Spanish Elections Watch (III): Nuevo episodio de violencia (+)

If yesterday I wrote about the attack on María San Gil, today another PP candidate, Dolors Nadal, has been harrased (video inside) when she was going to give a conference at the Pompeu Fabra’s University. She has been unable to even begin with it. The independentists have shouted «No fascists in the university» and «Catalan Countries are not Spain«.

When Nadal was going to enter the room, some of those youths have tried to block it not to let her enter. There were several people pushed and slapped in that moment. Then when she was going to speak, some youths, who were out of the room, have begun to shout «fascist» to her, while the Mossos (Catalan Autonomous Police) were trying to save her from the pushes.

One of the men who was with Nadal has taken a fire extinctor, just in case the demonstrators were going to use it against the candidate. Then dozens of youths, inside the room, have insulted her.

In the end, the Mossos, considering the situation was out of control, have taken her out of the room and have driven her out of the compound in a secret police car.

No association has announced their responsibility for the boycott. But they were carrying propaganda from one of the associations of Catalan Independentist Youths. ERC (Catalan Republican Left) has stated they are not the responsible.

Oh and no condemnation from the PSOE’s representatives… 😦 Even if they should worry about the polls: PP is nearer PSOE each day (according to latest data: PP would have only 2 seats in Parliament less than PSOE). So El Pais is going to publish a special report on Zapatero, considering him as the best candidate: with satisfaction and tranquility, sure of himself, reasonably happy, with a smile, «Bishop-proofed«. 🙄 Yeah… so subtle and clever as ever…
Today it has been published that Zapatero accepted a written proposition from ETA to begin the political negotiation.

And the ETA terrorists have said that Zapatero promised them Navarra:

Los presos etarras han emitido un comunicado, publicado en Gara, en el que señalan que durante la negociación del Gobierno con ETA «nunca antes habíamos llegado tan lejos en el reconocimiento de los derechos», en alusión a la independencia. Y es que según los terroristas, «si se abrió la puerta de la solución al conflicto» fue porque Zapatero «dio su visto bueno a ese estatuto de autonomía a cuatro», es decir, que uniera Navarra, Vizcaya, Guipúzcoa y Álava.

ETA imprisoned terrorists have stated officially, in Gara, than during the negotiation of the Government with ETA «they were farther than in any other negotiation in the acknowledgement of out rights», referring to the independence. According to the terrorists, «if a door was opened to achieve a solution to this conflict» was because Zapatero «agreed with that Autonomy Statute in which the four parts were involved», that is, that Navarra, Vizcaya, Guipuzcoa y Álava were united.

Against the will of the people, without any kind of announcement. If this the Zapatero’s definition of democracy, I really do not like that democracy for sure… 👿

(+) You can send her a message of support clicking here.

Spanish Elections Watch: Zapatero (II), the tension and the drama

I wrote before about Zapatero and the economical problems and also about the relationship with the Catholic Church.

But the elections draw near (March 9th) and the situation is not eased at all.

Last week Popular Party representative in the Basque Country, courageous María San Gil, was going to be the main speaker in a conference at Santiago de Compostela University. There about fifty Galician far-rightist independentists, insulted and tried to beat her. One of them walk to Ms. San Gil, placed his finger as it was a revolver in his temple and shout: «Hope ETA kills you». A bodyguard and two policemen were hurt in the attack. The images are very telling: someone, who lives with bodyguards’ protection 24/7 because ETA has really menaced a lot of times to kill them, now is called «fascist».

A lot of people in the blogosphere asked for measures to be taken against the agressors: for example, Hurssel, AntiPSOE. Well, they were detained but set loose in hours, although accused of the crimes of affront, public disorder, menaces and attack.

So the Socialist said they condemned the agression but they rejected to pass a resolution from Galician Autonomous Parliament, condemning it, the reason being: «we should not engage the Parliament in this conflict». But the position of Antisemite BNG is even worse: they have accused the Popular Party of wanting to win a political advantage of «anecdotical» incidents. The problem is that extreme independentists have beaten or menaced both Socialists and Populars at least in 4 ocassions in less than a month, apart from this one.

Some days ago, some electoral posters appeared in San Martín de la Vega with a shot in the forehead and most of the posters were burned. The agression towards María San Gil is one step further in the scale of violence during these elections. Violence which has not been absent from any of the electoral campaign since at least 2004’s elections (read here, here). Or even without any elections.

