a Holandia on tenen molt support de la populaci? musulamana local. Quan li responsia, li informava alguns idees de la pol?tica antiterrorista que Zaptero hauria d'adoptar si realment es sincer a lluitar contra tota manifestatci? de terrorisme.

Dan m'ha donat la seva reacci? que l'incorporar? quan presenti les meves propostes m?s baix. Donc, ?Quines pol?tiques proposo que Zapatero hauria d'adoptar? Divideixo les propostes entre la dom?stica i l'internacional.

I Domestica
1) Enfor?ar les lleis d'estrangera/immigraci?. Deportem aquells que han arrivats il?legalment. S? si va contra el desitg de normlaitzar el sense papers i la retic?ncia natural a no criminalitzar immigrants en la seva qualitat com a tal. Tanmateix, 202 ciutadans han morts precisament per que Espanya no aplicava aquelles lleis tal com s'havia i Zogham ha pogut entrar f?cilment al pa?s malgrat que Morroco ja havia avisat el govern espayol que est tractava d'una persona perillos?ssima.

2) Els polis saben ben b? qui son i on es troben; donce autoritzar-los a fer un fort cop d'escombra. Adem?s verificar si els supsitosos tenen multes o ordres judicials pendents. Els pol?s agafarian molts per que un no ha pagat la multa de contravenci? d'aparcament. Tamb? preconitzo que es incauti els havers i confiscar diners dels accomplices. Dan m'avisat que incauter i confiscar ser? molt, per? molt dificil per que la gran maj?ria dels diners i havers son ls caritats saudies i la familia real disposa d'un enorme poder economic no sols a trav?s l'OPEP ans tamb? a traves el mercats financers. Exactement com pot influir aquest segon marcats no tinc idea honestament.
3) Revovar la ciutad?nia de quansevul estranger que ha acomplert aquest massacre o ha ajuat en quansevulla manera i expel?lir-lo o empresonaem-lo a cadena perpetua. Dan tamb? m'ha recordat que tamb? no descuidi l'asili pol?tic. Hi han molts abusos. El m?s notori es del Mullah Krekar a Noreuga.

4) Recompensar quansevol estranger que forneix informaci? o ajuda els polis a capturar m?s accomplices o autors del massacre o de cel?lues no descobrtes amb la ciutid?nia espanyol i l'autortizaci? que la fam?lia s'estableixi en Espanya. Dan ha suggerit de crear un programa de protecci? de testimonis com a Estats-Units. No es mala idea per? em pregunto si es podria amagar efectivament l'individu i sa familia.
5) Meus pares han proposat el seg?ent: dir a la communitat musulmana que denunci tota viol?ncia; si no ho fan, deportem-los del pa?s. Quansevol no denuncia un imam integrista radical els el seguiran a la deportaci?. Dan explica que el govern espanyol inviti els imams morroquins i si no es possible els tunisians o turcs. La ra? es que els imams wahabbis enverenan la comunitat musulmana i provoquen for?a malestar en tot pais on es troben.
6)?bviament concertar amb Europol i Eurolex per que els polis europeus i els judges poden coordinar i bescanviar informacions, ordres de busca/captura etc

II) Internacional
1) Si Zapatero es realment seri?s a voler l'ONU prendre en m? la seguretat d'Irak el 30 juny doncs que comenci ara mateix a redigir una resoluci? que es presentaria al Consell de seguretat. Dan m'ha dit que l'agradia veure en la mateixa resoluci? que es comdemni amb nom pa?so com Burkina Faso, l'?rabia saudita i Iran. Sap ben b? que tal comendanci? no s'incloria mai per? almenys serviria a satisfaer un sentit de just?cia

2) La seguretat d'Irak l'asseguraria un tipus de FSIA (ISAF per rec?rrer al acronim angl?s) Dan proposa que algu semblant pels pa?sos africans directament amena?ats pel Al Qu'ida como Mali, Liberia, Sierra Leone entre altres.
3) Parlar amb els canadencs sota l'?gid de l'OTAN de c?m podria donar un cop de m? i recorrer amb les experi?ncies amb Kosovo com a guia

4) Discutir amb els pa?sos no-OTAN com el Jap? i Thailandia com podrian integrar-se amb aquest nova for?a multinacional. Finalment, Dan suggereix que l'ONU autoritzi una for?a especial que compren les unitats d'elit de cada pa?s amb les ordres de perseguir/capturar o matar la c?pula d'on estiguin en el m?n.

