Talk:2004 Madrid train bombings/Archive 2

message: I have now divided the article in two, as discussed earlier, and done a copyedit which has involved some cutting. Adam 11:54, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks (very much) to Adam. Great job. Pfortuny 12:39, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: Very nice. Well done, Adam. -- ChrisO 00:14, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Note: Article has been divided in two

message: I haven't seen M-11 used anywhere as an aka to the Madrid attacks. 11-M was coined by the Spanish press and is widely used in the Hispanic world. 3/11, is more rarely used, but still valid. I propose removing the M-11 aka. --Cantus 23:14, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I saw 3/11 in an American news commentary this morning. I haven't seen M11 or 11M and I don't think they are becoming established (in English) as 9/11 has done. Adam 01:55, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: AKAs: M-11

message: Comparative figures from Google // Updated by Cantus 00:27, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Usage figures 

message: *March 11, 2004 Madrid bombings
*11 March Madrid attacks
*Madrid train bombings
*Madrid attacks
*Three eleven
*11-M	
*March 11, 2004 attacks in Spain
*March 11 Madrid bombing
*March 11th Madrid bombing
*March 11 attacks
*Madrid terrorist attacks
*March 11, 2004 attacks	
*The Madrid blast
*Madrid bombing
*March 11, 2004 Madrid attack
*Madrid bombings
*March 11, 2004 Madrid attacks
Here are the current pages that redirect to this article.  I'm listing them here so that they are indexed by Google (and perhaps a search for these titles will turn up this page first). --Minesweeper 10:56, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirects

message: This page is now temporarily protected due to the edit war re: listing victims.  Please discuss the issue on this talk page and come to a compromise. moink 21:24, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: We should make a 'List of' and link to it from the article, and the list should be complete. I don't think any of the links outside wikipedia are good enough to be linked, they are all in spanish, and thus make no sense to have on the english Wikipedia. — Sverdrup 21:45, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: OK. Re the title, I note the 9/11 pages are located at Casualties of the September 11, 2001 Attacks: XX: "casualties" is, I think, better than "victims", and inclusive enough to cover both the slain and the wounded. Can we have our page back now? User:Awe! would appear to have withdrawn from the discussion. –Hajor 22:33, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Page Protection

message: Based on evidence above, see Usage figures, I believe the name of this article should be changed (yet again) to 11 March 2004 Madrid bombings, to reflect more accurately on how people the majority of people identify the events. The more vague term attacks is used more correctly in the 9/11 article, because of the nature of those events. --Cantus 22:38, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Do you have a link to the usage figures? The ones I see for March for Wikipedia don't even show Madrid as a search entry. - Texture 22:48, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm talking about Google search results, see Usage Figures topic above in this page. --Cantus 23:13, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Move page

message: There seems to be endless confusion about whether this was, in fact, 911 days after Sept 11, 2001. Discussion on the current events page, and the current text at 900 (number), conclude that the calculation is correct if you count it as the number of days between the two dates - i.e. there are 911 days from Sept. 11, 2001 to Mar. 11, 2004 exclusive. I'm too tired to doublecheck this myself right now, so I'll leave it to someone else rather than fiddling with the article. - IMSoP 22:05, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: This was discussed two weeks ago, and the conclusion was that it didn't merit a mention in the article, plus it wasn't a likely Islamic terrorist patron anyway. --Cantus 22:08, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh, OK; I didn't mean to repeat old discussion. Although, your answer doesn't quite fit with the current state of the article, since the "Responsibility" section still mentions that "It has been widely reported that...", but then implies that such reports are false, which is misleading. But maybe this was re-added later and should be removed or rewritten or something. - IMSoP 23:02, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Hmm, I thought that bit was gone, lol. --Cantus 23:52, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  Dumb question: Does this really matter? This does seem to be yet another wasteful exercise in numerology. Arno 10:16, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  911 days 

message: Does anyone know of an English translation of King Juan Carlos's speech to the nation on March 11? I cannot seem to be able to find one. Arno 10:16, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: BBC -- Arwel 12:04, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Translation sought

message: Just saw this on the news.... it appears to have some relevance to this article:
:One policeman and three suspected militants have been killed in an explosion in a suburb of the Spanish capital, Madrid. 
:The blast was set off by the suspects as police closed in on an apartment in the south-western area of Leganes, Interior Minister Angel Acebes said. 
:Eleven police officers were hurt in the blast, some seriously. 
:Police said they had been looking for three men of Moroccan origin in connection with the Madrid train bombs. cont...
fabiform | talk 22:17, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: This is relevant to the Aftermath article. But since it is a developing story, I'd suggest to wait before any inclusion is made. --Cantus 22:27, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Police raid

