Autonomic Catalan elections on 27th September 2015

The date 27th September 2015, the last episode from the independentist challenge, will be decisive for Catalonia and Spain future. The independentists are agglutinated around a single list whereof they hope to get the enough Parliamentary majority which let them to unilaterally declare the independence and create a new State. In order to achieve that, Arthur Mas is advised by an “experts group”, building authentic State infrastructures straight from inside the Catalan Community and disposing of everything they need to take that goal.

The independentists have understood these elections as plebiscitary ones; despite the elections order did not mention anything about that with the purpose of avoiding an eventual complaint before the Constitutional Court. However, although from the juridical view are just an autonomic elections, these elections are crucial and mean a decisive battle in the dialectic war that the unionists have been losing for several decades. The massive vote, the not-independence victory and the independentists’ failure are crucial for changing the fracture tendency which has been imposed since 1980.

Mas has lost the control of the game that he began years ago, he is on a not-exit street, pressured by his partners and the independentists lobbies. The blackmail strategy has become in something dangerous which has led Catalonia to the border abysm. The President has seriously broken the Catalan society, dividing families and sowing the hate and radicalism seed. In addition, he has destroyed his own party, which is the result of a thirty years coalition. There are not politicians who had the enough legitimacy for causing that damage, skiving the attention from the really important issues in order to hide his miseries.

From an economic view, there are some doubts about the Catalonian State viability, due to the fact that many people affirm the separation from Spain would lead to the collapse and it would not be possible to pay the retirements, government officials’ wages and other essential spending. Moreover, we must take into account the difficulties due to the reestablish of customs houses and borders surveillance. However, the unionists should not focus all their arguments on the economy issue, because if the Catalan State was viable they would not be able to support their position. Although it is not the most common speech, the best reason for the not-independence must be historical, social, juridical and, specifically, the common sense.

Historically, Catalonia has never been an independent kingdom, but belonged to the Aragon kingdom. Neither, the Secession War supposed an independence war, but a civil war that was caused by an empty throne. Neither the Second Republic proclamation meant to ignore the entire Spain, but the establishment of the Catalan Republic inside to the Spanish Federal Republic. Essentially, people ignore that nationalism were born in the XIX century in the textile industry and foreign imports framework.

From the social reasoning, the independentism is inspired by the race purity and the prosecution of what is different. The race purity idea ignore the non-existence of pure Catalan people and the migratory movements from the South Spain during the XIX and XX centuries. The Catalan society is a mix from different origins and not a monolithic stone, just as some people pretend. In addition, despite the external appearance, the independentists do not constitute a social majority, since those who defend the stay of Catalonia in Spain are over the 50% and still are increasing, just as show some surveys made by the own Generalitat.

From a legal view, the secession is impossible although some people use the juridical framework for their own advantage, using distilled arguments. It does not exist the “right to secession”, despite some people try to hide it behind the opportunist “right to decide”. The Spanish Constitution recognize the Spanish Nation indissolubility and the legislation provide tools for defend it. The Mas behaviors constitute an attack against the legality and a seditionist punishable attitude. In this way, the Generalitat officials should disobey those orders which were clearly contrary to the legislation or constitute legal offence. The non-fulfillment of Constitutional Court awards in the linguistics or competences field, and the illegal summons of a consultation should have been stopped under that principle. However, the reality has been different.

From an international legal framework, the Catalan State would be out from the European Union, despite in fact it continued using the same currency. The independent Catalonia would have to apply for the entrance in the EU, which would require the unlike unanimity of all the Member States. According to that, the Mas international adventures have failed, due to the fact that the International Community has respected the principles of non-intervention on the internal affairs and the territorial integrity of a sovereign State. The responsible States reject the instability, the uncertainty and the recognition of a fact which could be qualified as “coup d´état”. That failure has happened despite the establishment of the wrong called “Catalan embassies”, and other actions.

However, rejecting the independence does not impede to debate about how Catalonia must fit in Spain. Neither to talk about the necessaries Constitutional and tax reforms. It is clear that something does not work in Catalonia, and the passive attitude from the Spanish Government does not help. Nonetheless, in order to debate about these socio-economic issues it is necessary to have enough and reliable data, checked by independent experts who confirm or refute the Catalan unbalanced budget. In any case, a best autonomic financing, the recognition of the Catalan singularity in an eventual Constitutional reform or the establishment of an asymmetric decentralized model will not satisfy the secessionist aims.