Com es nota, Zapatero t? bastants opicions a implementar per la seva pol?tica ant-terrorista. De cap manera m'il?lusion que els funcionaris que aconsellen a Zapatero i el nou govern llegiran aquesta bit?cola per? almenys ac? he comen?at a remuniar que hem de fer proximadament.

Robert Kagan vidicates Buscaraons

David Adesnik posts this extraordinary admission by one of the influential neocons. I'll become momentarily vain and brag that Kagan took almost a year and a half to recognize that the current policy towards the European allies is utterly counterproductive and the current crisis, whereby the they've had enough of American insults and ingratitude, endangers the West's ongoing committment to destroy islamojihadism. By contrast, I'm a total nobody who's tirelessly foresaw, eloquently in 3 languages, at this blog for over a year that the American policy would haunt the current Administration. Its officials are needlessly alienating allied/sympathetic countries. They're just as committed to combatting islamojihadists they just don't need to be insulted or morally hectored about their civilizational responsibilities. As Prof Glenn would conclude: advantage Buscarons.  ¶ 16:47

 

On Europe, defense and war: A corrective to Victor Davis Hanson

I do enjoy reading Victor Davis Hanson but there are times that even a distinguished miltary historian is wrong. In an interview with Frongpagemag he stated that the Europeans haven't really spent much on defense in the last 60 years. That's false with respect to the imediate postwar era. He conventiently glosses over the French determination to fight in Indochina from 1945-53 and the British in Malaysia from 1948-61.

Remember that the French had been defeated, plundered, fought over and destroyed 4 years before. So the country never had enough material or personnel to adequately prosecute the war; yet it managed to scrape together the money to fight for 8 years. Further the French had the misfortune of being the first Western military to face a Maoist style guerilla war.

As I've written previously about the subject. The American played a small role in ensuring France's defeat: the Americans prohibited the French from deploying American equipment and weapons slated for NATO defense under pain of suspension of further military transfers. That policy change in 1950 and the Korean war but it was too late by then.

American policy was still deeply influenced by Roosevelt's sincere, but niave, dislike for imperialism and a maddening belief that the communist dominated liberation movements would be pro-Western; though I've always noted a bias for British imperialism after Roosevelt's death.

Turning to the British, they too fought a long, hard guerrilla war in Malaysia. Again it must be forgotten that in 1945 Britian was as bankrupt as France though fortunately, the island nation wasn't destroyed or plundered. Nonethless, the war was a heavy burden on the British economy.

In the meantime there were other conflicts that erupted throughout the world: the Suez is one of the best known. The British and French were threatened with severe economic sanctions by the Americans in trying to perpetuate their empires. There's the Algerian war. James Bennett once wrote to me to point out that one reason why France left NATO was because the Americans supposedly vetoed the transfer of the former's NATO troops to Algeria. Finally let's not forget the crude division of military reponsibilities during the Cold war: French intervention throughout Africa to check Communist expansionism.

There's another factor too: America didn't exactly encourage Europe to spend too much on defense and the Europeans agreed. Davis Hanson conveniently skims over recent Europan history as to why both sides of the Atlantic came to the modus vivendi. So Davis Hanson is disingenious to state that Europeans haven't spent that much on defense. Reading through the interview, I was struck by a long forgotten parallel: that America has committed a similar mistake with Europe as Britian did with France in the post-Napoleonic period. Britian was so fearful of France that the former kept the latter down for too long- until the 1850s and completely overlooked the new threat: Germany. America's error is that it's been so fearful of European militarization that the former overlooked the rise of islamojihadism. Thus when American plead/lobby/demand for Europeans to increase their defense budgets, they refuse, partly due to past fears, partly because American officialdom really doesn't want Europe to take over its own defense and the European politicans really can't make a persuasive case to increase military spending. Matt Welch wrote a classical article on the subject. Moreover, that American reluctance justifies itself through the ideology of the new American century. It's very difficult to demand that Europe be responsible for its defense when you have a worldview that treats allied/sympathetic countries as latent enemies out to undermine American hegemony.

One last thing, I was profoundly insulted by Davis Hanson bombastic moralizing about how downsizing American troops throughout the Mediterriean would send a message that alliances are about mutual sacrifices and friendship. What wicked ingratitude! The Spanish have lost 202 citzens and before that, 10 or so soldiers; the Italian 24 soldiers; yet these losses don't constitute sufficent sacrifice! I objurgate again the American pro-war commentariat that they regard any sacrifices by its allies, any casualty, any effort as perpetually unsatisfactory; indeed proof of their lack of seriousness to prosecute the war against the islamojihadists. Is it any wonder that the Coalition is fragmenting and sympathetic countries are increasingly hostile?