message: Well I just reread the article (and tweaked it in one or two places, nothing major).  I got the feeling that the article places too much emphasis on ETA.  Now I realise that initially they were the main suspects, and that the fact the Spanish government went out of its way to say that ETA were to blame needs to stay in the article, but perhaps references to them should be trimmed in other sections.
The introduction looks perfectly balanced to me.  In ==The attacks== ETA is mentioned twice, in the paragraph about booby traps, saying that it followed their MO, and in the next paragraph about the type of explosives used.  I would suggest moving the first mention of ETA and booby traps to the section which explicitly deals with the analysis of ETA's normal tactics.  As an aside, should "The police are investigating reports of three people in ski masks" now be in the past tense? ("The police investigated reports...")
:Problem: there were no actual booby traps. Those were in the initial reports because, intentionally or unintentionally, reports interpreted facts in the way most likely to place the blame on ETA. I fell for that myself. The unexploded devices were all in backpacks on the trains, and failed to explode presumably because the timers were set 12 hours late. When they were found, they were reported to be in parked cars and timed to explode on rescue workers. Miguel 00:06, 2004 Apr 5 (UTC)
The responsibility section begins with "Although ETA has a history of mounting bomb attacks in Madrid...." which implies the reader thinks ETA was behind the attack.  Now that it seems so unlikely to be ETA, I think this whole section should be reworked to place a higher emphasis on a fundamentalist Islamic group.  In fact, this should start by restating what was said in the introduction, i.e. that we cannot yet say for sure who did this.  Then say that arrests have centered on people linked to Islamic fundamentalist groups.  After this the article could jump back to ETA and work through all the initial suspicions and misinformations, and the denials by ETA.  Followed by a detailed analysis of the al-Qaida theory.  At the moment the section "ETA suspicions" is twice as long as "Al-Qaida suspicions".
Is the subsection "Precedent" named correctly?  It descibes plans which in hindsight seem to relate to Spain (rather than Iraq), not prior attacks.  How about "Al-Qaida intelligence", or something like that?
I do think this is an excellent article by the way, I just want it to be as good as possible.  Any comments?  fabiform | talk 21:00, 4 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Emphasis of the article

message: From the "al-Qaeda Suspicions" section:
"In addition, bin Laden had spoken earlier of wishing to return the southern Spanish region of Andalucia to Muslim control, reversing the Reconquista of 1492."
Where and when did he say that!? I'm writing a paper on this right now and if I could find either a transcript of whenever he made reference to this or a news article or some sort of journal article mentioning this it would make my day! 
As for right now I'm making this comparison that Islamic terrorism occuring in Spain is a reflection of Spain's history with Morocco and the rest of the Islamic world. But this direct reference by a head of an Islamic terrorist organization would be an absolute gem. Honestly, I'm skeptical that Bin Laden even mentioned this and that someone simple stuck this in and kind of stretched his statement that "France, and...blah blah blah, and Spain or any other nations supporting the U.S. are open targest for suicide bombings".
--Zach
"In addition, bin Laden had spoken earlier of wishing to return the southern Spanish region of Andalucia to Muslim control, reversing the Reconquista of 1492." ---> This is true
"As for right now I'm making this comparison that Islamic terrorism occuring in Spain is a reflection of Spain's history with Morocco and the rest of the Islamic world".---> This is a great mistake Mabuimo 01:53, 18 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cite your sources!!! 

message: I want to prisonplanet.com/articles/march2006/110306Madrid.htm add this] somewhere, but ill ask for some help with that. Try reading the article here and following the links. --Striver 00:27, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: New info

message: I am embarking on a major edit to this article. Much if it seems to be rooted in the mystery in the days immediately after the attack when ETA was still to blame, and there is some seriously wrong information about the March 12 demonstrations (I was there, so I remember quite well what happened.)
If people would like to support my additions with citations please do - everything I am adding is from personal recollection. I presume my own diaries don't count as citations! 
I shall translate some information from the Spanish page at a later date.
Damiancorrigan 20:27, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Major edit

