IAP Political Forum

Fresh news from the Iberoamerican Meeting in Chile...

At the closure of the meeting, PM Zapatero defended the honor of former PM Aznar, after Hugo Chavez repeatedly had called Mr. Aznar a "fascist". PM Zapatero replied saying that former PM Aznar had been elected democratically and all leaders demcoratically elected must be respected despite any strong disagreement. Then Hugo Chavez has began interrupting PM Zapatero, calling Me. Aznar "fascist" again and demanding Mr. Aznar to "respect" Venezuelan people. After several interruptions of Chavez to Zapatero, the King of Spain Juan Carlos I, head of state of Spain, has shout at Hugo Chavez: "Why don't you shut up!?", to the shock of the presents. Eventually, and after PM Zapatero has finished speaking, Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega has began crytizise Spain about the behavior of some Spanish corporations; at this moment, the King has left the meeting after a quick consultation with the Spanish delegation.

It's the first time that the King of Spain is seen speaking publicly in such heated terms, and the diplomatic consequences of the whole incident still are unclear. But one thing is for sure, Hugo Chavez has crossed a line he shouldn't had crossed, has made a clown of himself and has become a pain in the ass to Latin American leaders, further alienating himself.

What a boar...

leaders speaking the language of the street. Aznar is probably called "fascist" by some public in Spain. Chavez has large popular following throughout Latin America; Aznar and Juan Carlos don't.

No but you don't use the language of the street at a top level international meeting.
Calling Aznar, Bush or Sarkozy a "fascist" when chatting with manual worker colleagues has another meaning than when adressing the head of states of Europe.

Chavez made a goof of himself. It's not to a guy like Juan Carlos that he should teach who is a fascist and what a fascist is.
But what irritated Chavez the most was maybe the fact that Zapatero pointed out the democratic principles which elected Aznar (and himself) while Chavez precisely started the porcess for ruling against these democratic principles.

the application of the word is inappropriate. But Spaniards themselves use it with generosity against Aznarists. U saw Jabato mentioning how "eres un facha!" became a habitual accusation of the left against the right.

I personally have an allergy for monarchy, and prefer all European royal folk to STFU. Chavez at least is an active creative force seeking to change things in his country and in the world. Juan Carlos is a decoration, albeit they say he has the conciliatory function.

Awesome

Well, there is a funny thing with monarchy in Spain. Spain is full of lip-republicans... If you say the royal family are parasites, many will cheer. It actually is "cool" amidst certain progressive circles. When it's a matter of talking, there are lots of republicans in Spain... yet then, it comes reality.

You know, the type of governemnt of Spain is written in the Constitution. And the Constitution can be ammended and so change the type of Governemnt. It says "a Constitutional Monarchy" and it can be ammended to say "a Republic".  If you want Spain to become a Republic, all you got to do is to ammend the Constitution. But, alas!, that's the trouble. In order to ammend the Constitution, you need...

- someone to forward the proposal of ammendment
- 2/3 positive votes in the Congress of Deputies
- Senate can also ask to hold a vote. 2/3 of majortiy is needed too.
- Once the amendment has been approved, either 10% of the Congress or the Senate can demand that a popular referendum is hold.
- The popular referendum must achieve 50%+1 votes in favor or else the ammendment will be rejected
- The Chambers are disassembled and a election is called according to whatever procedure set in the ammendment process...

Now, the question is: with so many lip-republicans in Spain, it should be easy to achieve all the majorities required, shouldn't it? Yet then, why the issue is not even on the table...? Rather "republicans" just complain and complain as if it was impossible to shfit the government type in Spain... well, it is possible, just you need a vast majority to do so... and such a majority does not exist. That's what lip-republicans will never agree to... and tha'ts why I always fin them funny. ;)

Personally I don't worry much about monarchy or not monarchy, as I am comfortable with the idea of a "Federal Monarchy" where the King was head of state and some of the current comunities become federated states. Namely Catalonia and Euskadi to begin with; the other communities could choose wether to keep being communities or become federated states, although, being true, federation would be too much self-determination for them... 8)

As spanish i can tell you that, yes, accussing someone of being "facha" is commonplace here, but that's on a street level. No political leader uses that language in public, although it's a fact that Aznar's political party was founded 30 years ago by Manuel Fraga, who served as minister for Propaganda and Tourism during Franco's dictatorship.