El PP, l'atemptat i la declassifiaci? dels documents

L'ex-govern, abans que traspassi els poders executius als socialistes, ha pres l'etapa extraordi?ria i ins?lita de declassificar els docuements interns que servin a informar-lo i donce el p?blic i apagar la creen?a que el govern havia mentit.

Es d'agra?t d'haver pres aquesta decisi? pero desafortundadment, l'ex-govrn encara no ha captat el problema. No es que hagi mentit; per? si ha manipulat l'informaci? per inculpar a ETA i d'insistir sobretot quan les proves palesament refutaren ETA com l'autoria del massacre quan era Al Qu'ida. Aquesta tossuderia devant els fets es que li cost? les el?leccions; pitjor encara fou quan Aznar telfon? el redactor en cap del Periodico de Catalunya que no dubti de l'autoria d'ETA i llavors m?s tard amb la segona trucada Aznar matisava les seva convicci? que ETA fou l'autor.

El problema es que el govern havia pres la gent per imb?cil i que el es pensava m?s llest. Es la conseq??ncia d'un majoria absoluta combinada amb una pol?tica de crispar les relacions amb les CC AA, emenistar aquells que discrepen i ignorar diff?rencies d'opin? legitimes. El PP t? 4 anys d'oposci? per a reflexionar i proposar de nou una plataforma alternative que prengui amb compte que les diff?renies d'opini? i descrepar p?cificament en proposant una alternativa son l'essencial de la democr?cia

  ¶ 08:42

 

Spain: the next step

I responsed TM Lutas' question about Zapatero's anti-terrorism policies at the Flitter's board and it struck me. In Spain, it's illegal to belong to an armed group (banda armada) Obviously ETA is banned under this law and membership is a crime. Curiously, AL Qu'ida had never been formally declared an armed group. I think if Zapatero is serious and consistent, he or the interior minister should make a formal declaration. It would have immediate effects:
1) the Audencia nacional has jurisdiction for terrorism under the Spanish judicature laws and constitution
2) Hence the Policia nacional (the Spanish judicial police) would be the lead agency (though in places like Catalunya and Basque country they need to work in concert with the respective regional police forces)
3)membership is automatically illegal and the police have wider powers to investigate and arrest(subject of course by oversight by an investigative judge and the higher tribunals)
4) I'm not sure but I believe the assets can be frozen/impouned (incautado in Spanish)
5) supporters come under scrutiny
I realize that you'd criticize me that the law enforcement model is somewhat inadequate for non-Westphalian attacks but I'd argue that Al Qu'ida would realize that it miscalulated(stupidly yet again)when the the entire civilian security apparatus falls on them like an anvil on the head. Dan, responding to an off the cuff comment I sent to him email about the 'truce', pointed out that there was a possible likelihood that the brains behind the operation could be in the Netherland. If this should be the case, then it's incombunt on Zpatero to request the Dutch government to investiage immdiately and extradite them if the perpetrators are indeed in
Relentless, sustained pressure in the form of trans-European investigation, intelligence sharing, police sweeps, confiscating assets, deporting illegals who are accomplices, etc would really crimp Al Qu'ida operations in Europe. Better yet, such concrete steps would fulfil Zapatero's policy of combatting terrorism in all its forms.

Gagliano: je suis un irresponable!

Bon en realit? il n'a pas dit comme tel mais c'est la conclusion qu'on puisse tirer car il a ni? qu'il a jou? quelque r?le que soit dans le scandale des commandites. Ouais sauf on n'est pas imbecil. Il a ?t? le lieutenant politique de Qu?bec pour la parti Lib?ral f?d?ral. C'est lui qui ?tait le responsable des faveurs et d'autres types de favoristme que Chr?tien lui d?l?guait. Personellement je ne lui crois pas. Gagliano n'est pas un cr?tin m?me s'il nous traitent en tant que tel. Il sera int?resssant ? lire le rapport final du comit?. Je frotte les mains en anticipation ? voir en noir et blanc que Gagliano est autant responsable du scandal que Chr?tien et tout le parti.   ¶ 17:00

 

Al Qu'ida: ?Gr?cies per la treva conelluts!

Ay quins humanitarians es massacren 200 ciutadans i aununcian una treva com a recompensa per haver guayada les el?leccions els socialistes. Espero que Zapatero reflexioni m?s sobri?ment les seves pol?tiques exterior, immigraci? i policial. No dic que canvi d'idea encara que seria malament que digui que la treva insulta nostra l'intel?lig?ncia i reesfor?arem els soldats en Iraq amb un miller m?s. Fem cagar aquest conelluts i empreynem-los fins el 30 juny. Ja ens ha matat 200 ciutadans i si maten alguns m?s francament no canviar? l'odi que sentim per aquest marr?ies.