message: I think that in the article there would be more about the government party change after the attack.
I live in Spain and I could swear that 3/11 changed a lot of thing including the government. It's a fact the People's Party government manipulated media during amnd after the attacks. I hope everyone agree with me at that point. And now, speaking from a more personally view I think that José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero is leading Spain now because of the attacks.
Before them everyone, the media, the previtions... Everithing said that we were going to have again People's Party in the government. And then with the attacks Socialist Party win. I feel like terrorist wanted to change the government attacking as a vengance of Irak war and that they made it: change of government, President Zapatero withdrawing troops out  of Irak before the date he promised...
:It's not so easy. PP was losing many positions in the pre-electoral surveys since (at least) a week before the bombings. The reasons were many: an non charismatic candidate, Rajoy, that voters considered a puppet of Aznar; great manipulation in National Media -Urdaci, director of TVE News even was condemned by EU for his information about a general strike-; introduction of unpopular laws in Teaching centers; a suspicious maneuver after the elections for regional goverment in Madrid, that led to today unpopular goverment of the region by the PP when, actually, it had less votes than PSOE-IU coalition; unstoppable ascent of prices after the adoption of the Euro as national money and heavy building speculation -there where even illogical layout in the AVE train in Guadalajara that passed exactly on some lands of certain politics of the Popular Party that exactly they have increased their value after being built-; constant samples of contempt about Political Opposition, some regional goverments (mainly Catalonia, also Basque Country), unions of workers (there were several general strikes during the 2nd goverment of Aznar) and even the own citizens, that were called pancarteros ("placard carriers") when they demonstrates against the bad coordination of oil slick of 2003 in Galicia and, mainly, against the unpupolar Spanish participation on the War of Irak. Many citizens support the invasion of Afghanistan because it was a decision of UN and talibans were in fact allies of 11-9 terrorists of Al-Qaeda, but the accusations against Irak always were seen as ridiculous lies (althoug the big campaign of Aznar and his party in TV supporting him). When the Congress voted for the participation of Spain in the war, only PP voted "Yes" but it winned because they had simple majority at the time; following the victory in votation, PP parliaments performs a lamentable spectacle of laughs and shouts. By the way, Aznar broke the traditional role of Spain in the European Union and started a politic of confrontation against several Latin American countries, France and Morocco. As a result, there were most demonstrations against Spain in Latin America and Morocco since the times of decolonization. Aznar was always seen as a debil character ("a pet" according to some humor writers) when he appeared in TV with Bush or Blair. All Spaniards remember his "amazing" speech with a Texan accent in Bush ranch; the time when Foreign Minister Josep Piqué received Bush in an airport and almost he brokes his neck doing reverences; the absolute incompetence of Piqué' successor, Ana de Palacio and her affairs with Colin Powell; and the weak (or null) response to British nuclear submarine Tireless in Gibraltar. Moreover, when a Spanish reporter was killed in Irak by American forces in the Palestine Hotel, Aznar government didn't asked for a true investigation, and didn't adopt a better politic of security against Islamic terrorism when 9 Spanish militars where killed by terrorists in Irak or when there where a bombing in a Spanish restaurant on Casablanca. Finally, when occurs the worst terrorist attack in Spain, the 3-11, manipulation increases and even the Minister of Security, Ángel Acebes calls "Misserables" to all Spaniards that doubt of ETA authority, and Mariano Rajoy wound the Jornada de Reflexión making a political speech on Radio. In my opinion, even without terrorist attacks, PP would be lost the general elections. The attacks, and the following goverment manipulation, perhaps reduced some votes but didn't change the whole result. It's more probable that a 3-14 without 3-11 wolud be ended like last elections in Italy, with a minor but whole victory of Left parties and a defeat of the Right. But, by the way, also remember that Berlusconi is less hated in Italy than Aznar and his crew was at that time in Spain. PSOE didn't win... PP, and mainly Aznar, lost. This was the true result of 3-14-2004.--Menah the Great 01:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Politics, Social changes

message: Wow! I read this article for the first time today, and I must say I almost was convinced the ETA did it after all. Seriously, if one reads through this article quickly, that's the impression you get. There is also a serious POV problem in the 'electoral consequences'. I see that these problems have been discussed before, without any effect, so let's do it the hard way. 1652186 19:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't agree that it implies ETA did it. Telling the story chronologically, ETA has to feature highly as they were being blamed by Aznar at the time.Damiancorrigan 12:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: I am missing some mention of the conspiracy theories that have been pushed in the last two years by some journalists close to the PP and sometimes by the PP itself.
Well you skipped them. I included them a few days ago. They are at the top of the article. User 83.97.192.10 is trying to erase them though.--Burgas00 10:07, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Over the last three years, conservative forces in Spain have overtly argued the possibility that the Socialist party, the police, the Spanish, French, and Moroccan secret services, and, of course, ETA, may have had a role in organizing the bombings.
I am not "conservative", and I can tell you that the Official Version is full of crap.
We still do not know who was the real origin of the bombings. 
Do not bother to translate te above spanish text. Is a flagrant POV written from the officialist POV.
Randroide 12:09, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conspiracy theories 