It is necessary to revise and reform the autonomic territorial, competence and financial model. In that sense, it should establish a clear competence distribution, transferring some essential competences to the Central State, such as Education. It should remove the uncertainty and duplicities, defending the territorial solidarity among the different peoples of Spain and claiming for responsibility and well management to every single governor.

Definitively, the common sense arguments are those which must be imposed: the union leads to the stronghold, and the disaggregation cause weakness. Spain is a great Nation and its diversity constitutes its best value. As big as the integrity among its peoples was, better and more effective will be the responses before the XXI century challenges. It should exist an open minded vision in a world where the borders are being blurred, the universality is growing and the ostracism does not fit.

Abraham Lincoln and our time.

The North American War Secession (1865-1865) was one of the most traumatic episodes from the short History of the United States of America. It supposed a crash between two different perspectives about the State´s territorial organization, the opinion of the Founding Fathers on the slavery and the way to understand the own democracy.

The Slavery ran a different lucky in the United States, since the North expressly banned that, or at least it was observed as a social reality which would disappeared. The South maintained it due to the white superiority presumption and an economic oligopoly which understood slavery as a legitimate institution. That debate took place in a legal framework where the slavery regulation was understood as a State field, and not a Federal one. 

Those fights between two opposite conceptions and the multiple socio-legislative battles led to a civil war, in a framework of opposite economic interests. The South States decided to proclaim the independence and organized them as a confederation, pressured by a Parliament which was against slavery. These States strongly believed that was better to strengthen the power and autonomy of the States, instead the federal power. However, the tools used were away from a democratic process and supported by the population.

Abraham Lincoln, who achieved the presidency once the war had started, emerged before that extremely situation and passivity of the unionists. Lincoln, who was lawyer and politician, had suffered a lot of punches during his life: from electoral and politic defeats to the loss of his son. His arrive to the Federal Government meant an electric shock which allowed the Union to react against the independence challenge. Lincoln knew the historical importance of the war which was taking place, since the survival of the Union meant the survival of the democracy. Moreover, behind that conflict there was a moral dilemma: the slavery debate.

The President defended the men had been created as equals by God, and for that reason the slavery was condemned to disappear in the South progressively. Given that, there was not necessity to adopt legislative measures in order to eradicate it at one time. His thought obliged him to adopt measures during the war which seemed to be too soft by the radical Republicans and inacceptable for the Democrats who supported the Federal cause. His thought can be expressed as follows: “If I could save the Union without liberate any slave, I would do, and if I could save it liberating all of them I would do, and if I could save it liberating some of them and let some behind, I also would do”.

Although the war did not started well for the unionist due to the inexperience of its army and the irresolute generals who commanded it, Lincoln never gave up. Next to the presidential determination, the Union owns the industry and amount superiority. After several defeats the course of the war changed for the Union, at the same time that the possibilities of rebel international recognition were falling. The disintegration and the inexistence of a strong central power were the keys of the rebel final defeat. During the war, the Lincoln´s moral dilemma was solved for the slaves: it was effectively proclaimed the slaves emancipation in the whole national territory, including the secessionist states.

Although in the practice it had not a relevant repercussion and Lincoln had to face crossfire from two extreme positions, the President made a decision according to his faith. The decision was made according to the fundamental conviction regarding the radical equality of all men recognized by the Constitution, and which roots were in the biblical scriptures and the Christianity faith. Lincoln was strongly convinced he was complied with the Creator desires.

Ended the war and having survived the United States, against what was expected and the revenge claims, Lincoln led a peaceful policy regarding the losers. He believed that the best way to maintain the Union and cure wounds go through reincorporating the rebels to the national life, without rancor and revenge. That purpose came true by death penalty commutations, pardons, the joining of south soldiers to the US army and the strict limitation of confiscations. However, the total national reconciliation and social integration of black people were delayed until the twentieth century as consequence of the President murder.

Disappeared the major icon of national reconciliation and moderation from the slavery ending, the radical Republicans get the control of legislative and executive powers, approving acts in order to punish the rebels and using the black vote for biased purposes. As consequence of that radicalism, it beginning a system based on the favoritism and corruption, which conducted to a legal response by the south Democrats where the black people was situated in a lower juridical and social position. In addition, it took place violent acts from some radical groups. The death of Lincoln and his policy delayed almost a century what could have been achieved in a few decades.