All of the responsibles of the agressions belong to a single group, AGIR, a far-extremist-leftist independentist organization, has being menacing and practicing violence for some time. Seven years ago, a group from the same association, walled in the door of one of the Professors of the same University, Roberto Blanco Valdés, because he was using Castillian/Spanish to give his classes. Other Professors and teachers received similar menaces.

The association immediately boasted about the menaces in their webpage.

The Socialist youths justified the agression, stating that: «these are the fruits of the high level of tension and political radicalization the PP has brought throughout the term«. But of course, this is normal if someone has killed/abused you, it’s your fault. Typical of Zapatero’s rantings.

El Cerrajero wrote:

The result can be a new civil war, but the socialits are now taking measures not to arrive to something they are used to lose, that is why they are just preparing everything, there is no war but a bloody repression.

This is truly related with the coward spirit of the left and no one has to be a great analyst to discover where are pointing the movements of the colleagues of Zapatero: they have destroyed the Army, reforced and made bigger the Moncloa’s bunker [Moncloa is the official residence of the Spanish Prime Minister], divided the security forces -even they have built confrontations between the policial corps with «convenient» rivalries-, have destroyed the hierarchy’s ruling with loyal servants -just take a look to the chiefs of the security forces after the March 11th bombings and consider who have been promoted or given medals to-. They have also raised the quantities in the reserved funds’ budget [those are the ones who are secret or clasified, related to national security], have controlled most of the MSM, have eliminated the popular action, have the control over the Judges and the Prosecutors [the first ones using the Judicial Power’s General Council, who must be named by Parliament; the second, because the Prosecutor’s office depends from the Minister of Justice, both organically and economically] and have built a powerful machinery to control the opposition.

So, what does Zapatero think about this?

In the middle of this event, Zapatero had an interview with leftist and Zapatero’s supporter, Iñaki Gabilondo, a Spanish Keith Obermann, just for international readers to understand his «level». Partial, absolutely boring because of his partiality for Zapatero, the interview was the derision of nearly all the blogosphere.
But the worst was yet to come: the video from the interview distributed to the Spanish media had a very interesting part about what Zapatero wanted to do during the campaign. It should have been erased before the distribution but it wasn’t. It runs:

– How are the polls going?
– Well, without any problems. But tension is convenient for us in the campaign.
– Yes, yes, you need tension clearly.
– So I’m beginning to play some drama this week-end.

Zapatero and Socialists in general have been accusing the right of promoting tension (what here is called crispación) throughout since they won in 2004.

So what is the tension Zapatero wants to create so Socialists can win the elections again? Aquiles asks if it consists in another March 11th bombings (you have to consider that the judicial process over it did not resolve any doubt about what happened… and that the detention of the Islamists arrested less than a fortnight ago in Barcelona was a little rare…).

Of course, Zapatero’s words were considered by most of the conservative Spanish blogosphere. Some examples:

1. La tensión de Zapatero @ Agnetem: My opinion is that the President’s words are extremely grave: he is instructing the news chief of a private (leftist) MSM to create tension between Spanish people, after presenting himself as the champion of peace, happiness…. Hipocrisy, cowardice: nothing of this is lacking in the President’s attitude that answers a lot of questions about his «use» of the tension 4 years ago:
2. El Optimista tonto @ Prevost: throughout all these four years, every critic from Socialists was that everything bad was the responsibility of PP.
3. Tensión @ Luis. The voter should continue to be sedated, but he must vote. And the «tension» is the best way to wake up the monkey leaving the homo sapiens resting. Verbal violence, to identify the enemy. They need a finger and someone to single as the enemy. When Socialists’ voters are occupied denouncing the dab guy, the one who pretends to throw them out from their comfortable state to the emptyness of uncertainty, they do not have time -and of course, no neurone- to consider the unnrealities in which they are sleeping in their happy ignorance.

Of course, after that, Socialists have begun to tell us how we must consider the word tension, as if we were all illiterate. Zapatero for example has said that «the tension is achieved making the people go to vote and explaining the ones who want a Socialist Governemnt what is at stake?«. Really? Without condemning the agressions made to other parties’ representatives (not only Popular Party’s members are attacked, others from little parties such as UPyD or Ciutadans have also being attacked. Even Socialists have been attacked by minor parties’s supporters without any condemnation from Zapatero).

So, the great mask of talante (something like character, but of course, character can be good or bad), exhibited once and again by socialists, has fallen.