I also dislike our monarchy (i'd like Spain to be a republic) but here, this gesture is seen by the public as a good thing, humanizing the figure of our monarch blah blah...

It's interesting to note that, albeit Aznar has personally thanked Zapatero and Juan Carlos for their gesture, the secretary of Communications of Aznar's party has tried to take advantage of the situation accusing Zapatero of being fainthearted. There we can see a right wing making fool of themselves. If the spanish right keeps thinking that statements like those are gonna give them votes, we might have PSOE  (Zapatero's party) in the government for the next 100 years.

Testing... 8)

...and, presto! The content of my invisible post (flagged as spam!?!?!?) has been rescued... :laugh:


Well, there is a funny thing with monarchy in Spain. Spain is full of lip-republicans... If you say the royal family are parasites, many will cheer. It actually is "cool" amidst certain progressive circles. When it's a matter of talking, there are lots of republicans in Spain... yet then, it comes reality.

You know, the type of government of Spain is written in the Constitution. And the Constitution can be ammended and so change the type of Governemnt. It says "a Constitutional Monarchy" and it can be ammended to say "a Republic".  If you want Spain to become a Republic, all you got to do is to ammend the Constitution. But, alas!, that's the trouble. In order to ammend the Constitution, you need...

- someone to forward the proposal of ammendment
- 2/3 positive votes in the Congress of Deputies
- Senate also can ask to must hold a vote. 2/3 of majority is needed too.
- Once the ammendment has been approved, either 10% of the Congress or the Senate can demand that a popular referendum is hold.
- The popular referendum must achieve 50%+1 votes in favor or else the ammendment will be rejected
- The Chambers are disassembled and a election is called according to whatever procedure set in the ammendment process...

Now, the question is: with so many lip-republicans in Spain, it should be easy to achieve all the majorities required, shouldn't it? Yet then, why the issue is not even on the table...? Rather "republicans" just complain and complain as if it was impossible to shfit the government type in Spain... well, it is possible, just you need a vast majority to do so... and such a majority does not exist. That's what lip-republicans will never agree to... and tha'ts why I always find them funny. ;)

Personally I don't worry much about monarchy or not monarchy (they're small fish compared to the real big sharks abusing populace; they can be voted out, whereas the big sharks can't...), and I am comfortable with the idea of a "Federal Monarchy" where the King was head of state and some of the current comunities become federated states. Namely Catalonia and Euskadi to begin with; the other communities could choose wether to keep being communities or become federated states, although, being true, federation would be too much self-determination for them... 8)

i saw some of the British ceremony when the queen ordains the government, or what they call it. All this idiotic stuff with trying to be as authentically medieval as possible. Clothes, gaits, gestures, voice intonations. A weirdly clothed dude must walk to the gates of the chamber and properly knock with his fist a proper number of times and properly demand to be let in. The ceremony takes hours and hundreds of thousands pounds from the taxpayers. And the queen declaring "MY government will provide...." Freak off, old hen, this is not YOUR government, this is the government of the British people. Or is it? This thing has to be made clear once and for all. No ambiguities left. Whose government is this and whom does it serve?

The most impossible thing is that the Brits adhere to these idiotic re-enactments of the long irrelevant fashions even in the archi-critical times. When Britain was trashed by Germany and facing existential threat in 1940, Churchill somehow found time to go to the HRM King and waste ultra-precious time for the idiotic and politically irrelevant ceremony of presenting his new government to the King and soliciting for the royal approval of the cabinet. Luckilly for the Brits, the far less ceremonic Soviets saved their ass.

People should be reminded more often of the financial costs of the theatric fantasmagorias held around their monarchs. On the other hand, monarchy can be a tourist attraction. It is something exotic, by any measure.