From this chapter of the North American History we can learn universal teachings: the necessity to strongly defend the Democracy, avoiding that minorities subvert or blackmail it and setting before their particular interest from the rest of the Nation. It is also necessary to being strong before who pretend destroy what has cost effort and sacrifice. Before who attack the democratic building, its defenders should emerge firmly. Moreover, it should recognized scopes which are above the play of parliamentary majorities and the convenience of a reconciliation policy. It is necessary to achieve a Nation where everyone can be inside, fixing wounds and looking at the future.

In conclusion, despite the non-religious character of the State, it would not be harmful that politicians leaders trust in a high being who knows the destine of men and nations, just as Lincoln did. And coherently, they worked for the poorest and the downtrodden, defending the equality of opportunities. Essentially, Spain is where these ideas need to be put in practice. 

Failure of XXI century socialism and time of change in Venezuela

After Hugo Chavez´s death and following the constitutional orders, it call to presidential elections in Venezuela, beggining a new chapter at the History of the Caribbean country. The electoral overturning in relation to october elections surprised international community: the opposition had achieved cut a fourteen points distance to the minimum (one comma eightythree points). The figures showed that bolivarian regime heir had been rejected by its own electors.

However, the Nicolas Maduro´s poor victory smells fishy due to it´s too difficult to accept that using all the ways and resources of statal power, in order to coerce the vote and pervert the elections, he got only two hundred thousand votes above Henrique Capriles. As a matter of fact, we can pose some questions: Are the election results more manipulated than ever? What would happen if the winner was Capriles?

On one hand, Spanish left, making a wink to authoritarian regimes, is supporting the electoral results while it praises the fiability and modernity of the Venezuelan electoral system. On the other hand, Spanish government has recognised clumsily the government of Nicolas Maduro despite its illegitimate, arrogant and authoritarian character. Both of them should think about the fiability of an electoral telematic inventory and the moral and ethic rate of the called assisted vote.

Those election results show the falling of XXI century socialism. During years the government has been subsidizing the popular sectors of society, instead to teach people how to generate richness and promote the personal autonomy. The direct subsidy has attracted the vote of poorest, but it hasn´t report a well-fare State anyway; due to poverty must be defeated teaching in hard-work culture, the effort and the equality of opportunities. Therefore, it´s a wrong perspective to achieve the social progress through the indiscriminate persecution of richness, the property collectivization and the statal planification in citizens life.

These elections will be an advance to the formal instauration of a comunist dictadure; in fact, the country has been known as an hybrid State, a pseudodemocracy with totalitarian characteristics, typical of fascism and with an important dose of populism which mobilizes people. Chavism will get down democratic disguise and will repress with the power State any opposition focus. In the same way, the purpose is stress the socialist revolution; that point of view is according with penitentiary secretary and Nicolás Maduro statements (“Anyone will hurt you, but I am preparing the cell where you will have to pay for your crimes, because you´re a fascist and killer”; “Capriles fascist, I´ll working hard in order to make you pay all the damage you´re inflicting to our country and people”).

Opposition is not fighting against government plan, but a statal project: right now, the Venezuelan government is owner of the State, turning to property of socialist revolution. It´s not easy to defend the ideas of change in a not neutral State where oficialism shakes its bases and use coercion in order to get the victory. In that way, it´s amazing the effort made by Venezuelan opposition which is facing the Bolivarian politics on ideas field.

Venezuela is poorer than fourteen years ago: it grows up in a slowler rhythm than its continental neighbours and it´s the most second violent country of Latin America. Apart from, the panorama is complemented by any positive figures such as the drop of the petroleum production and a galloping inflation. On that abominable situation, Capriles represents a movement of change and renovation, he knows the ways which could situate Venezuela in the right place as emergent power.

To sum up, we can´t speak about democracy where there isn´t a clear separation of powers, either where members of Electoral National Council are elected by government; and either where civil servants have seen conditioned their freedom to vote. In short, either can´t exist democracy in a State where the elected president thinks he´s “son” and “heir” of former president, due to in democracy there are leaders and statesman, but never heirs.

Roman Republic and contemporaneus democracy (II)

From that point of view, since 1978 we have been enjoying a parlamentarian regime which was a dream

during centuries; also we have to remember the traumatic experience of the Second Republic and Franco´s dictadure.