message: To gain some background about the realities of 11-March Madrid Bombings, see also False flag and Strategy of tension.
Some raw texts in english from 11-M Dissidents:
11 M known lies
In March 11th 2004, Spaniards suffered the bloodiest terrorist attack ever happened in our history.
We were told 11 lies about the terrorist attack.
1. We were told the perpetrators of the massacre were fanatic islamists enrolled in Al Qaeda, but the prosecuted turned out to be mainly just ordinary criminals, almost all of them being either security forces informers or controlled by them.
2. We were told the terrorists left a bag containing explosive in a Renault Kangoo van found in Alcalá, but the EOD dogs that inspected it did not find anything unusual.
3. We were told several items proving the implication of the terrorists in the massacre turned up in the van, but the Police saw none of those items when they first inspected the vehicle right in Alcalá.
4. We were told a bomb that did not explode was found almost 20 hours later in a police station, but several evidences lead to suspect that bomb was never in the trains. A mobile phone found inside the fake bomb allegedly pointed the police inquiries toward the then-arrested suspects.
5. We were told the bomb did not go off due to a mistake made by the terrorists, but evidences lead to suspect the device was deliberately designed so as not to explode and therefore constituting a forged incriminating evidence.
6. We were told the terrorists left a Skoda car in Alcalá the very same day of the attack. It was found 3 months later, but there are evidences that prove the car was not there on March 11th.
7. We were told the terrorists used the Skoda car to commit the attacks, but there is no evidence they were ever inside that car, but for some clothes and other items that were found inside the car in a certainly suspicious way.
8. We were told a group of islamists put the explosive backpacks in the trains, but, unlike New York or London, the security cameras did not get to record the image of any of them.
9. We were told a long and heavy shooting between the terrorists and the Police took place in Leganés, but after the explosion (as a result of which the terrorists and one policeman were killed), only 5 cartridges were found, and not a single bullet hole in the whereabouts.
10. We were told Leganés terrorists provoked the explosion in an attempt to carry out a typical terrorist suicide and therefore another massacre, but, after killing 192 in the trains, they were kind enough as to wait till all the neighbours left the building before blowing it up.
11. We were told the case was clear and solved, but day after day new information questioning the veracity of the official version is being published.
A shameless chain of lies
A shameless chain of lies
By Luis del Pino - Original published by ©Libertad Digital 
The 11-M premilinary proceedings show that Juan J. Sánchez Manzano, the director of the TEDAX unit (Technicians in Explosive Deactivation) / (Explosive Ordnance Disposal Technicians), manipulated the analysis of the explosives carried out by the Scientific Police right after the attacks, in order to conceal the fact that the explosive found in the Alcalá de Henares van did not match the one found in the Vallecas backpack.
While the Vallecas backpack contained only pure Goma-2 ECO, the fragment of explosive from the Alcalá van contained also METHANAMINE, which is a compound found in some military type explosives, such as T-4 (cyclonite). The deceit was exposed by the Civil Guard (Guardia Civil, a Spanish police force with both military and civilian functions) one year after the massacre, but only now has it come to public notice.
The hush-up.
There are many different types of dynamite, among these are Tytadyne or Goma-2. There are also several sub-types of Goma-2, such as the famous Goma-2 ECO. All of them differ in chemical composition. Goma-2 Eco in particular is made up of five compounds: nitrocellulose, nitroglycerin, ammonic nitrate, ftalato of dibutilo and calcium carbonate.
As soon as the attacks occurred, the different police units started working to try to clear up what had happened. The Scientific Police took to the task of analysing the chemical composition of the explosives found. After the discovery of the ‘miracle backpack’ in Vallecas, they had three different samples to analyse and compare:
1. The rests of explosive from the Alcalá van.
2. The explosive found in the Vallecas backpack.
3. The Goma-2 ECO sample that the TEDAX unit presented as standard sample.
Before these analyses had been completed, Sánchez Manzano circulated a preliminary report, dated 12 March, in which he literally stated: ‘The results of the analyses, still unconcluded, confirm so far that it is [the Vallecas explosive] the same substance as the one found in the aforesaid Renault van, which in turn matches the standard sample of Goma-2 ECO dynamite’. That is, on March 12 the tests haven’t concluded but Sánchez Manzano already dares maintain that they are three identical Goma-2 ECO samples.
He must have been in a great hurry, because had he waited only a few hours, he would have known that the conclusions of the Scientific Police report, issued on the same day, did not exactly confirm what he had predicted.
The analyses indeed showed that the Vallecas backpack only contained Goma-2 ECO. However, both the Alcalá van and the standard sample contained METHANAMINE as well as the normal compounds of Goma-2 ECO.
This is of utmost importance, since:
1. In the first place, METHANAMINE is a compound not of Goma-2 ECO, but of some military type explosives (such as cyclonite, also called hexogen, RDX or T-4), which suggested that a mixture of explosives could have been used on 11-M.
2. In the second place, the tests showed differences between the Vallecas backpack and the Alcalá van explosives, which finally confirms the suspicions about the ‘miracle backpack’’s origin and the sequence of investigations its lucky finding led to.
3. In the third palce, the unexplainable presence of METHANAMINE in the Goma-2 ECO standard sample presented by the TEDAX, which suggests that they might have given in two fragments of the same explosive found in the van, instead of a genuine standard sample.
On March 12, the Scientific Police, in their report labelled 173-Q2-04, specifically state the difference between the three samples, pointing out that they are identical except for the METHANAMINE compound, which is not to be found in the Vallecas backpack explosive. These results were concealed from the people who two days later would have to vote in a crucial poll.
The manipulation.
But they could not be concealed from the judge, and this is where the chain of manipulations begins. In the report sent to the judge by Sánchez Manzano on March 16, the director of the TEDAX states that the explosive in the van, the explosive in the Vallecas backpack and the Goma-2 ECO standard sample are identical, and he lists their compounds for the judge: nitrocellulose, nitroglycerin, ammonic nitrate, ftalato of dibutilo, METHANAMINE and calcium carbonate. In other words, Sánchez Manzano of his own accord adds the METHANAMINE missing in the Vallecas explosive.
There is a double manipulation in Sánchez Manzano’s report: on the one hand he conceals from the judge the differences found between the samples by the Scientific Police, while on the other hand he leads judge Del Olmo to believe that METHANAMINE is a compound of Goma-2 ECO, thus dodging uneasy questions on likely military type explosives.
This double manipulation conveniently strengthened the official story before the judge and the public opinion. From that moment on, everyone would take for granted that the explosive used in the attacks was Goma-2 ECO. In fact, Sánchez Manzano’s following reports handed in to the judge only mention the name of this sub-type of dynamite, without slippery further explanations about the chemical composition of the samples found in the backpack or in the van.
Headlong rush.
Sooner or later this manipulation was bound to be discovered, and so it was, although one year late. The first alarming signal was given in January 2005, when the judge was handed in a report by the Guardia Civil concerning some cartridges of dynamite collected in Asturias (North of Spain). The analysis of these cartridges of Goma-2 ECO showed the presence of the five normal compounds in this explosive. Naturally, METHANAMINE was nowhere to be seen.
To top it off, on March 21, 2005, judge Del Olmo received a report from the Headquarters of the Guardia Civil in Toledo, then in charge of the investigation of the failed attack against the AVE (high speed train). In this report the Guardia Civil cleverly requested that the police be asked whether any traces of METHANAMINE had been found in the Leganés explosives, which was a subtle way to call the judge’s attention to the key point of the deceit.
After examining the documents in his posession, judge Del Olmo spotted the contradictions and on April 5, 2005, requested a pertinent explanation from Sánchez Manzano.
Sánchez Manzano finds himself caught in the tremendous fraud woven around this issue and rushes headlong into yet another unlikely report. He admits having said that there was METHANAMINE in the Vallecas backpack when there was none, but explains this as a ‘transcript error’. A very handy transcript error indeed, for it so mislead judge Del Olmo that for one whole year he believed that all three samples were of the same type of explosive. Some positions and some issues cannot afford one single ‘transcript error’.
Further on, Sánchez Manzano acknowledges that METHANAMINE is not a compound of Goma-2 ECO (so why, then, did he in his first report on March 16, 2004, lead the judge to believe that Goma-2 ECO does contain it?). He must therefore offer an explanation to the fact that there actually was METHANAMINE in the Goma-2 ECO standard sample handed in for analysis. And what is Sánchez manzano’s explanation? That it is ‘an unmistakably contaminating substance external to and nonexistent in the original formula’. Peculiar, isn’t is? What Sánchez Manzano is telling us is that the Scientific Police accept for their analysis samples of explosives containing contaminating substances. Moreover, not just any substances, but ‘incidentally’ one that is a military type explosive compound. If this is so, it immediately follows that the result of those analysis is rubbish, since no one can guarantee that every other compound detected is not a ‘contaminating substance’ too!