Zougam et preocuper?s molt m?s que pel bon D?u

T?pica actitud d'un integrista f?ntic musulm?. No et preocupes imb?cil et preocupis molt m?s que pel bon D?u quan els jutges et qu?stionen; far?s el suec i repitr?s ad nauseum les lit?nies quraniques per? eventualment cantar?s com un ocellet i en reveler?s molts secrets i altres informacions jutoses que permetrira a detenir encara m?s terroristes i desarticular cel?lules. Doncs fes el pallasso vantant-te com es un gran muhejad? que desafia els 'croats-sionistes' pero fondras com un cube de gel devant el foc.   ¶ 18:22

 

Jonah Golderg and the Allies: a visceral response

Jonah Goldberg is a frivolous twit at time. His post at the Corner rhetorical stroking his chin and pontificating what good are allies is a sobering illustration of how he should just write about undemanding subjects like American pop culture, mocking the domestic left and Cosmo.

He cites Spain but it could be any other allied/sympathetic country. To answer his question, what good is it to have allies? Well for one thing it's a reminder that you don't live in a solophilistic environment content in navel gazing at your own marvelousness. Another reminder is that there do exist likeminded country who share similar values and committments even if they disagree with the U.S. Unfortuantely, Jonah's not satisfied enough. His attitude highlights a tendency I've noted for some time within the American right: a conflicted attitudes that regards the allied/sympathetic countries as either potential rivals who'll do anything to undermine American power while appeasing the islamojihadist or treat the allies/sympathetic countries as satellite regimes who'll click their heels and shout out ?A sus ordenes comandante! and uncritically send out their troops im americaner dienst whenever additional military force is needed at a moment's notice.

Reading between the lines there's also a sense of soured ingratitude towards the allies/sympathetic countries no matter how committed they are to combat terrorism becaue it's never enthusiastic enough. Thanks you Jonah for vindicating the Spanish anti-war activists that the military contribution to Iraq was useless, the death of the Spainish soldiers was in vain and that the country's participation merely set it up as an Al Qu'ida target that killed 200 civilians.

Indeed, there've been reports that Poland and Spain were shut out of several contracts to help rebuild Iraq and awared instead to certain associates of the Iraqi provisional government. Such decisions contradict the American policy to diversify as much as possible in Iraq's rehabilitation. Iraqis would benefit from the Polish, Spanish, Bulgarian experiences of transiting from an authoritarian to a democratic regime as well as learning how long time democracies like Denmark and Australia established just societies. Your blood our treasure makes a lousy campaign slogan.

True allies aren't servile; so jumping through the hoops is a reminder that they have to persuade each other as to the soundness of their points of view, that their collaboration is worth it and neither should ever slip into a complacent take it for granted attitude.

Unfortunately, it's not so much that allies/sympathetic countries are unreliable as American fickleness. Americans turn against those countries as a pit bull sometimes attacks its owner without warning. It took only 72 hours before American sympathy backlashed to opprobium over the election results in Spain. Little wonder that the allies/sympathetic countries are increasingly indifferent to American threats and blandishments

P.S. So when does the boycott of Spanish products and tourism begin?

  ¶ 09:04

 

The Spanish elections: second thoughts

I haven't really changed my mind about the signifigance of the Spanish electoral results that gave the Socialists a minority government. Nonetheless, I read through Dan's analysis I greatly appreciate the calm, dispassionate tone as he assess the signfigance of Al Qu'ida's massacre and its impact on the electoral results.

I agree with Dan's overall strategic analysis that the bombing has completely changed the dynamics of European politics as well as opening a new strategic possibilities for Al Qu'ida to intimidate Western countries that hitherto didn't exist before 11 March.

It's reassuring to read that Zapatero has stated that he'd fight terrorism in all its forms. My deepest concern is his decision to govern alone. Given the gravity of the circumstances this is a blunder; hence I predict circumstances and events will eventually oblige him to pact with either the nationalist parties or agree to punctual pacts with the ecological left (Izquierda unida) and the nationalists on certain issues dear to the Catalans and Basques.

I'm no supporter of the socialists and Zapatero has never impressed me when he was in opposition; however, for now I'll give him the benefit of the doubt but I'm still leery. I dislike his ostentatious tilt away from America towards the 'European option'. Frankly France and Germany haven't done much to deserve a total rehabilitation but then I'm not the Spanish prime minister.

