Terror in Madrid: Of "lions" and red herrings

The terror attacks in Spain brought to a head the conflict between the government, which supported the Iraq war, and the electorate, which detested it. The people of Spain rejected the Popular party of Spanish rightist Jose Maria Aznar (the son of a Franco official), who was supported by the Church’s most reactionary wing -- specifically Opus Dei. The arrogant Aznar achieved power by promoting fear and nationalism, and did everything he could to dismantle protections for the destitute and the elderly while eroding the separation of church and state. His economy was marked by skyrocketing housing prices and a widening gap between rich and poor.

It’s tempting to suggest that “Aznar” is Spanish for Bush. But that wouldn’t be fair to Aznar. The Spanish economy has not suffered the wounds inflicted on America’s.

In the old days, terrorists signed their acts. The signature was the point. The message was “Do what we want,” which meant that the “we” could not remain mysterious. Nowadays, matters are more difficult.

Aznar personally assured inquirers that the Basque terrorist group ETA (Euskadi Ta Askatasuna) bore responsibility. The Spanish investigators have not (at this writing) ruled out ETA, although this attack differs in striking ways from their usual modus operandi -- for one thing, ETA has always given prior warning. When they were last in power, the Socialist party had taken extremely stern anti-ETA measures; the Basques may not welcome a Socialist return to power. The Popular party, however, was just as harsh, and had rebuffed even those representatives of the Basque cause who denounced violence.

Although the American press have told us that the attack came as a complete surprise, and was preceded by no terrorist “chatter,” a story by Mario Andrade in the Spanish newspaper La Rioja indicates something quite different:

“The Spanish Ministry of Interior was on maximum alert, just days prior to the terrorist attack in Madrid. The ministry deployed over 200 agents, heavily-armed and equipped with riot gear. Officials stated that the reason for the security alert was to protect the nation's capitol against a possible terror attack from the Basque ETA terrorist group.

“The security forces were convinced that the ETA terrorists were going to return to Madrid, in spite of their previous attempt to smuggle explosives into the capitol. Just two weeks ago, t he police in Spain reported they had foiled a big attack by the Basque separatist guerrillas, ETA. Police arrested two suspected members of ETA as they drove towards the capital, Madrid, in a pick up truck carrying eleven hundred pounds of explosives.”

The article goes on to state that two days before the attacks, “the riot police in Madrid began setting up checkpoints in order to find cars with explosives. They began patrolling commercial areas, train stations, airports, stadiums, large crowds and government buildings.”

Was it Al Qaida? Near the scene of the crime, a witness saw men in ski masks coming out of a van, which was left in place. The police found detonators, unexploded bombs, and an Islamic tape recording. Why was the van left there? Why would the perpetrators leave evidence pointing to Muslims? A “clue dump” of this sort always seems rather too convenient.

The London-based Arab-language newspaper Al-Quds Al-Arabi published a statement from a “death squad” of the Abu Hafs Al-Masri Brigades, supposedly an al-Qaida linked group. The message claimed responsibility and reported that preparations for a major strike against America are “90% completed.”

Do we have our perps? Not so fast...

This same group also claimed responsibility for the power outage in the United States and Canada last year -- an assertion few take seriously. A line-by-line analysis of this statement by MEMRI (the Middle East Media Research Institute) argues against its authenticity; the wording differs in striking ways from genuine Al-Qaida communications.

Robert Fisk adds: “Sources close to Osama bin Laden's organisation are puzzled about the strange message, supposedly from the attackers, which was printed in the Arabic language paper Al-Quds al-Arabi. It suggested that the initial response to Spain's involvement in Iraq was the attack on Italian troops in Kerbala - if real, it would surely have referred to the killing of seven Spanish intelligence officers near Hilla. Using a public statement to order its own "cells" to make more attacks does not show the
desperate discretion which al-Qa'ida normally shows in its communications.”

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: Forgeries do not make themselves.

I don’t know if Al-Qaida had anything to do with the blasts. Clearly, however, someone wants us to so believe. The question is: Why?

One way to approach that question is to ask another: Did the perpetrators believe that the bombing would bring about a Socialist government? Or did they predict (wrongly) that outrage against terror would insure a right-wing victory?

Another terror group, a newcomer to the scene, has taken responsibility. They are called "the Lions of al-Mufridoon" -- and they too, have been linked to Al-Qaida. After an Islamic website named Jihad Unspun printed this group’s communiqué, the site reportedly suffered “a very serious hack attack that brought it to its knees. This was no ordinary hack, which we deal with every day, but a very high level effort to prevent us from getting this information out.” According to Jihad Unspun, these “Lions” include operatives from Tunisia, Morocco, and Algeria.

The most recent report holds that the Spanish police are holding six Moroccans who took part in the Madrid attack. The main suspect is Jamal Zougam, a disciple of al-Qaida leader Imad Yarkas. French investigator Jean-Charles Brisard – 911 researchers will recognize the name – claims that Zougam has connections with a radical Islamic group in Morocco and may have played a part in the bombing in Casablanca last August.

Is Zougam’s group the aforementioned Lions of al-Mufridoon? What was the purpose of the letter from the Abu Hafs Al-Masri Brigades? Was it (as Alan Dershowitz might put it) an attempt to frame a guilty party? Were the Spanish authorities alerted before the attack, or were they caught unawares? And what made Aznar so positive that ETA did it?