Alienating himself indeed. His is very outwardly passionate about his position, which is proving to be more of a political liability than a positive quality. As well, if anything Chavez reflects a Fascist leader more than the liberal democracy in Spain does.

I see, you don't realize why there are only "lip-republicans". In Spain, there are three mayor parties, PP and PSOE are the real big ones and IU (left) is the other one, with about 5% of the votes and 5 elected M.P.s. IU is pro-republic but the other ones are pro-monarchy. It's not that spanish people are pro-monarchy, it's more like that the big parties don't want to change the actual status-quo and that monarchy is still something mainstream media does not dare to question yet.

Why? Simply put, many people still fear that if "the republican question" is brought to the mainstream, the right could try a coup or at least it could destabilize the country. Yes, many people think that our democracy is not developed enough to be able to deal with the republican question. There's a big dissociation between people and their parties, and between the street and the media, no one dares to make a reliable poll on whether we prefer a monarchy or a republic. But reality is more complex than what you might be thinking: if you ask, indeed, many  people in the right-wing prefer a republic. It's even rumoured that our king has got a better relationship with PSOE than with PP. Reality is complex: many republicans are said to be 'Juancarlistas' (supporters of Juan Carlos, our actual king), because when he assumed the power after the dictatorship he guided us to our actual democracy. The bottom line is, things may change when Juan Carlos dies, as his son hasn't done any merits at all, not like Juan Carlos (don't make me defend this possition, i'm not Juancarlista, but for example my mother is).

If we don't have a republic now it's because:
1.- We all know it's not a priority: the king doesn't have a real power.
2.- Many people still fear the right.

My reading of this is that, eventually, we'll need to change X or Y in our constitution and it will be then when we'll deal with this issue. Hopefuly, bad sentiments amongst the right-wing towards the republic will mostly die with the old guard. Me? I wish our monarchy to die with our monarch!  ;D

I see, you don't realize why there are only "lip-republicans". In Spain, there are three mayor parties, PP and PSOE are the real big ones and IU (left) is the other one, with about 5% of the votes and 5 elected M.P.s. IU is pro-republic but the other ones are pro-monarchy. It's not that spanish people are pro-monarchy, it's more like that the big parties don't want to change the actual status-quo and that monarchy is still something mainstream media does not dare to question yet.

Why? Simply put, many people still fear that if "the republican question" is brought to the mainstream, the right could try a coup or at least it could destabilize the country. Yes, many people think that our democracy is not developed enough to be able to deal with the republican question. There's a big dissociation between people and their parties, and between the street and the media, no one dares to make a reliable poll on whether we prefer a monarchy or a republic. But reality is more complex than what you might be thinking: if you ask, indeed, many  people in the right-wing prefer a republic. It's even rumoured that our king has got a better relationship with PSOE than with PP. Reality is complex: many republicans are said to be 'Juancarlistas' (supporters of Juan Carlos, our actual king), because when he assumed the power after the dictatorship he guided us to our actual democracy. The bottom line is, things may change when Juan Carlos dies, as his son hasn't done any merits at all, not like Juan Carlos (don't make me defend this possition, i'm not Juancarlista, but for example my mother is).

If we don't have a republic now it's because:
1.- We all know it's not a priority: the king doesn't have a real power.
2.- Many people still fear the right.

My reading of this is that, eventually, we'll need to change X or Y in our constitution and it will be then when we'll deal with this issue. Hopefuly, bad sentiments amongst the right-wing towards the republic will mostly die with the old guard. Me? I wish our monarchy to die with our monarch!  ;D

Funny.

