Regime Change by Al Qaeda
Mon March 15th, 2004 00:49 MSTThere is no way to interpret Spain’s vote yesterday than as a regime change engineered by Al Qaeda, and a major defeat for the forces of democracy. An Al Qaeda document captured some weeks ago foretold exactly this strategy and outcome.
Spain, to its eternal shame, has chosen the path of appeasement. They have lost 200 citizens to Al Qaeda violence, with many more terribly wounded, and their response is to cave to Al Qaeda’s desires.
In America we feel grief for the victims and their families, but the Spanish voters have demeaned their own dead by surrendering to the killers, and betrayed their own brave soldiers who have served well in Iraq. Clearly Spain has joined Western Europe in its pathetic decadence.
A nation which, when its civilians are attacked, blames its own government and gives in to the attacker deserves no respect from thinking people. Rather, it is an accessory to the murder of its citizens and the murder of many more around the world that will result from their cowardice. The more solid Australians did not cave in when they suffered proportionally more casualties in the Al Qaeda attack in Bali, but the Spanish took only four days to bring out their white flags and wave them for all to see.
Those who choose appeasement often imagine that they are choosing peace. In reality, their actions encourage more violence and more deaths of innocents. We should feel nothing but loathing for those who switched their vote after the Al Qaeda attacks.
Spain has now joined the French as surrender monkeys, for Spain has truly done exactly what the Islamofascists want.. Ironically, tthe Spanish don’t understand that they will be targeted again in any case. Usama Bin Laden long ago listed the reconquest of Spain for Islam as one of his primary goals.
Al Qaeda has demonstrated that it can cause regime change. It will try it again. Thanks to Spain, we can expect massacres to occur in Britain and Italy, and probably in the United States this year.
The Democrats in the United States, by giving every indication that they are weak on terror, are essentially asking Al Qaeda to attack. Kerry may, for a day or two, condemn terrorism and vow to be strong. But he is fooling few with this, as we and Al Qaeda know that he will return to form, espousing policies that would require the acquiescence of the Axis of Cowards. Terrorists understand that this gives them a license to act. They know that Kerry has already been instrumental in causing the United States to surrender to an enemy after losing tens of thousands of soldier. If terrorists were included in voter polls, they would agree with the North Koreans that Kerry is their choice for president.
This latest attack has shown the continued seriousness of this war. However, we can expect the Kerry machine to be back to criticizing the Bush war effort in a way that our enemies want to hear. They will be trying to tear Bush down, lie about his politicies, spread distrust, making untruthful accusations of lying and base motives, and generally showing that they are willing to encourage terrorists if it gains political advantage. In other words, they will be showing that they are not serious about defeating this enemy.
Terrorists understand people like this. They know such people have no core beliefs and hence are fundamentally weak. This knowledge will inform and encourage our enemies.
Sunday was a black day for the forces of good, and a major defeat in the War on Terror.
Is there any reference to this captured document you refer to? I am looking for information of this sort on how terror can influence voters.
Why is everyone so certain it was an Al’Qaeda based decision. Maybe the previous government really sucked. It happens.
What were their pollsters saying in the weeks leading up to the vote? How close was the outcome? The bloggosphere is quick to condemn the idiot press for making up stories, lets not go around making up our own.
Lloyd, you should be able to find the reference with google web or google news.
Blair, the ruling party was expected to win comfortably, according to polls, prior to the attack.
Several days ago the Norwegian intelligence released a memo from Al Queda saying they (Al Queda) had to strike Spain right before the elections, that they could withstand 3 bombings and that the elections would turn, and the rest of European coalition partners would “fall like dominoes”. The also cited the fact that Spain is still Islam land to be reconquered, even though lost to Islam 500 years.
Blair,
From what I’ve seen, prior to the bombings, Aznar’s successor was projected to win the elections by a margin of 5-3. After the bombings, the vote turned dramatically in favor of their Socialist opposition. No one even needs the Al Qaida memo to see that this was obviously the intent of Al Qaida, and the Spanish voters complied all too easily. The bombings are tragic, but the voter reaction makes them even more tragic. Al Qaida knew there would be a knee-jerk reaction, which is why they waited until less than a week before the election to strike.
It doesn’t take a genius to realize that the bombing had an effect on Spanish elections when voters interviewed on tv and in newspapers explicitly said that it did. I read dozens of comments from Spaniards interviewed at the polls who blamed Aznar for the bombing and said that is why they were bothering to vote. What do people think Spanish protesters were trying to say when they held up signs saying “Your War, Our Dead” in front of international media the night before the elections? Hello!
Wait, so a full fledged democratic election is a defeat for democracy? Huh?
Or are you saying - like so many useful idiot Right Wingers - that the voters of Spain really voted for Al Queda? If that’s the case then you really are a reactionary dope.
Every responsible commentator has evaluated the situation and concluded that THAT full fledged democratic election is a defeat for the war on terrorism. The reason is that both polling information and interviews with Spaniards show that the reason for the sudden switch was the attack. And yes, it was a defeat for the forces of democracy, since an election was decided by mass murder instead of uncoerced votes.
Now I understand that you may find it difficult for you to comprehend that democratic actions can be defeats for democracy, but if you work real hard you might be able to figure it out. I would also point out that Hitler was democratically elected, and that wasn’t a high point for democracy either.
The voters of Spain voted for appeasement. They voted for a government that would presumably make them less of a target. The act of doing so is properly seen as a sign of weakness in the face of an act of war against them. It shows that Al Qaeda was able to change the outcome of an election.
The Spanish didn’t intentionally voted for Al Qaeda. They voted for appeasement of Al Qaeda. Do you understand the difference and the relationship between the two? Do you understand what this means in terms of the calculations of a terrorist group?
No, obviously you do not, or you wouldn’t have responded the way you did.
One of the fun aspects of having a blog is the opportunity to see how utterly dense many on the left are.
Regarding Spain’s recent capitulation to terror, I suppose I’m one of those “Useful Right-wing idiots” of whom Matt wrote. Frankly, from the moment I heard that some 14 million Spaniards were ‘marching’ in the wake of cold-blooded, cruel-hearted, cowardly murder, I leaped from my comfortable TV-room easychair, and shouted to my wife, who was cooking dinner in the kitchen (freely, I might add, without a head garment and black cloak, and free from fear of being murdered by Al-Qaida), “By God, Hon,’ the Spaniards are gonna’ take the lead in this thing, and stand up to these fg cowards!” But, alas, my hopes’ of a tide-turning 12th-hour Spanish display of honor and courage were short-lived: As it turned out, Spain did indeed capitulate when “the people spoke.” Meanwhile, Islamic terrorists the world over–predictably, in the same fashion as their Cosa-Nostra cousins before them–rejoiced as only criminals would. For in taking a knee before terror, Spain veritably shrieked to the world all-too-loudly and all-too-clearly: “We’ll do anything, pay anything you demand; please…just don’t hurt us.” In so many words, rotund Winston Leonard Spencer Churchill explained that there are ‘far worse things in this world than war.’ Capitulation, particularly, is one of these.
History teaches all of us that the bully NEVER respects the wishes of a invertebrate. In fact, NO ONE–absolutely NO ONE, not even a cowardly terrorist–respects a coward.
You’re free to exhume Neville Chamberlain, if you don’t believe me, Matt.
Response to Robert: I agree completely. I also shouted to my wife just about your exact words, and also was so disillusioned by Spain’s subsequent vote. Everything you have said about cowards is true. There are things worse than war. For one, submitting to enemy manipulation to the point to the point of doing the bidding of that enemy.
credible