Anyway, Zapatero has continued to exhibit those same (bad) manners, we are used to see by now, and has blamed the tension on the Popular Party again. He has stated that «PP swindles, lies, produces tension (after saying that, you see), produces confrontation and anger and makes undecent boycotts«.

Portuguese blog O blogue Atlantico writes:

We have percieved that since March 11. By the way, this is the inheritance European leftists have left.

With a commenter, saying: «who wants this man as an ally», because Portuguese President of the Republic, the curriculum vitae forger, Sócrates, is also a Socialist.

Bad prospect indeed.

Venezuelan blogger Martha Colmenares compares Zapatero with Chávez, as both of them need tension to maintain themselves in power.

But Zapatero wants not to show that very widely, because he can lose more votes. So he has gone to have a «little soap» with the Holy See’s Ambassador in Spain, Monseñor Manuel Monteiro de Castro, the Nuncio of the Holy See. He wants to show that there are no tensions with the Catholic Church, something which is really difficult in the present moment after the insults, the blames and the disrespect bordering the menace that some of the members of the Socialist party (and supporters) have directed to Catholics during these past four years.

Investigadores de corrupción ingleses amenazados con otro 7/J

Si continuaban investigando los sobornos en los negocios de armas a Arabia Saudí… La corrupción, esa maravillosa ayuda al terrorismo a la que no se presta ninguna atención.

Bribes inquiry was warned of ‘another 7/7’, court told – Times Online:

«Fraud investigators were told they faced the possibility of “another 7/7” and the likely loss of “British lives on British streets” if they pressed on with inquiries into Saudi Arabia’s arms deals, it was revealed yesterday.

High Court documents showed that the Saudis threatened to cut off intelligence, potentially making it easier for terrorists to attack London, if the Serious Fraud Office (SFO) did not drop its investigation into alleged corruption in deals with BAE systems.

After threats by the Saudis over co-operation in national security issues, the former Prime Minister Tony Blair subjected the SFO to “irresistible pressure” to stop its inquiries, it was claimed.

Lord Justice Moses, hearing a legal challenge to the scrapping of the inquiry, said the Government appeared to have “rolled over” in December 2006.»

Pero es que quién presionó para que se dejara de investigar fue nada más y menos que el ex-Primer Ministro Tony Blair, diciendo que la investigación «sólo dañaría las relaciones económicas y diplomáticas con Arabia Saudí«:

The Serious Fraud Office last year abruptly canceled its inquiry into the allegations after Tony Blair, the prime minister at the time, said the investigation would threaten thousands of British jobs and affect diplomatic and intelligence ties with Saudi Arabia. Blair had said an investigation would not «have led anywhere, except to the complete wreckage of a vital strategic relationship for our country.» BAE has repeatedly denied wrongdoing.At the judicial review Thursday, the Campaign Against Arms Trade and the Corner House, an anti-bribery group, said the government acted unlawfully in December 2006 when it told the fraud office to stop looking into alleged bribes paid by BAE to Saudi Arabian officials in exchange for arms deals.

Dinah Rose, a lawyer representing the two groups, said new documents showed that BAE Systems wrote to the attorney general confidentially to urge him to halt the investigation for commercial and diplomatic reasons.

Así que ya están pidiendo una nueva investigación:

Pressure groups and lawmakers have urged the government to restart the investigation or face new questions over its commitment to an international anti-bribery convention that says investigations should not be stopped because they could damage relations with other countries.

La cantidad de soborno fue de… dos mil millones de dólares que terminó en cuentas corrientes del Príncide Bandar Bin Sultan de Arabia Saudí y están vinculadas a los pagos provenientes de BAE (o sea, Gran Bretaña) a Arabia Saudí, por un negocio de armas de 1985.

British news media reported last year that more than $2 billion ended up in bank accounts in Washington controlled by Prince Bandar bin Sultan of Saudi Arabia, and that the payments coming from BAE were linked to an arms deal negotiated in 1985. The prince has denied accepting «improper secret commissions.

Por supuesto el príncipe bin Sultan (se tenía que llamar sultán…) lo niega…

Y ¿cuáles eran los grandes intereses comerciales de Gran Bretaña para no investigar?

At the time BAE and the Government were negotiating a key order for Typhoon fighters with the Saudis, a deal that was sealed last year.

En ese momento, BAE y el Gobierno estaban negociando una orden de compra primordial de cazas Typhoon con los saudíes, un negocio que fue concluido el año pasado.