Well, Findeton, I must acknowledge that my opinion on "funny republicans" is slanted because around home those "republicans" mean ERC... ;) And they certainly are a funny crowd... ;) :angel:

Anyway I agree that the status of the King is largely a non-issue in a political sense, unless in the meaning of being a guarantee of the Constitution. I am of those people who feel uneasy about the possibility that the Constitution depended upon people like some individuals at the PP and their well-proven leaning towards bypassing democracy. Roughly like USA and Bushites, just USA haves what Spain lacks -tradition, experience and a true unlimited appreciation for democracy. It still is too soon to handle our constitution and our democracy solely to people who was grown under non-democracy and felt comfortable with that; people who could vote someone to "rescue" us from the "evils" of "democracy". Maybe the next generation will be able, but currently... not. :police:

Peisithanatos wrote:
The application of the word is inappropriate. But Spaniards themselves use it with generosity against Aznarists. U saw Jabato mentioning how "eres un facha!" became a habitual accusation of the left against the right.

But why? Why is the left always using the word fascists to talk about the right? Because as the left has nothing to offer from an ideological point of view, they have to create an enemy, they need it in order to win an election. So every person who has a different opinion is labelled as a fascists but the main purpose is to isolated those who have to be beheaded not because they are fascists but because they have a different opinion. People who has to be surrounded with a sanitarian belt. But

Peisithanatos wrote:
I personally have an allergy for monarchy,

I personnally prefer Monarchy. Most of the spanish in History has been written under Monarchy, more than any other political system.

Peisithanatos wrote:
Chavez at least is an active creative force seeking to change things in his country and in the world.


Do you know anyone from Venezuela? Many spaniards went to Venezuela in the 60's as inmigrants. Most of them come from the Canary Islands. My uncle and auntie were among them and my cousins too. Again, do you know anyone from Venezuela?

Findeton wrote:
As spanish i can tell you that, yes, accussing someone of being "facha" is commonplace here, but that's on a street level. No political leader uses that language in public, although it's a fact that Aznar's political party was founded 30 years ago by Manuel Fraga, who served as minister for Propaganda and Tourism during Franco's dictatorship.

But who do you think was the first one to say that Aznar was behind the Venezuela cup de etat? Yes man, our Minister of Foreing Affairs. Didn't you see him in the meeting? Didn't you see how he had no balls to look straight to Chavez's eyes? I felt ashame with his behavior. Some sort of "If I don't look at him, it is not happening"
And in fact the Socialists party of Spain was founded at the end of the 19 century and carried out the worst and most criminal part of the 20century spanish History.

Most of the spanish History has been written under dictatorships (in fact, monarchies), is that any base to prefer dictatorship rather then democracy?


Morations didn't ever say that Aznar was behind  Venezuela's coup d'etat, what he stated is that Aznar legitimized it. And sure he did. BTW, were did exactly Moratinos use the word 'facha'?  :sleepy:


Yeah, yeah, keep telling lies, like that PSOE started the civil war and Franco's dictatorship was legitimized because it was a defense against fascist PSOE (lol). Truth is that it was Franco who started the civil war and franco's dictatorship killed tens of thousands of people, and i mean even AFTER the civil war. Truth is that PP was founded around 30 years ago by Manuel Fraga, which was a minister during Franco's dictatorship.

For the record:

When a coup d'etat overthrew Hugo Chavez, the Spanish PM Mr. Aznar phoned personally the new "president" and congratulated him for his success (in usurping power). Venezuelan people and supporters of Hugo Chavez liberated Chavez and kicked the coupists after three days, restoring democratic normality in Venezuela. By then, the only countries to approve the coup d'etat had been the USA and Spain.

So, Hugo Chavez has got a personal reason to hold a grudge against Mr. Aznar, who, by the way, is the only Spanish PM ever to support a coupist against a democratically elected leader.

Anyway, the meeting was not the place to air that gruddge, and Chavez still is a clown. But being a clown does not mean he has not got enemies...

Findeton wrote:
Most of the spanish History has been written under dictatorships (in fact, monarchies), is that any base to prefer dictatorship rather then democracy?


I'm sorry to disagree but that's a very weak reasoning , IMO, because it seems, from your words, that we are suffering a dictatorship nowadays with our Monarchy.



Findeton wrote:
Morations didn't ever say that Aznar was behind  Venezuela's coup d'etat, what he stated is that Aznar legitimized it. And sure he did. BTW, were did exactly Moratinos use the word 'facha'? 