As a rule, in European scene we are not concerned about democracy difficulties during the Second World War, when Nazism tried to conquest European continent; either we recognise the breakable equilibrium at Cold War between Soviet bloc and nerveless occidental democracies. It meant not only an economic discussion, but also political and philosophic.

If citizens didn´t feel democratic system can respond satisfactorily their requirements, they would become away from and hate democratic values; that´s the most dangerous risk we have to face. As we have seen with August and the Republic, any conspirator disguissed of democrat will be able to tranform the system helped by the passivity of citizenship and using populist and demagogic instruments.

Restore citizens confidence on the Right State and focus on the studying of History and democratic postulates are the best guarantee in order to avoid tacit changes of regime. That´s why I strongly believe we need to renove the nobility of politic, making the popular representation impregnates its legislative and philosophical activities through the intelectual height of Classic Culture. I´m talking about those values which took place in Ancient Greece and Roman republic known how to reproduce in perfect way.

Nevertheless, it´s not enough with demand more preparation to our politicians, it´s necessary to demand an high level of citizenship intelectual preparation, teaching to our young generations the seed of racional and critic knowledge. Universities must teach looking at values represented by democracy, avoiding political indoctrinatement, imposition of dogmas and ideological fanatism.

In conclusion, the before reasoning should be the way to the democratic and social recuperation; if we don´t undertake the essential reforms about internal troubles of Democracy, we will take the risk of repeat traumatical historical experiences.

Roman Republic and contemporaneus democracy (I)

From our current historic perspective, we use to think the values that inspire our juridical legislation came from French Revolution. However, that statement is not exactly true due to the outbreak of French Revolution was the performing of values which origins and development were situated many centuries before.

We are talking about values borned in the Ancient Greece, being aplicated at the end of sixth century before Jesus Christ and taking end with the invasion and victory of Filipo´s soldiers above Athenian army. Nevertheless, the Athenian democratic seed come back and blossomed many times in the History with better or worse luck; that´s why Democracy was tried at every time.

The Roman republic was inspired on those values, becoming a rather advanced form of political organisation for the epoch. Evidently it wasn´t a perfect democracy; in fact, the system vote and the magistratures access were conditioned by an aristocratic character. Apart from that situation, Roman republic can be considered as a perfect precedent of our contemporaneous democracy, sharing the basic and intemporal nucleus: the politic power must be subject to the laws voted by citizens.

Focusing on the formal and material perfection of Republican conception, institutions of our current democratic system are being affected by troubles that Roman institutions never had. Therefore, justice, power distribution and sovereignty thinkings that head this first democratic formulation have been valid for all time and all places. Those ideas are kept as universal values that must be object of respect, lauding and veneration.

However, the republican regime disappeared formally centuries later since the proclamation of Absolute Empire by Dioclesiano in 284 after Jesus Christ. Nevertheless, the truth is that republic began to descompose materially many years before, with August´s populist government and his power play. August known how to camouflage his personal ambitious and achieve an ilimitated power and influence. He claimed himself as the institutions guardian while he was destroying astutely the republican constitution; that´s why nobody wasn´t able to thwart his authentic purpose.

From critic spirit and Law student perspective, the disappearing and sustitution of the republican regime for the Principality due to the August´s populist actions it´s a recurrent historical image. In that way, it´s usually to say the people who doesn´t know his History is condemned to repeat it, specially those traumatical events which people was not able to extract learnings.

Stressing on that idea and from a general position, it seems to me that if Occident isn´t concerned about democracy troubles during the History, we will take the risk of trivialise and situate it in a second place.

The biggest challenge of democracy system is fight against those bads wich try to destroy it from inside. In order to manage this achivement, democracy needs to have all the necessaries instruments which let discover false messiahs and disguised menaces; but first at all, we should to work out the citizens confidence in the political system.

Currently we´re in a deadlock, it means we are trivialising ethic values and the Right State. We have fallen in the mistake to think the borning of a democratic regime in Spain and the hegemony of representative system in Europe are achievements reached without effort. We have taken for secure democracy is inherent ourselves and immune to any social or economical event.

Nationalism, measles of Humanity

The President of the Generalitat and his ministerial teamwork ignore in democracy there are some aspects where a parlamentarian majority is not enough, either an absolute majority. Consequently there are freedom areas where political institutions must keep special protection and respect. In the same way, it reminds me a discussion that took place between the political parties during the Second Spanish Republic: the Court of Constitutional Guarantees.