But there’s more: asked by the judge whether METHANAMINE is relevant in the identification of the type of explosive, Sánchez Manzano acknowledges it is a compund used in the making of cyclonite, but rushes to add that ‘it is not an explosive substance itself and so it follows that it can never be relevant in the identification of explosive substances, and this is the reason why it has never been used, mentioned or considered in the reports issued by this Unit’ (sic). That is:
1. On the one hand, Sánchez Manzano audaciously claims that he has never ‘used, mentioned or considered’ METHANAMINE in his reports, since it is irrelevant. Well! Some nerve, when you consider he squeezed it in by means of a ‘transcript error’ to fool the judge into believing that all three samples were identical.
2. On the other hand, the director of the TEDAX is telling us that a substance found in the formula of some military type explosives is ‘not relevant’ to find out what the explosive was that blew up the trains. Bright. I gather he actually means he doesn’t care what compounds the analysis detected, since it had to be Goma-2 ECO anyway.
Conclusions.
This series of reports raises two fundamental questions: since the presence of METHANAMINE in the Alcalá van explosive evinces that it could not be Goma-2 ECO, what type of explosive was it? And still more important: since METHANAMINE is not a compound of Goma-2 ECO, how could it be detected in the standard sample handed in by the TEDAX? Or is it perhaps that the sample did not come from a Goma-2 ECO cartridge? Is there another type of dynamite that does have METHANAMINE in its formula?
As regards the explosives in the trains and those found in scenes also related to the massacre, we shall try to sum up for the reader the present state of the investigation. Both in the trains and in the house in Morata de Tajuña, only generic compounds of dynamite were to be found after the analysis, thus we cannot definitely specify what kind of dynamite was the one used in the attacks (that is, there are no analytic results that can determine whether it was Goma-2, Tytadyne or some other type of dynamite that blew up the trains). In fact, as El Mundo newspaper recently published, there are in the trains two sources of explosion where no explosive compunds at all have been identified. As to the strange device found on the AVE railway line, it contained pure Goma-2 ECO (as did the Valecas backpack).
One thing is clear so far, and this is that the explosive in the Vallecas backpack did not match the one in the Alcalá van, which suggests that one of these two pieces of evidence was deceitful.
But something else is clear. Few aspects of the legal proceeding illustrate in such detail the deliberate attempts of manipulation judge Del Olmo has had to go through form the very first day, March 11, 2004. Manipulated reports, absurd arrests, groundlessly withheld information, hushed-up evidence, innocent people falsely charged with crime… but none so plain as the chain of lies pointed out in this article.
These are not Sánchez Manzano’s only lies. He lied in the Commision of Investigation when he said that the backpack bombs collected from the trains exploded accidentally as the TEDAX unit men tried to deactivate them. This is not true, they were eliminated by the TEDAX unit by controlled explosion, as stated in the committal proceedings conducted by judge Del Olmo, and in the declarations of policement who witnessed the events. Sánchez Manzano also lied in the subsequent reports sent to the judge on the Vallecas bomb, in which he hushed-up for four months that the reason it hadn’t exploded was simply that it had been set not to, as shown in the scanned image of the backpack, taken on March 12, where the wires that sould have been connected could be seen loose.
The readers will remember how on those crucial days from March 11 to march 14, 2004, the PP government was repeatedly accused of lying, on the basis of its trying to hide that the explosive used in the trains was Goma-2, an explosive ETA quit using long ago.
Well, it is true that from March 11 somebody manipulated and lied about the explosives, but the legal proceedings show it was not Home Secretary Acebes who did.
Original published by ©Libertad Digital
::Terror victims call for a demonstration to demand the clearing up of the 11M bombings in Madrid. June 7th, 2006Doubts and suspicions are mounting up on the official version of the 11M terrorist attacks in Madrid. The Terrorism Victims’ Association (AVT) has called for a demonstration to demand the clearing up of many dark aspects of the official version of the facts that are daily being exposed, an official version that the AVT questions. The demonstration will be held on June 10th at 6 pm in “Plaza de Colón” (Columbus Square), Madrid, with the motto “We want to know the truth”. According to the AVT spokesmen, more than two years after the attacks, “many doubts and question marks still surround the investigation of the case”.This demonstration, which is expected to be massively supported, has received the endorsement of numerous social organisations among which internet user groups devoted to the detailed investigation of the facts of the massacre are prominent. These groups, which have shed light on the many pitfalls, inaccuracies and fabricated evidence which plague the official version of the bombings, will rally to the gathering bearing the black pawn symbol on a white field that identifies all who seek the triumph of truth, of the dignity of the citizenry and the memory of the victims. Its black colour symbolizes the mass of fault-finding anonymous citizens who have unselfishly taken action to uphold those ideals. Some associations of internet users have denounced the passivity, lack of interest, and fainthearted attitude, when not a deliberate concealment of information, practiced by most of the Spanish media in connection with the investigations undertaken by the public. Members of these groups have pointed out that “what in other countries would result in a serious political and institutional crisis, is silenced or disdained by most of the media in Spain, therefore showing an attitude that is in poor keeping indeed with their high responsibility to the public” Journalists wishing to receive press credentials to report on the demonstration can send an e-mail with their details to prensa@avt.org
::Fondo Documental - Press Release
::Subjet: 11M Citizen investigation on the greatest terrorist attack in Spain 
::1) In March 11 2004, Spain suffered the greatest terrorist attack ever happened in our history. 197 citizens died in a tragic way and over 1500 victims were marked forever.
''
::2) However, the date of the attack - 72 hours before the presidential elections - and other strange and suspicious coincidences, have driven THOUSANDS of citizens, from housewives to anonymous Security State civil servants, to investigate by themselves, in a world - wide unprecedented initiative.
::3) Part of the judicial proceedings have been made public, being the main working tool of these voluntary citizens, who are analyzing its every single piece of information.
''
::4)In a first reading by the journalist Luis del Pino, a series of ENIGMAS regarding the massacre were published.
''
::The regular collaborators work in an organized way, putting forward their appreciations on the blog published by the leading Spanish digital communications media.: Libertad Digital, and by the pararell forum of Fondo Documental sobre el 11M. Several participants from the blog offer altruistically their point of view at any time, day or night. Thus, every aspect expressed in those forums, is analyzed from different points of view, allowing every single detail to undergo a close check. For example, if a witness provides information on a given building, there is always someone who knows the area and analyses the information.http://www.libertaddigital.com/ : 1.100.000 visits in April.http://www.fondodocumental.com/ : 500.000 visits in April. The dissemination of this contents is allowed through any mean'. 
The power of Internet: A new social behaviour.Over 1,500,000 Spaniards meet in a blogg and a forum in internet to find out the most important facts regarding the bombing attack in Madrid 11th March 2004.They are trying to clarify the truth regarding the big massacre during the terrorist attack on March 11th. The blogg and the forum are already being used by some newspapers, TV channels and radio stations to find information that is not available from the official version of facts.More than two years after the terrorist attacks, the more reliable sources of information are in internet and, more specifically, in a blogg and a forum. Both of them were started by telecommunications engineers, the first in a digital newspaper www.libertadidigital.es and the second in the web site www.fondodocumental.com. This blogg and this forum have been the meeting points for over a million and a half Spaniards looking for the truth regarding the biggest terrorist attack in Europe.Policemen, students, engineers, housewives, soldiers, lawyers, taxi drivers etc are participating in these forums. The result is a very well organized investigation project with thousands of participants. They have used the same documentation of the trial provided by the Police and the examining magistrate to the lawyers.Internet users have pointed out a lot of pitfalls, inaccurancies and fabricated evidence in the official version of the facts. Some Spanish newspapers, radio stations and TV channels are already using this information as a support in their own investigations.
Randroide 12:53, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  11-M Dissidents ("conspirationists")