Moratinos in our TV program "59 seconds" did accuse Aznar and is this accusation the one Chávez is using against us. This socialists goverment are just a bunch of amateurs. I feel ashamed about what they are doing to our country.



Findeton wrote:
Yeah, yeah, keep telling lies, like that PSOE started the civil war

Yes, keep using wikipedia and not reading a book.
And yes, Psoe started the civil war. The Psoe was simply a fascist party during those years and you know why? because socialisms and democracy are incompatibles. It seems you have the same problem that other spaniard in this board: lack of culture.

Findeton wrote:
and Franco's dictatorship was legitimized because it was a defense against fascist PSOE  

Every day I'm more confident about that fact. Socialists just wanted a proletarian dictatorship, that's why Stalin's agents were in our country. Like Orlov, but hey, how are you gonna know Orlov or Marty, if your mother of all knolewdge is wiki? Why did we send our gold reserves to the USSR? We were not a socialist country. Why didn't we send it to the US, as the UK or France did with their gold, while nazi were aproaching western Europe? Have you ever heard Stalin's words regarding our gold? Did you know we had the 4th most important gold reserves in the world, back in those days?

Findeton wrote:
Truth is that it was Franco who started the civil war and franco's dictatorship killed tens of thousands of people, and i mean even AFTER the civil war.

The truth is that socialists did try to destroy the spanish second República from the very beginning. The truth is that for socialists the only way to destroy la burguesía was throught violence. The truth is that Franco, just with 2500 men, was able to win a war against the left, who was ruling the country and did have the Army, the Navy and the Air Forces under their command. The History of the Psoe is full of traitions to our country. Even the choosing of ZP as the candidate to be Prime Minister is another traition to our country.

Findeton wrote:
Truth is that PP was founded around 30 years ago by Manuel Fraga, which was a minister during Franco's dictatorship

Truth is that the Psoe is a criminal party from the very beginning. In 1910 they thread our PM in the Parliament. Between 1934/1936 they robbed in the Bank of Spain, they killed members of Parliament, they killed every single socialists that disagree with the Stalin "points of view". Between 1939 and 1976, they were hidden as cowards and no one knew about Psoe during  those years, but we did know about the Pce, communists were alive in Paris and in the exile, but socialists.......................just hidden. From 1976, as you know, no more socialism within Psoe but they do not change it's name, because if we are not socialist anymore, why do we keep calling ourselves "socialists"? The socialists lies goes on. Between 1982/1996, man, what a shame! The turn Spain into a criminal State. Minister of Interior had been send to jail. They tortured people. There was not a single part of the public administration were they didn't "metieron las manos".
And you are talking about the PP founder? Get a book Findenton and do yourself a favor.

Sólo una cosa, Jabato... ¿podrías citar tus fuentes? Con título y autor, por favor. Más que nada para que nosotros, pobres imbéciles iletrados, sepamos de dónde provienen tu profunda sapiencia e imparcial visión de la historia de España...

Just one thing, Jabato... could you share your sources? Title and author, please. Just so we, poor illiterate morons, do know where do they come from your deep wisdom and your unbiased view on the history of Spain... 8)

Between all the lies you have shown to believe, i'll talk about this one. Gal were death squads, supported by the spanish goverment, set with the objective of annihilatating the terrorist band ETA. As a matter of facts, those death squads existed long before Felipe González reached the presidency, and what he did was to tolerate them. I mean, GAL was part of the legacy of Franco's dictatorship. I'm not saying that tolerating GAL was the right thing, i'm saying that those death squads supported by the government existed long before Felipe González reached the presidency. BTW, Pio Moa is a silly suporter of Franco's dictatorship and any statement that you could possibly read in any of his books is useless to me. It's yourself who should get a book, instead of a simple pamphlet.