Pero ¡¡¡menudos almas de cántaro!!! Les venden armas ¡¡¡a los que les amenazan con un atentado si no les dejan de investigar los trapos sucios!!! Hmm, claro, la corrupción es muy efectiva: poder y dinero todo en uno. Porque además es definitiva: una vez que alguien ha cobrado algo, ya se le puede chantajear de por vida. ¿Verdad, Bin Sultan?

Hmm, así que ¿quién es el príncipe Bandar Bin Sultan? JW:

This is Prince Bandar, smiling Prince Bandar (President of the Saudi Council for National Security). The one with the estate in Virginia. The one with the vast chalet in Aspen, where he had the top of an entire mountain removed so as to improve his view. The one who has that Plantagenet hunting-lodge outside London. The one who became the longest-serving diplomat in Washington, who entertained so lavishly all of his many good and great friends of both parties. The one who defended the massive thievery of the Al-Saud with his usual actor’s routine, as he served the port and distributed the box of cigars, that «after all, all governments are corrupt and it is only a matter of degree» — and how, after all, could the Americans present, all of them recognizing the corruption in their own government, and of which some of them were no doubt more than observers, disagree?Prince Bandar, the Smiler With the Knyf Under the Cloke, the one who was allowed in, or rather allowed himself in, to secret policy-planning sessions just before the war in Iraq. Prince Bandar, the one who was a regular tennis partner of Colin Powell, to whose wife he gave a jaguar, the very same one she had once possessed, and had let drop in conversation how much she missed it. Prince Bandar –whom did he not touch? Was there a President, or a Secretary of State, or a National Security Advisor, or members of key Congressional committees, or generals preparing arms sales of all kind, from AWACS back in 1980 to the most advanced weaponry now, or people in the Energy Department who never managed to come up with even the semblance of an intelligent energy policy, who never met Prince Bandar?

Así que el Sultán (el presidente del Consejo saudí de la Seguridad Nacional) tiene un rancho en Virginia, un chalet en Aspen -donde retiró la cima de la montaña porque le privaba de vistas ¿¿¿dónde estaban los ecolojetas???- y una casita de caza de estilo Plantagenet en las afueras de Londres. Además, se convirtió en un diplomático al servicio de Washington donde entretenía con largas fiestas a sus amigos (hmm, ¡¡¡qué videos tendrá de los desarrollos privados de las fiestas, dentro de los boudoirs al uso!!!…). Su teoría es que «todos los Gobiernos son corruptos: es sólo una cuestión de grados«.
Se le autorizó para que supiera los planes secretos justo antes de la guerra en Irak. Era un compañero de Colin Powell en los partidos de tenis, con quien jugaba de forma regular. A la mujer de Colin Powell le regaló su jaguar (¿¿a cambio de qué?? ¿los planes secretos?): el mismo Jaguar que la esposa había «perdido», «pérdida» que dio lugar a comentarios.

Termina Hugh Fitzerald preguntándose quién de las personas que manejaban la política internacional americana, no ha tenido una relación con el Príncipe Bandar. Preocupante cuestión…

Eurabia: me da que es un poco más grande que sólo Europa. Y siempre existe una cosa en relación: la corrupción.

Mientras se siguen vendiendo armas a Arabia Saudí: el año pasado:

Estados Unidos anunciaba que está planeando vender a Arabia Saudí de 20.000 millones de dólares en sistemas de armamento avanzado, incluyendo kits de Joint Direct Attack Munition o JDAM, que son capaces de transformar las bombas no inteligentes en armas «inteligentes» de precisión dirigida.

On August, 2007, USA announced that it was planning to sell to Saudi Arabia 20 billion dollars in advanced weapon system, including kits of Joint Direct Attack Munition or JDAM, which are capable of transforming the non-intelligent bombs in «intelligen» weapons of directed precision.

Was involved Bandar in this agreement? Is US being also menaced with similar attacks if it doesn’t investigate corruption?

Por cierto, lo he buscado y no se ha publicado en España. ¿Tienen miedo de que nos preguntemos a cambio de qué se está regalando en armamento a Marruecos?

By the way, this has not even been published by any representative/important MSM in Spain. Are they afraid we can begin to ask why Zapatero is giving away weapons to Morocco? Or the other possibility: Has something been promised by Morocco to Socialist Government to have so bad policy regarding Morocco?

Lots of questions. Riddles in the dark. Gandalf. Lord of the Rings. The Fellowship of the Ring.