message: Listen there are many opinions on this issue. For me, as for most Spaniards, what Jimferrer writes is outright lies + garbage. I dont think we should enzarzar ourselves in a war on English wikipedia. It will take too much of our time. There are no experts on the issue in this language and what NPOV editors (I include myself) write will not be contrasted by enough editors challenging them. This article will thus succumb to a small number (perhaps one or 2) editors with a clear political agenda.
I have the impression that NPOV users who cannot impose their views on the Spanish wiki such as jimferrer are coming to this one where less editors will challenge them.
I propose that this article simply mirror the Spanish one since neutrality will be best assured in this way.
--Burgas00 19:54, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You are reverted well sourced facts:  the schedule of the trains in first paragraph, the information about the different bombs, the profanated body of the TEDAX, the official theory of judge Del Olmo (hash traffickers of Moroccan origin, Asturian thiefs, Internet...), the links to El Mundo's articles, the accusations launched by Almodovar or manifestants, etc. However, you are recovered your opinions, as El Mundo is a conservative media (sic). --Gimferrer 16:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Danger of NPOV 

message: Mirad. Vosotros dos formais parte de la discusión en es:wikipedia. No me parece correcto por vuestra parte el huir hacía la wiki inglesa donde hay menos voces que puedan discrepar de vuestras opiniones. Yo no estoy de acuerdo con vosotros en nada y la verdad es que, como os habreis dado cuenta, me produce cierto cabreo el escucharos a vosotros, a Jimenez Losantos y demas personajes. Pero no quiero entrar en el tema. Si según vosotros el articulo Español representa a la voz del entramado Prisa-ETA-GAL-PSOE-Alqaeda, utilizad vuestros argumentos y fuentes para que aquel artículo sea NPOV, y una vez encontrado un consenso, el artículo será placidamente traducido al inglés.
Un Saludo
--Burgas00 22:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  To Randroide and JimFerrer 