Findeton wrote:
Gal were death squads, supported by the spanish goverment,
Supported? Come on man, socialist created a terrorist gang, but they did so bad, they were caught by Police. What a shame! Minister of Interior, Security Secretary of State were sent to prison. This people has been sent to jail after a sentencia firme de condena. But here are other socialists that are in jail for..............robbery, for illegal financing, for using reserved funds to buy jewels,

Findenton wrote:
 I mean, GAL was part of the legacy of Franco's dictatorship.
Ja, ja, ja, ja, the Psoe has the lamentable honor of being the worst and more criminal party ruling Spain since 1978. I call them criminals, because criminals are those who commit crime, and Psoe has commited for sure. That's why our Supreme Court of Justice, put them behind bars.


Findenton wrote:
BTW, Pio Moa is a silly suporter of Franco's dictatorship and any statement that you could possibly read in any of his books is useless to me. It's yourself who should get a book, instead of a simple pamphlet.

That's why after saying that Psoe is a golpista party no one in that party has say a word. When other spanish politicians say: "when the Psoe has needed to kill someone, they've killed him" and no one from that party is going to a Court of Justice to say, hey those are telling lies and are insulting us.
Psoe simply cannot be trusted

Just one thing Major, NO.
You are old enough -hopefully- to get a book a read it.
Sources, sources, go and look for them!!!!

Major wrote:
Just so we, poor illiterate morons, do know where do they come from your deep wisdom

Thanks a lot. It is true. You are a poor illiterate person and my wisdom is for sure deeper than yours.

No, Jabato, I want to know YOUR sources, so we all can discuss them. You say you read books. OK, give us title and name of author. There are many books. And many authors. And some authors are serious and reputable, whereas other are well-known bigots and liars. And I suspect you only read bigots and liars, as most of what you post here are bigot lies. Yet you don't call them opinions, rather you say they mean you are "cultivated" whereas people who says otherwise are "ignorant". I guess you're not interested to tell a bigot lie from reality and so you read bigot lies and claim they are true. Or maybe you know they are lies but hope that people will not notice it if you conceal the sources. So, do you dare to provide your sources or you will just keep hiding them, calling people ignorant and spreading bigot lies?

Give your sources. Title and name. Or maybe, just maybe, you got no sources and just are spreading your insane fantasies...?

Major Zee Lee wrote:
Give your sources. Title and name. Or maybe, just maybe, you got no sources and just are spreading your insane fantasies...?

Yes Major, I got no sources. Ja, ja, ja, ja, ja, what a superb reasoning.

Just produce your sources, Jabato. ::)

You really need to re-read your history.  In 1940 when Churchill was performing activities he knew would help to rally and bolster the British people, just when they needed it most, the soviets were not in the least inclined to be saving British asses.  In fact, at that time, the Soviets were sending letters of congratulations to Hitler on his stunning victories in western Europe.  It was only later when Hitler invaded that the Soviets threw the weight of their military and populace into saving the asses of the British.  So really, if you are going to ascribe the saving of the collective British backside to the military might of the Soviet Union, I am affraid you need to give the credit for that to Hitler himself.

Now, wether the silly cermonies Churchill was performing SHOULD have the effects they did and do for the British people is certainly up for debate, and I suspect you and I might agree on the answer to that, but the fact is they had an effect and therefore a value.

Major Zee Lee wrote:
Just one thing, Jabato... could you share your sources? Title and author, please. Just so we, poor illiterate morons, do know where do they come from your deep wisdom and your unbiased view on the history of Spain... 8)

I've changed my mind Major. It has to be in spanish but I'm confidence you'll do the translation. This is not the "other languages " subforum, so we could be warned.