What I'll keep my eyes on is how will Zapatero and the new Interior minister react with respect to progress of the police and judicial investiagation as well as where the evidence will lead. Will the new Socialist government take the appropriate decisions based on the final status of the evidence? Also, what will the new governments immigration policy be? I worry that it'll simply adopt the bleeding heart coddling position they've had some time. I'm not opposed to compassionate policies but I do insist that the immigrants- especially from North Africa-accept Spanish society and its polity. If not don't come and certainly don't bug us about the need to respect uncritically every aspect of Islamic culture.

I deeply deplore the both the pessimism and the sudden volte-face that many Spanish and American bloggers have shown in the last 24 hours. If you're outraged at the electoral results then persuade the Spanish as to why they erred but be prepared to defend your positions and not be content with dismissing us as vichyards, appeasers, cowards, losers, and every other insult under the sun.

Carta oberta al nou govern

Us felicito per haver guaynat les eleccions; ara demonstreu-me que

sou a l'altura del resultats. El president ha assegurat que lluitar? contra el terrorisme en tots les seves manifestaciones. Molt b? per? ?qu? exactament signficar??

I si lluiteu contra el terrorisme ?per qu? treureu els soldats d'Irak? Assumiu realment que reure les tropes rendir? Espanya menys vulnerable? Francament es massa tard i vostra pol?tica nom?s encoratjareu m?s besties pels terroristes. Ara torneu a l'immigraci?. N'estic curi?s que exactament ser? vostre politica d'immigraci?. Espero que no regularitzareu pas el il?legals o els sense papers massa r?pidament. Penso que es l?cit a exigir del immigrants- sobretot els magrehibins- si respectin la nostra societat i les seves valors.

Hi han valors i actituds tampoc que m'agraden per? tampoc exigir? d'ella que respecti les meves valors que li obligaria a comprometre's-en o que n'es impossible a satisfer. Finalment, ?De quina manera us differenciareu del PP quant a les relacions dela comunitats aut?nomes? ?Aceptereu a legisferar un nou Estat per a Catalunya? ?Modifiquereu el Codi penal i les lleiselectorals per no pas m?s criminalitzar el referendum que Ibarretxe vol tenir i persuadir-lo que el Pa?s basc i Espanya poden conviure-hi hjunts amb pau i tranquil?lat. Em damno si pactareu un sistema de finan?ament i interpretareu de mander m?s oberta les comp?tencies que les CC AA podran assumir o no.

En tot cas, com veieu, teniu molta feina no sols legislativa sin? ans tamb? de persuasi? perque francament no em convenceu encara que realment hi ha hagut un canvi.

  ¶ 16:01

 

The Spanish elections: my take

I haven't yet commented about the Spanish elections. It appears that the Socialist wil win a minority government. Leaving aside John's sourness that the vote is one of appeasement, there were legitimate reasons to either reduce the PP to a minority government or boot it out of the executive.

The massacre certainly played the definitive factor but there's also 8 years of baggage to take into account. The voters rejected the PP's antagonistic policies towards the Basques. The detoriating situation there is the PP's fault. Since 1996 it choose a policy to demonize the moderate nationalist parties, and try to paint the Basques as ETA supporters.

Recently, the PP with the socialist support signed and presented a common antiterrorism pact. The PP in government changed the Penal code and electoral laws to ensure that Ibarrexte would go to prision if he held his referendum for independence. the PP threatened to suspend the Basque's sel-government.

Then there was the restrictive interpretations of the Constitution so that the regional governments- i.e. Catalan and Basque- wouldn't have any more jurisdictions transferred to them because the historical minories threatened Spanisn unity. I leave aside the lead up to the Iraqi war because that clearly showed the deep divisions in Spain. The voters finally got to decide and they were fed up; the massacre simply clinched just how much they'd enough. Obviously the American commentators and bloggers don't particularly care the the PP deliberately manipulated the information as to who the perpetuators are. My mistake, only the Anglopshere must benefit from transparancy; Europeans are congentially unable to handle the truth.

Mind you I disdain the Socialistw as much as the PP; ideologically I'm a Catalan Christian democrat. So to read the English language blogs and commentators wring their hands that a Socialist victory is one for appeasement insults everyone in Spain. Geez what confidence and trust you show towards a stalwart ally; how quickly you've become the imperious superpower berating us because we booted out your preferred party.

Learn to live with the electoral results just as we live with yours. Forming the government and being briefed on the state of the msaacre investigations will sober the Socialists. The Spanish citizens know that Al Qu'ida is their enemy and demand that agressive action be taken. Let's hold off the panic and hair pulling lamentations

  ¶ 16:59