A string of explosions took place on Madrid’s railway network at the height of morning rush hour on Thursday killing, according to latest reports, at least 130 people and wounding more than 400.
Three explosions hit separate trains along the southern part of the train network at Santa Eugenia, El Pozo and Atocha stations.
The most deadly blast happened on a train entering Madrid’s main Atocha station, killing 29 people there, the broadcaster quoted Interior Minister Angel Acebes as saying.
Three bombs, planted in plastic bags in the front, middle and rear cars, hit the train, arriving from the eastern Madrid suburb of Alcala de Henares, Spanish radio SER reported.
Spain’s government blamed Basque separatist group ETA. Government spokesman Eduardo Zaplana dubbed it a “criminal gang of killers”.
The attacks came barely three days ahead of the Spanish general election.
Spain’s conservative ruling Popular Party — which has taken a hard-line stance against ETA — is currently leading in the polls ahead of the election.
Basque Member of Parliament Gustavo Aristegui, who was in Madrid at the time of the attack, also blamed ETA. “This is probably Spain’s worst terrorist attack in history — not probably, surely our worst terrorist attack ever,” Aristegui told CNN.
“There are people that are real monsters that are trying to blackmail the whole society through acts of terror.”
Last month, two suspected ETA members were arrested as they headed to Madrid in an explosive-laden truck. Spanish police said they were arrested about 140km outside the city with 500kg of explosives hidden in the vehicle.
And last December, Spanish authorities said they foiled a Basque plot to blow up a train at a Madrid rail station.
Factfile
ETA (Euskadi ta Askatasuna) is fighting for an independent Basque state in northern Spain and southwestern France.
The group has killed nearly 850 people since 1968, typically using car bombs or shootings. The number of ETA killings had been falling, from 23 in 2000 to three in 2003.
Spain, the United States and the European Union have listed ETA as a terrorist organisation.
In 2002 the Spanish government banned the Basque political party Batasuna, which it described as ETA’s political wing. The party denied the charge. Batasuna won 10 per cent of the vote in Basque parliamentary elections in May 2001.
By: Dutchy - 21st March 2004 at 22:11
How did we come to this? From a terrorist attack to the economics of moving jobs abroad.
But that is indeed an interesting debate. In Holland beta orientated university programmes are way down. So what we are doing for now is hiring Chinese / Indian / Pakistani etc to fill to highly technical jobs in The Netherlands. It is a matter of time that not only the production of goods but also the development will be outsourced to these countries and where will Europe then be?
Only providing management positions?
Ah well, it’s going to be hard to turn this trend around……….
By: Flood - 21st March 2004 at 18:59
Originally posted by TTP
As an example, New York city is enjoying a great renisance, crime is way down, and tourism up..the city was largely cleaned up, and despite 9-11 its very prosperous and has a great reputation. Yet say for instance each night on the national news Dan Rather recites all the robberies, rapes, and criminal activity that routinely occur in a city of 9 million plus…after a while the viewers would think that New York was a crime-infested wasteland……….though its just a normal or less than normal amount of crime for such a large city……..its all in the perception, and how its rerported.
It boils down to this: good news is nearly always personal and boring; bad news is interesting and reportable.
For example:-
Who wants to hear that Mrs Jones had her hip replaced? It affects nobody except Mrs Jones and her friends.
If Mrs Jones’s hip replacement goes wrong then people will want to know all about it in case it was caused by the hospital, a defect in the replacement hip, incompetence by the surgeon, etc – because it affects them. They might have to be in that hospital tomorrow…
Flood.
By: Hand87_5 - 21st March 2004 at 18:49
Maybe I’m wrong , I wish I am , but I’m not that optimist. Anyway, this was an interesting debate.
Thanks for that.
By: TTP - 21st March 2004 at 14:28
Hand,
Again if the Enron scandal were the norm and not the exception, the US economy would be in a shambles. I for one, think it was a good thing with respect that it exposed these crooks. Stiff penalties will be forthcoming, and every corporate big-wig is on notice that this type of behavoir will not be tolerated. Unfortunately many innocen stockholders were hurt. Trust me, if you just watch CNN or any other news network its all doom and gloom! As an example, New York city is enjoying a great renisance, crime is way down, and tourism up..the city was largely cleaned up, and despite 9-11 its very prosperous and has a great reputation. Yet say for instance each night on the national news Dan Rather recites all the robberies, rapes, and criminal activity that routinely occur in a city of 9 million plus…after a while the viewers would think that New York was a crime-infested wasteland……….though its just a normal or less than normal amount of crime for such a large city……..its all in the perception, and how its rerported.