"Afirmar que hay en Cataluña una tendencia a vivir aparte. (...) ¿Quiere decir que todos los catalanes sientan esa tendencia? De ninguna manera. Muchos catalanes sienten y han sentido siempre la tendencia opuesta. (...) Muchos, muchos catalanes quieren vivir en España. (...) No, muchos catalanistas no quieren vivir aparte de España, es decir, que aún sintiéndose muy catalanes, no aceptan la política nacionalista, ni siquiera el Estatuto que acaso han votado. Porque esto es lo lamentable de los nacionalismos; ellos son un sentimiento, pero siempre hay alguien que se encarga de traducir esos sentimientos en concretísimas fórmulas políticas: las que a ellos, a un grupo de exaltados, les parecen mejores. Los demás coinciden con ellos, por lo menos parcialmente en el sentimiento, pero no coinciden en las fórmulas políticas; lo que pasa es que no se atreven a decirlo, que no osan manifestar su discrepancia, porque no hay nada más fácil, faltando, claro está, a la veracidad, que esos exacerbados les tachen de anticatalanes. (...) Pero sabemos perfectamente de muchos catalanes catalanistas que en su intimidad no quieren esa política concreta que les ha sido impuesta por una minoría"

Sources.............................. for you info:

This first quote is from..............................José Ortega y Gasset. And these paragraphs are part of the speech he gave in our national Parliament in 1932/1933, I don't remember exactly, but for sure the Estatuto of Cataluña had been voted already. There is a book, "Two visions of Spain", but man, a book!, an unknown product for you. Anyway maybe there is a chance for you to start off a "new life"

I was watching TV last night. An interwiev whith Mr. Albert Boadella founder of Els Joglars, one of the most important and relevant theater director and actor in our country, while talking about his new book entitled: "Good Bye Cataluña" Mr. Boadella has been forced to leave Cataluña due to the nationalism presure. He is a very good source, because even being as catalan as you, that minority that Mr Ortega talked about, has expelled him from Cataluña.

Man, aren't you blatant? :o

We ask you the sources of your bold claism (like, the PSOE is guilty of the SCW, something it's not a common opinion between historians), and yet instead of backup your claims you produce a quote by a reputable source, warning against the tyranny of nationalism... 75 years ago. ::)

See, I have read about 1,000 different books, most of them while I was younger. 70 books a year for years gives out an impressive record. Currently I still read about 40 books a year despite computer leisure takes a lot of my time. I am a fast and experienced reader.

And yet it's obvious I never read the same books as you. Now, you could rant on about how I read the wrong books, on how your books are better than my books... yet to do so, we should know your readings. Your sources. And, alas!, we still don't know what is the source of your bold claims on the history of Spain. A history according to you, and -let we guess you're not just figuring all those claims-, according to someone else who wrote a book about it. ::)

Furthermore, once in rant mode, you produce a source -Albert Boadella, the latest hero of Spanish nationalism. Well, Mr. Boadella is free to hold any opinion he sees fit for the advancement of the last stages of his career. Of course, people who used to knew Mr. Bodella will tell that Boadella is not being the same person he used to be. People change. And fact is that all the reputation Mr. Boadella earned as a freedom fighter and victim of repression was earned when he held opinions extremely incompatible with what he preaches now. It is ironical that he himself can't tell the difference betwen being incarcerated for "offense to the Army" and whatever he fantasizes to be "prosecution" now. Also is ironical that he choses to slam the door now that "nationalists" are not in power. I mean, he gleefully smashed them when they where in power. Albert Boadella, the unconquerable buffoon (in his own words), had no God and no master, and bashed everyone in power, free of allegiances. And yet now that nationalists are gone, he embraces Spanish nationalists (selling himself to a harsh master) and bashes not just the nationalists, but the whole Catalonian people and nation!? Whatever happened to you, Mr. Boadella? He, the unconquerable buffoon, now has sold himself to a harsh master and spreads hate on those he vowed out love. Pity the fallen hero... but don't count on anyone taking him seriously unless it is for a partisan interest. I am sure *you* will take him very seriously... :P

Major Zee Lee wrote:
See, I have read about 1,000 different books,

Only 1.000?
I knew I was wasting my time.

Well, that haves an easy cure, fantasma: stop spending your time posting lies, ravings and bigot propaganda. Just keep your opinions and wisdom for anyone deserving them and store them up somewhere dark and warm so they don't catch a cold. ::)


(Oh, AND you still haven't produced your sources. Don't you have your library with you at your haunted house? ::) )