message: Hi o hola everybody. I am a third and neutral party in this debate. I've had a look at the situation and see no reason for all this mess. The solution is so simple. No edit warring is needed. 
* First, the "Alleged Smoking gun against the Official Version" should exist as it contains sourced material from a notable newspaper. Also, the title if the section is totally NPOV as it contains the word "alleged".
* Second, the section should be repositioned at the end of main articles as it is considered a fork section.
* If the edit warring persists, i'll be obliged to protect the page untill things are sorted out.
* Finally, please refrain from personal attacks. Cheers -- Szvest 19:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I agree with you on all four points you make. Additionally, I think some wikification of the format of the section under discussion is warranted. However, I am not sure if I should start working on it while the mediation takes place, or if I should wait until it ends. Anagnorisis 00:29, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Some order please, guys!

message: The first thing i though coming here was: damn! this problematic has been taken here too!
Please note that this is a very problematic subject. If you can read spanish i strongly encourage you to see the Spanish version at :es:Atentados del 11 de marzo de 2004 as it's easier to detect untrue facts there than on the English version (i haven't still read the article, so i'm stating nothing about the current one). You can see the long long discussions at :es:Discusión:Atentados del 11 de marzo de 2004.
It's not a small group of fanatics who think that the bombing was done by the current Spanish governement, but a group of people which thinks there are contradictions and non-senses on the investigations. They ask for more and better investigations on the subject.
I've heard nobody clearly stating that the current Spanish goverment (of Rodriguez Zapatero, PSOE) set the bombs. They have been accused of hiding information, true, as PSOE accused PP (the previous goverment) the days following the bombings. They were favoured by the bombings so there have also been speculations about PSOE supporters favouring them or unrevealing what they knew in order to avoid the bombings.
Involving Basque terrorist organisations is not a bizarre way as 99% terrorism done in Spain has been done by the Basque terrorist gang ETA. All the political parties agreed at the very beginning that 11-M had been done by ETA.
I'm very sorry you state The only solution is to block them and all their IPs. If you do not do this ASAP you will have all their rambling atrocities written again and again. I thought better of you.
I don't agree about the trolling nor as the Spanish Wikipedia sick of it. That many colleagues in the Spanish wikipedia seems excesive too, as there's little (and stubborn) people discussing it (on both ways).
It's strange you accuse of trolling when Randroide has been (or it seems to me) answering point by point you statements, many based on ad hominems.
What i do agree is in not taking here the discussion. I propose not moving the english version up and down, until a real consensus gets on the Spanish one (though it seems veeery hard).
About clearly for brained people, i see clear that any brained people can agree in that we were told that they were islamic terrorist actions. If there are brainer people which says that it was only said to hide us other facts, you shouldn't discard it too fast. You risk of being in the less brained group ;)
Platonides 22:18, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Warning on the warning

message: A mediation page has just been created User talk:FayssalF/11M. -- Szvest 14:09, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's the reason the link above is set for. Please do not blank content as it is considered vandalism. You are instead welcomed to participate in the debate following the link above. It serves to hear the arguments in order to sort out if there are or not any non-objective facts. Please create an account or you can still use your IP to participate there. Cheers -- Szvest 20:00, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Mediation request