By: Hand87_5 - 21st March 2004 at 13:06
Originally posted by TTP
Hand,A similar phenomenon occured in the US in the 1960s, A large portion of the higher paying blue-collar manufacturing jobs left the northeastern US and went South. The reason was the high union wages and higher cost of doing business in the northeast, as oppossed to the southern US, where there were much lower wages, eventually things level out…thats one of the advantages of the capitalists system, it seems slow to react, but eventually everything finds “its level” Once upon a time blacksmiths were upset because automobiles were putting them out of jobs. Recently in the US one innovative company gave Americans a choice, to order a product off-shore at a slightly cheaper price or pay a higher price for a US version, 80% of Americans opted for the off-shore cheaper version!!! Like I said, election year politics, If Kerry wins I guarantee you won’t be haering about offshoring anymore.
TTP
Let me tell you what : I really wish you are right. However all those Enron-like scandals worry me a lot , since it appears to me being not an exception but more a general rule of management.
By: TTP - 21st March 2004 at 12:46
Hand,
A similar phenomenon occured in the US in the 1960s, A large portion of the higher paying blue-collar manufacturing jobs left the northeastern US and went South. The reason was the high union wages and higher cost of doing business in the northeast, as oppossed to the southern US, where there were much lower wages, eventually things level out…thats one of the advantages of the capitalists system, it seems slow to react, but eventually everything finds “its level” Once upon a time blacksmiths were upset because automobiles were putting them out of jobs. Recently in the US one innovative company gave Americans a choice, to order a product off-shore at a slightly cheaper price or pay a higher price for a US version, 80% of Americans opted for the off-shore cheaper version!!! Like I said, election year politics, If Kerry wins I guarantee you won’t be haering about offshoring anymore.
TTP
By: Hand87_5 - 21st March 2004 at 08:40
Originally posted by TTP
Hand 87-5I’m sorry about your job, but off-shoring jobs has been going on for decades!! Just now, with the election this year in the US has it become this huge problem…..and don’t believe that all Americans are working at McDonlads making minimum wage, Don’t believe what you see on the Liberal US Networks…….Remember back in the 1980’s homelessness was a huge political issue in the US, One would think a huge portion of our population was homeless, then Bill Clinton gets elected and all of a sudden one never hears about homelessness. I’m not saying jobs aren’t moving overseas, but just the other day a report came out, not widely reported by the liberal media, stating that the US exports many Billions of Dollars more in services, high paying services, like law, design, engineering, than we lose to these jobs overseas that are being off-shored. Its typical election year hysteria.
Look at the auto industry, all those jobs to Japan!! same with electronics, but nobody complains when a Honda cost peanuts and ran well, same with Sony radio’s
TTP
I understand your point TTP.
Thanks for your concern , but my job is not gone …so far. What I’m trying to point out is that right now not only maufacturing job are moved overseas. It’s a more general trend.The danger is to create more poor people in the so called rich countries.The paradox is that the system creates jobless people in the countries where the same companies have their customers. It looks like a very short sight strategy to me.
By: Sauron - 21st March 2004 at 06:31
This thread has taken a number of turns.
Not only is the US UI rate lower than Canada’s, our GNP is growing at a far lower rate and more importantly for our consumers, our disposable income haven’t kept pace with that of Americans.
Sauron
By: TTP - 21st March 2004 at 02:32
Hand 87-5
I’m sorry about your job, but off-shoring jobs has been going on for decades!! Just now, with the election this year in the US has it become this huge problem…..and don’t believe that all Americans are working at McDonlads making minimum wage, Don’t believe what you see on the Liberal US Networks…….Remember back in the 1980’s homelessness was a huge political issue in the US, One would think a huge portion of our population was homeless, then Bill Clinton gets elected and all of a sudden one never hears about homelessness. I’m not saying jobs aren’t moving overseas, but just the other day a report came out, not widely reported by the liberal media, stating that the US exports many Billions of Dollars more in services, high paying services, like law, design, engineering, than we lose to these jobs overseas that are being off-shored. Its typical election year hysteria.
