Terrorists and elections

[trof]

OK, I'm hearing on damn near every channel how the Madrid bomb effected a change in government in Spain.

But I remember that Aznar's decision to support Bush* and send troops to Iraq was immediately hugely unpopular with his constituents.

"Aznar's decision to send troops to Iraq was very unpopular at the time, and the election result was widely interpreted as a backlash against it, with the bombs bringing the issue to the forefront."
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L05499445.htm

I just do not believe the Spanish people acted out of fear. I think they just disagreed with the actions of a government that appeared to be badly out of touch with them and they wanted a regime change at home. Of course Aznar claims it was all because of the bombing, as one would expect. Better that than admit that you were turned out of office by an irate populace.

I also deeply resent that pundits are trying to make this election a referendum on terrorists and their perceived or imagined ability to affect our choice of national leaders. I don't think this dog will hunt for Bush*.

I don't think he'll get some kind of sympathy vote if something does happen, and I don't think he'll get a "reward" vote if it doesn't.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

1. From the John Hopkin's PSy-ops manual - population control

"World War Three will be a guerilla information war, with no division between military and civilian participation."
-- Marshall McLuhan


There is a different manual online but this one deals with their program in Africa....it DOES give an idea of how one uses the media and governmental and non governmental entities to control population behavior though - which IS relevant to this conversation

http://www.africa2000.com/PNDX/jhupage.htm