Flanneruk, your ability to miss the point is once again matched by your arrogance.

The point is that ETA is first and foremost a terrorist organization. Their motivations come second. Calling them *just* separatists, as many media do, obscures the fact that they have killed 800 people and legitimizes them in the eye of the reader.

By your logic Al Queda could be called the "beard wearing gentleman club".

democracy.. how far must a country go to protect it? how far must one lean to tolerate totally unacceptable behavior in the name of "separatism".

how far back does one roll the clock?

at this rate, the arabs will find acceptance to re-claim the lands they once ruled in spain.

or do we not go back THAT far?

blackmailing businesses in the basque country with a revolutionary tax... burning busses, putting bombs....this is all too much to tolerate in a democracy.

hopefully the "band" and its leaders and sympathizers will stop JUSTIFYING terrorist acts like the 30th december at the airport one day, abide by the democratic rules, and stop trying to FORCE themselves onto the state by terrorizing.

100 Kilos of explosives have been found this afternoon in the Basque country, ready to be exploded. Meanwhile Zapatero has returned from his vacation, 4 days after the bombing, and has finally visited the bombing site, only to say that he hopes the violence will somehow end. No talk of eradicating terrorism and holding ETA accountable.

OK, before this thread gets shut down ...

I came back from Bilbao last Monday evening. Flight was uneventful, although the suitcases took longer to get out than in previous days. I saw that there was plenty of dust in the arrivals hall, probably from the explosion.

The bomb went out just in the parking modules more heavily used (a few of my workers always liked to park there because of the location opposite the Iberia check-in counters). Right underneath was the beginning of the taxi rank (much better organized than the one in the old terminal) and the bus stop to connect with T1-T2-T3 and the metro.

They have moved the taxi rank a bit further down, and there are lots of police and firemen working there. The images there reminded me a lot of Ground Zero. It was more than two days after the bomb, and there was still smoke going out, slabs of concrete falling and dust. An awful feeling. There were people taking pictures, but I couldn´t bring myself to do that.

And regarding the politics ... everything is so, so complicated. It would take a long time to explain all of this, and even then, nobody would agree. Sorry to be so depressed.

Kind regards, Cova

No puedo estar más de acuerdo con tus últimas líneas, Cova. I totally agree with your last two lines, Cova. It´s too complicated to find a logical explanation, even an ilogical one.

I´m flying to Madrid next Tuesday and will see it by myself.

Who cares what they're called? A name doesn't change who they are or what they do, and people should stop evaluating others based upon what the media call them.

Back in the 1980's (during the Afghanistan war), the U.S. called Osama a "freedom fighter." Now, he's a "terrorist" - yet, he's the same person he always was and he's using the same tactics he always did, only his target has switched from communists to capitalists. I submit that he should never have been called a "freedom fighter" in the first place, and that we (the U.S.) should have evaluated him based on his actions and not the politically-motivated label Regan's administration gave him.

By same token, some people referred to the woman who took in Elian Gonzales in Florida as a "kidnapper" because she kept him from his father. Others have called her his "surrogate mother" because of the care she gave him. Why use either title, as they are both incomplete and incorrect? Emotional manipulation should not be a part of news reporting.

The Basque movement is probably both separatist AND terroristic. But why use either title? Just report facts.

It really isn't that hard to understand. Calling Al Queda "a muslim organization", for example, would be insulting for

a) the 99.999% of muslims who are not terrorist

b) the victims of Al Queda.

separatists.. separatists who are terrorists and terrorists who are spearatists.

the last two have no place in our society.

the first group is welcome in a democracy, getting support from those who believe in them.

what name can you call entities who decide to blow up anyplace with innocent people in it other than "terrorists"???

Well, ETA are not only a terrorist separatist group, but also an unionist group: they also have as a main goal to join a part of France (the French Basque country) and Navarra to Euskalherria. And this claiming is so capital for them as the separatist one.
I think that all Spaniards know what ETA wants. The problem is that it doesn't equate at all with what the, say, 95% of Spaniards do want...
So sad...

To be accurate, the stated goal of ETA, reiterated by them in 2006, is to achieve "independence and socialism in the Basque country". Through murder, of course.

The saddest thing is people who kill for an idea. No matter how good the idea can be, 'cause using terror you're always wrong.

We don't need to understand the will of those **** murderers, we have just to stop them, bringing them to jail with the law in the hand, that's why we are right.
As I wrote two days ago, there are people with the same wills (separatism, unionism, socialism...) or similar but within democratic ways, maybe I do not agree with them, but they have my deepest respects.

Basque Country in a very wide sense, I would say (ETA's concept includes Navarra and the French area)...

I've followed ETA since the summer of '72' when Franco was still in power. The original members of ETA where "separatists" and in most cases obtained their goal.

The current group going by the name of ETA is nothing more than a collection of uneducated hoodlums, gangsters and terrorists and should be deal with accordingly, not admired. The latest bombing in SS displaced 24 innocent families.