Look at the auto industry, all those jobs to Japan!! same with electronics, but nobody complains when a Honda cost peanuts and ran well, same with Sony radio’s
TTP
By: Hand87_5 - 20th March 2004 at 17:04
Originally posted by TTP
Dutchy,Don’t fall into the trap that the US liberals are setting concerning all these jobs going off-shore. If you watch the news here one would think America has a high un-employment rate. Today its 5.6% much much less than Europe or Canada by a wide margin. Alot of these off-shore jobs are not high paying jobs anyway. Also its not just greedy CEO’s that are amking more profit, the price to purchase alot of goods are much lower so all Americans benefit..I just saw a very nice 19 in TV for $139 They used to be$350 20 years ago, ditto for a $59 DVD player……Eventually all manufacturing will move to the Far East where workers make $5 a day its been happening for the last 3 decades, but you don’t hear anything about it from the liberal TV networks when their candididate was in office, only now, its a problem, when they’re trying to get Bush out……Mark my words, in a few months the US job outlook will get much better and then the cry you hear will be about how these new jobs aren’t well paying etc etc
TTP
TTP,
Wrong !! not only manufacturing job are moved overseas.
My company (a very famous american computer company) after massive lay off , is no hiring similar peoples in India.Those are 6000$~8000$ a month jobs.
They claim that they can have 5 Indians for the cost of 1 European or US ingeneer. It’s not fiction , it’s now ….
An other point. The US has 5.6% unemployement rate , that’s true , but how many of those jobs are McDonals like low-wages jobs?
By: Hand87_5 - 20th March 2004 at 17:01
Mistake … see below
By: ELP - 20th March 2004 at 15:03
In essence America did attack Iraq without any just cause.
Standing in the rubble of 9/11, taking out a possible threat lead by a crazy that had unaccounted for military quality WMD makes perfect sense. Take no chances. Better that then risk a larger 9/11
How would America feel if for instance if a sovereign state like Kuwait was attacked and over run. There must be an appealing reason to breached the sanctuary of sovereign of a state.
Define sovereign. I hardly give that to a SH run Iraq. That was government was a combination sicilian crime family / stalinist state with possible WMD. RE: my first comment above.
In my humble view that can only be approved by a “world order” like the UN.
Good point. The U.N. could have helped out. Instead they were doing their super fine job of protecting terrorist countries and taking graft/payoff from the oil for food program. Way to go!. Based on our national defense, we aren’t going to go to the U.N. for a permission slip to take out a potential threat.
——- U.S. Senate Joint Resolution 23
Of equal legal significance, Senate Joint Resolution 23, which authorized the use of force in responding to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, authorizes the president:
“To use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”
By: TTP - 20th March 2004 at 14:45
Dutchy,
Don’t fall into the trap that the US liberals are setting concerning all these jobs going off-shore. If you watch the news here one would think America has a high un-employment rate. Today its 5.6% much much less than Europe or Canada by a wide margin. Alot of these off-shore jobs are not high paying jobs anyway. Also its not just greedy CEO’s that are amking more profit, the price to purchase alot of goods are much lower so all Americans benefit..I just saw a very nice 19 in TV for $139 They used to be$350 20 years ago, ditto for a $59 DVD player……Eventually all manufacturing will move to the Far East where workers make $5 a day its been happening for the last 3 decades, but you don’t hear anything about it from the liberal TV networks when their candididate was in office, only now, its a problem, when they’re trying to get Bush out……Mark my words, in a few months the US job outlook will get much better and then the cry you hear will be about how these new jobs aren’t well paying etc etc
TTP
By: SOC - 20th March 2004 at 01:59
It depends on your view of our motives. From the standard “m0r0n itz obviuhsly a11 ab0ut 0iL” viewpoint, the move could be considered a negative one in the eyes of the world.
If you believe it was to get rid of Saddam’s WMD threat, there’s nothing wrong with it as possession of those items was clearly a violation of UNSCR 687 and ended the cease-fire.