On one hand, some members of the Congress were against the institution of that kind of Court, due to they believed the Constitution had to be defended by political controls and actions. On the other hand, from a broadminded position, other movement defended the requierement of the Court of Constitutional Guarantees wich would assure the rights and freedoms of minorities and the overall society at the same time, forbading their vulneration by a parlamentarian majority.

It´s too easy to extrapolate that historical situation to our current Spain, where a government majority is attemping to impose unilaterally the opinion of his electors above the rest of Catalonian society, and generally above Spanish society. That authoritarian nationalism, prelude of a pseudofascism ideology, is one of the elements that most damage and instability can provoke to our democracy.

For the nationalism only exists one vision of Catalonia, wich have to be impose above any other pluralist conception about society. For that reason they are inspired in an ideal and hermetic full-blooded breed, seemed at fascist mindset. Catalonian nationalism ignore the origins of many catalan people are from the south peninsular migratory movements, which contributed to the rising of catalan industry. Moreover, this nationalism with fascist characters use political action to asphyxiate their enemies and go after any oposition; that´s why nationalism is impeding children get into school in Spanish language and is subsidizing some groups in order to transmit an only one vision of Catalonia: the secessionist vision.

What will do the Catalan state with those people that want to be Spaniards? Will they be declared as State enemies and exiled? What will do against those people who want their children study in Spanish language? How will explain the Catalan government after independence Catalonia continue sunk in the deep economical crisis? Will it continue blaming on the evil Spanish state?

Many people reclaim Catalonia can choose freely, despite opinion of the rest of the country. We could estimate that view when defenders of national union were in equality conditions in the fight against separatists. That means estimate the right of autonomy and self determination when nationalists teach Spanish History without one-sided vision and away from doctrinaire education.

However I understand the difficulty that suppose teach a passionate history of Spain, with his failures and achievements, in Vasque, Canary and Catalan schools. I wonder what would happen if they explained always existed an unitary concern between the Hispanic kingdoms: the “Regnum Hispanae”; and I wonder what would happen if they explained the unification of Law brought the entry of Spain (and Catalonia too) in Modern age. Therefore it´s easy to imagine nationalist indignation when myths about Spanish burglary, the Succession War and the rest of historical deceits were dismantled.

Nationalist is trying to finish nerveless Spain off, and is setting to be owner of Catalonia using volatile feelings. Catalan people should understand the enemy is the division planned by politicians that don´t know how to hide their failures and corruptions, instead of Spain.

Finally, in a moment of institutional, political, economical and social crisis, the only way for the Spanish survivor is the creation of an ambicious national project wich renove the constitutional pact of 1978; a pact where everyone can contribute to the happiness of the country. For that reason its essential that institutions apply the Constitution with security and determination in the renovated project; and his conservation as supreme juridical rule.

The autonomies decadence

Remembering Adolfo Suarez´s sentence: “Spanish transition was an exemplar for the rest of the world”; a country which recent history had been convulsed carried out the reconciliation. The Transition and 1978 Constitution were great achievements due to it gathered the diverse political interests that existed in Spain during those years. The political “harakiri” from pro-Franco Right empower the arrival of Democracy; in addition, the leaderships of personalities such as Adolfo Suarez or the king Juan Carlos were crucial. Everything happened in a moment which Spanish society was claiming “liberty” and the political oposition was increasing their support.

However, thirty years later, the current Constitution and self-government right have not usefulness. That´s why excesses of autonomic model against the national union and the corrected democratic function shouldn´t be permitted, specially in a moment that economical and decadent situation press-gang to adopt strong measures in order to recover the confidence of global markets.

The Autonomic Comunities have become placement agencies, wastes, duplicities, debt and particular toys of parties; not being close to citizens, otherwise the failure prototype. As a result of that we can talk about the ominous valencian administration, the autonomic andalusian cesspit and the increasingly nacionalist Catalonia, Canaries and Basque Country due to the cavernarian nacionalist parties that govern these regions.

The last episode of autonomic excess took place at the Council of Economical and Fiscal Policy, where catalan delegation defied the minister and andalusians backed away from negotiation table. Antonio Griñán justified the put-down saying debt limit, the prohibition of spend more money that you have, is an attack against Andalusia and the equality of all the Spaniards. In addition, for the president of regional government, the application of the limit supposes a great hit for andalusian public sanitation and education.