message: Well, I don't know why Burgas00 has deleted the next information (all with well sourced facts)
*the schedule of the trains:  (7:36-7:40 AM) 
*the information about the different bombs: 
The provincial chief of the TEDAX (bomb experts at spanish police) declared on July 12th 2004, that damage in the trains could not be caused by dynamite, but by some type of military explosive, like C3 or C4 . Two bombs (one in Atocha and another one in El Pozo stations, numbers 11 and 12) were detonated accidentally by the TEDAX. According the provincial chief of the TEDAX, deactivated rucksacks contained some other type of explosive. The 13th bomb (translated to a police station) contain dynamite, but did not explode, because there were not two wires connecting the explosives to the detonator. That bomb used a mobile phone Mitsubishi Trium as a timer, requiring a SIM card to activate the alarm, and thereby detonate. The analysis of the SIM card allowed the police to arrest the first perpetrators. :A link about detentions: . 
*The body of that police was profanated on the next days. 
Burgas00 has deleted the information about the official theory of judge Del Olmo, PRISA and ABC (hash traffickers of Moroccan origin, Asturian thiefs, Internet...): 
Nowadays, the responsibility is imputed by Judge Del Olmo to "local cells of Islamic integrists inspired by mean of Internet" , not Al-Qaeda, GIA or Islamic Group Combatant Moroccan. This local cells would be constituted by hash traffickers of Moroccan origin, remotely linked to an Al Qaeda cell already captured. These group would have bought the explosives (dynamite Goma-2 ECO)to low-level thiefs of Asturias (North of Spain) with money coming from the drug traffic on small scale. 
A neutral issue demands to gather all the important points of view (not only PRISA or ABC). Here I have been including information about theories from these media (not only the Burgas00's opinions about them):
*as well as accuse affirm that the "three capital evidences on the lawsuit have been falsified by elements on the Policy statements": 
**the knapsackp-bomb that appears in a police station. These bomb would "have walken around Madrid, without the TEDAX (bomb experts at spanish police) had detected it in the El Pozo railway station. Within the sac, a device that could not explode, based on a mobile phone with a unnnecesary SIM card, but that it opportunely lead to a scapegoat few hours before the elections" .    
**A Renault Kangoo van where appear 61 objects, among them rest of dynamite Goma-2 ECO. However, police would have declared that it was empty after reviewing with dogs at the first time. A recent attempt to link ETA to the bombings and to discredit the security forces occurred in May 2006 when the newspaper El Mundo published on its front page that a business card of the basque firm Mondragón had been found in this van. According to El Mundo this important piece of evidence had been omitted in the Police report. According to right-wing conspiracy theorists this proved an important link between the bombers and ETA as well as the "lies" of the government and security forces. Albeit, the firm Mondragón has no relationship with ETA and, more importantly, it was later revealed that, what had been found in the van was a music CD of the popular Spanish 80s rock group "Orquesta Mondragón" in a pile of various other music CDs.    
**A Skoda Fabia that later appears to 20 meters of the Kangoo. Both vehicles would been used by the terrorists. 
*According El Mundo, "the notes on the Moroccan confident 'Cartagena' prove that the Police had under surveillance the 3/11 leadership" . Thirtyfour from these forty imputed were informers and/or were controlled by the Police, Civil Guard and National Center of Intelligence before the attacks. That newspapers is outstanding weird coincidences, too: Moroccan El Chino distributed hash in the Basque country. A notebook of Carmen Toro (member of Asturian group) contained the cellphone number of the own Chief of TEDAX . The cellphones used in the bombing came from a the shop of Mausilli Kalaji, a Spanish police officer, former member of Al Fatah. 
Burgas00 only talks about "the extremely serious accusations launched by members of the Partido Popular and a number of conservative media outlets". He deleted the information about the accusations launched by Almodovar or manifestants to Partido Popular.
*In some manifestations, Aznar was called Assassin  and several ministers were struck. The film director Pedro Almodóvar declared to the international press that “the PP was on the verge of causing a coup d'etat”  
In this sense, Burgas00 has introduced his opinions about several mass media of Spain, as El Mundo is a conservative media, etc, and deleted the references to false information spread by PRISA: 
*In the days that followed the attacks, too many rumors and deliberate hoaxes were spread, specially in Internet, but also in prestigious media, as the Radio Station SER, where it was maintained that the corpses of suicidal terrorists have been found in the trains . 
Summary: Burgas00 have tried to impose a political point of view, when denigrating to the mass media (the second and fourth newspaper and the second radio station in Spain) that do not defend your thesis. It's necessary to add something of information which those mass media recover (not only PRISA). 
--Gimferrer 13:06, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Deleted information VS Burgas00's opinions 

message: Hello, Southofwatford. Congratulations for the improvementts you made to the article.
You wrote:
:I object to the use of the words "Official Version" - no such document exists. If this is a reference to the judicial summary or to another document then that should be made clear
You are right. But the judicial summary is not equal to the explanation of the facts that the current spanish government makes....and that explanation (I am trying to avoid the word version) is not good enough to some spanish Media and PP politicians.
--Southofwatford 13:43, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The principles I intend to follow in this edit are the following: narrowing the differences between the Spanish and English accounts
Please feel free to improve the article, but remember that you should avoid POV, unsourced facts and blanking. There is no rule for narrowing the differences between different versions of the same article, so I suggest you to use the spanish version as a Quarry for useful sourced data. Cheers Randroide 13:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

text: Indeed. The most important part right now is citing and referencing all the information. I've made a start and Randroide also marked places which needs to be cited. I found another section which was blanked, so maybe somebody should check the history, reference it and restore the blanked information. An introduction with the four train stations and the timeline would be very much appreciated, because that seems to be missing (or maybe blanked as well). Dr Debug (Talk) 01:12, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Summary was deleted as well. It's been restored again. There is probably more missing, because there was a pretty template on the top right however there are several versions. Dr Debug (Talk) 14:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  I am very glad we can work togther, Southofwatford