If you believe it was about a US administration sick and tired of funding yet another UN cockup for the past 12 years and wanting to be done with the problem once and for all, it lies somewhere in between I think.
What people fail to realize is that outside all the political rhetoric, military action in Iraq was fully legal the minute he broke UNSCR 687 and therefore ended the cease-fire. The question should not be “was the US invasion of Iraq justified”, but rather “was the US removal of Saddam Hussein and the installation of a new government justified”. He broke 687. Cease-fire over.
And before anyone gets into the old “but the US waited this long as well as the UN”, you need to rethink that one. 1991/1992? Elections and campaigning. 1992-2000? An obvious foreign-policy and defense idiot in charge. 2000-2001? Election crap and then 9/11. 2002? Operation ENDURING FREEDOM to punish those responsible for 9/11. 2003? Now we can catch our breath and reassess old issues that need to be addressed.
Did we foul up the justification for war? Well, yeah, that much at least is blindingly obvious. But war itself was perfectly legal. The real issue is the removal of Saddam and the installation of the new government. And if you believe in self determination, what’s wrong with giving the Iraqis that opportunity? Their constitution could have easily set up a different form of government-constitution does not imply democracy.
By: Dutchy - 20th March 2004 at 01:44
I do agree with you their, but you have to admit that it wasn’t the classiest of acts by the US/UK.
By: SOC - 20th March 2004 at 01:37
Originally posted by Dutchy
America upheld the resolutions by defying the Security Counsel.
Acting in the place of indecision does not constitute defiance.
I do agree with you that the babying of Israel by the US in the Security Council has to stop-if we are going to act to uphold UN resolutions ourselves the policy should extend across the board. Until the Israelis get into compliance with the UN resolutions set against them, they have no right to argue the illegality of anything themselves, including the outbreak of Homo explosivus which seems to plague their country.
By: Dutchy - 20th March 2004 at 01:32
Originally posted by SOC
If you can’t make a decision to buy white bread or wheat bread, and I go out and buy the white bread because you said in the past that’s the type to get, I am not defying you, am I?
Sean,
Sorry but I don’t understand the relevance of you analogy.
By: SOC - 20th March 2004 at 01:28
If you can’t make a decision to buy white bread or wheat bread, and I go out and buy the white bread because you said in the past that’s the type to get, I am not defying you, am I?
By: Dutchy - 20th March 2004 at 01:21
Originally posted by Hand87_5
TTP ,Don’t get me wrong. I guess rebuilding Europe after WWII was the right thing to do, as it is the right thing to do in Irak.
I know the America=Business= Capitalism. That is an equation which works pretty well if everyone is playing the rules.
What is the basic assumption:
“Let us do business, earn money , we will create jobs , produce wealth , and everybody will be happy”: fine!
It’s almost as perfect in theory as communism. The problem is that (as in communist countries) not everybody is playing with the same rules.What do we see in the business now.
Companies outsourcing, closing facilities in the US and in Europe in order to reopen them in Asia. Why? Because they not profitable? No , because they want them MORE profitable. More profitable for who? For the emplyees? No, to give indecent bonusses to their CEO’s ,fat cats and to a bunch of big stock holders. Right now Asia whealth is ramping up and US and Europe is getting down. I’m affraid that the end will be painful……But maybe I’m a bit out of topic here :rolleyes:
You got a point here, Hand.
By: Dutchy - 20th March 2004 at 01:19
That fact in itself is no reason. You are forgetting resolution 242 and 313.
——————-
United Nations Security Council Resolution 313
February 28, 1972
The Security Council,
Demands that Israel immediately desist and refrain from any ground and air military action against Lebanon and forthwith withdraw all its military forces from Lebanese territory
——————-
United Nations Security Council Resolution 242
November 22, 1967
——————–
So Israel is in breach of the UN SC for 35,5 years so 12 years is nothing.
But like I said that in itself is no argument to attack someone. The UN SC, the same body, which desided on this resolution, couldn’t agree whether to attack Iraq or not. And you have to agree with me it would be an utter silly argument to make: America upheld the resolutions by defying the Security Counsel.
Sign In
March 11, 2004 at 1:10 pm