Where lives Mr Griñán? Does he know a bigger money spending doesn´t mean better results? Does he know Andalusia is the most investor in education and its results are the poorest? Is he concerned about the chimera of the expression “equality among Spaniards, wherever they live”? Does not understand it´s impossible the equality meanwhile legal and judicial differences exist? How is possible the regional president claims in order to get the equality meanwhile his populist behavoir the only thing that provokes is the division of Spain in mud battles?

The behavoir of Catalan nacionalism is on top, discovering its hypocrisy and double-action. Increasingly citizens are concerned about the absense of moral rules that affects nacionalist politicians; they are poisoning young people with their derivative paraphernalia. They teach from their decadent administrations the hate against Spain, and promote an ideological thinking which origin is the economical insterests of Catalan bourgeoisie dedicated to the textile industry during the last third of XIX century.

The false political dignity also characterizes nationalists; it means, meanwhile they are claiming for a self-Chancellor of the Exchequer, they will receive the rescue in order to avoid the suspension of payments. Either the cowar and impolite act of stand the minister up has been correct; at the same time, nationalists disregard is not convenient to bite the hand that will feed and help them.

The unsustainable State of Autonomies, so called “coffee for everyone”, will fall due to its self-weight and instability. According that, the Government should have the duty to demand political conditions, such as the comeback of competencies in education and sanitation. Finally, it could be the first step to get an equaler and more centralised Spain.

Is the Republic the way? (II)

San Sebastián Pact between republicans, socialists and nationalists was responsible from the downfall of the Spanish Monarchy after municipal elections, which were celebrated on twelveth april 1931. In the following months it brought the sanction of a progressive Constitution. However, the deep failure of Agrarian Reform planned by president Azaña, contributed to give the win to the Spanish Confederation of Autonomied Rights.

It´s impossible to deny that extensive parts of the left; in special syndicates which were led by Bakunin and Marx ideologies down with conservative government first at all, such as Work National Confederation and General Union of Workers. According to that, we can talk about Asturian Revolution happened in october 1934 and the proclamation of Catalan Estate by Companys. So, the proclamation of the Third Spanish Republic inspired by the second one would be wrong because of its growing undemocratic process and its no political stability.

Focus on the second republican idea, the arguments they are talking about are differents from the first one (you can see it in Spanish version, just before my first articles) since they don´t use feelings in order to remember Civil War and they try to use logical arguments; that is why they discuss about the actual role of Monarchy, that must dissapear and cost several amounts of money. Despite of, those people who think that, recognise the esencial role king Juan Carlos I played at Democratic Transition. Consequently, the Republic issue born in orden to improve our Democratic institutions, instead separate Spaniards. I strongly believe that there is not so many differences between hold a Monarchy and politicians with public money.

Something that must be commented is that this second idea has inside all the ideologies, include the right; for instance, I can be both conservative and republican.

My finally conclusion is that Spanish society and political life are not enough prepare in order to assimilate this big challenge; it means the mistake is not the proclamation of the Third Republic, otherwise its poor application. So, in the same way: Will we be ready for the Republic some day? Could be the born of Third Republic succeed without a disturbing point of view of our History?

The false ETA ending

I am going to try to translate my last article to English language. Probably, some words and expressions will be wrong but I will have tried it.

Twentieth October 2011 will be remembered as one of the most important dates at Spain´s History but not because it means the end of terrorism and the triumph of Right State above it, otherwise the try of ETA in order to do something.

Certainly, the terrorist group statement could be reassuring for the mind of many people who won´t have to review their cars but it´s extremely suspicious and estrange for other people mind. It´s suspicious due to terrorists have not announced their dissolution or the handover of weapons to the Justice. However, they haven´t apologize to the victims (they have only remembered their mates who are behind bars or into exile).

There is an expression that makes me laugh: “Armed conflict”. I think “Armed Conflict” is a war between countries which have declared the war each other. Can we understand that like the killing from the back of innocent people?

Is this the prize that have to pay the group in order to receive political concessions from Prime Minister Zapatero government? Is the beginning of a new stage on the extreme Basque nationalism?In any case, terrorists have managed put their mates on Local governments in Euskadi (with the passivity of Spanish institutions).

Another point that have surprised me is the International Amnesty advice to Spanish Police about Human Rights violation in Basque Country. Are not terrorist enemies of Human Rights? Is just the advice to the police? What kind of joke is that?

If you want you can comment it, thank you very much.