Cali, you are trying to present yourself in a neutral position, while you have already taken part by one side.

Anyway, as long as debate remains civilized, I'll participate too.

Spanish governments have tried three times to negotiate with ETA. The last time ETA was very weakened and declared a ceasefire for one year and a half while they were in the background taking information of new objectives (which mean that they were searching for habits of politicians to place a bomb or shoot them more easily), rearming the band and training new terrorists to from new cells.

They have never the intention to stop killing people.

Therefore, you can't blame government of not trying to negotiate. I have convinced myself that to negotiate with terrorists is a loss of time. Either they choose to abandon their terrorist activities or they end in prison.

As for my grandfather, he was from Madrid. Franco's regime repressed those who opposed or could oppose him in any way, not just certain geographic zones.

Fernando

Well said, CaliBasco. Now we understand each other much better.
Zorionak!

The Problem Fernando, is that you have a short memory and a selective reading eye.

My post on the linked thread was written three years ago...and since you've been here three years, it may have been one of the first things you read by me. It hasn't been modified, it is in its original state...and my opinion hasn't changed.

Just exactly what is "neutral" anyway?

And a big egunberri on to you, too, deibid. Ah to be in Bilbo strolling the casco viejo right about now...those were the days!!!!

For quite some time, Calibasco has stated the same things, and asks the same questions, and never has he come out in support of terrorism as an end to a means.

What he has questioned is the reasoning of the Madrid government, and their refusal to at least recognize the rights of the Basques for autonomy, as has been granted by several Spanish governments over the course of history, the last being in 1936 when the Spanish Republic granted autonomy when the Basques supported the elected government of Spain that was overthrown by the dictatorial government of Franco.

Since Spain now claims to be a free nation, why hasn't that autonomy, in accord with past agreements, been given? Why has the Madrid government continuously refused the rights of the Basques to at least have a referendum that could resolve, once and for all, whether or not they really want autonomy? Why has the Madrid government gone into negotiations with the Basques, then, when it suits their purpose, unilaterally stated that any negotiations they are having will never include the right of Basque autonomy? Why has the Madrid government made it a specific point of purpose to summarily find ways to disqualify any duly elected Basques from national government by doing such things as requiring an elected official to "publicly denounce" what ETA is doing or be expelled, when they know full well it's a death sentence against the Basque in office... from ETA execution?

The fact is, the Madrid government has never negotiated one damned thing with the Basques over the years, and never has, or will do so.

That is why ETA exists. It exists because the Madrid government creates the environment for it to exist.

Wolf

I knew you were there, Wolf. It's nice to see that someone here, besides Ignacio, understands what I'm about on this issue. Thanks for getting it.

Speaking of Ignacio, let me tell all of you that although you may not agree with his points of view, he researches his points, states his opinions emphatically and doesn't back down. I look forward to the next time I'm in Madrid, as I was treated with respect, mutually understanding and cordiality by my friend Ignacio...this as he acknowledged to my face that he and I differ greatly in political ideology, and that it didn't bother him [nor does it me].

If we look past our emotionally-charged reactions to what he and others [including myself] post here, we'll see other viewpoints, nothing more. Take what you'd like, respect the person, and agree to agree, or agree to disagree. Then go out for a Casera and some tortilla.

Zorionak everyone!

You know Calibasco,

It's just not the same without Ignacio's comments. However, you say he did a lot of research when he presented his opinion. That might be true, and undoubtably is true about his stance for the Basque. But when he criticizes the U.S., or more accurately, our policies, he didn't know what he was talking about. Sorry, I live here, I think that ours is a very great country, as is Spain. Our policies are not alway right, but look what there is to compare them to.

I always got a kick at the amount of U.S. bashing that was permitted on this board, when right above this topic, it clearly states no country bashing. However, I'm not the type to complain to our good host. Other than that, I wish Ignacio were back too.

Ummm, Wolf, with all due respect, I can't disagree more with you.

What do you understand by "basque autonomy"? In 1978 our Constitution and then the basque autonomy agreement (Estatuto de Gernica) granted ample rights to the basque autonomous community.

Over the years that autonomy has been developed to a point in which the Basque Country is more autonomous than a german lander (being Germany a federal republic), of course more than Ulster or Scotland, and certainly more than a US state (I would say even more than Puerto Rico).

The basque autonomy has an own parlament which can dictate laws, has an own autonomous government, has an own police, their own courts, health system, education system, infrastructures (rail, phone, radio, highways, roads,...), financial agreements with the spanish state and a lot of privileges over other autonomies. The only things the state has retained are common defense, airports and seaports management and certain taxes for the public social security system.

Therefore, what more would you want the state to transfer to the basque government? Should they have their own army? Think of the USA having over 50 armies...

Every government since 1978 has negotiated with the basque government. Both PSOE and PP have even been supported by basque nationalists in the spanish parlament.

As for a referendum it is almost impossible. Would USA accept a referendum for Dakota to be independent?

As for expelling a political party for not publicly denouncing ETA it has never been done. Batasuna was illegalized for financing and actively supporting ETA. Various of their congressmen were ETA members, even one now is an ETA leader (Josu Ternera).

Cali: I won't comment anything about Ignacio as I have promised. As for you, I don't believe in people who say one thing and then argue for other. But let's please argue over things, not over board members.

Fernando

Yet autonomy does not mean independence, which is what askatasuna is all about.

Fernando writes:
As you posted in a separate thread about the Plan Ibarretxe, whatever "laws" are "dictated" by the Basque Parliament must pass Madrid muster, or they are struck down. So the laws passed in Vitoria are simply mirrors of the Madrid versions of the same thing. This is dependence and conformity, not independence and autonomy.

The application of the meaning of autonomy in reference to Basque Country was explained by indicating that the Basques would have the same individual rights of those nations who were part of Great Britain as of 1936.

Although they were linked to England, each was an independent nation. A commonwealth if you prefer.

The Madrid government is the one who has applied the term autonomy in this case to mean less than states rights which we have in the US.

That's not acceptable to the Basques, and may never be accepted.

Cali, the basque parlament may pass any laws, except those incompatible with our constitution. Autonomy doesn't mean that you can pass a law, for example, that would allow men to physically punish women, or that would send blacks to jail, or, in this case, that would modify our own state. As far as I know, a US state could not pass a law for which it would get independent, nor could it pass a law clearly against US consitution, couldn't it?

Wolf, I didn't understand your point. Spain has been a unique country for 500 years (with a brief period of three years in the XVIIIth century in which Catalonia got independent). It can't be compared to UK.

Our autonomies are much more independent, and our country much more decentralized than UK. Northern Ireland and Scotland hadn't an own parlament until some years ago. The Madrid government didn't impose anything. We as spaniards decided that the best frame to live together was the state of the autonomies in 1978. People voted in a free referendum what kind of state they wanted.

I think that the problem here is not autonomy, but that you tend to think that the spanish state is not legitimate and that we should accept something that is not accepted in any other country of the World.

Do you know that in France there is a unique parlament and that everything is decided by the central state? Even when some of France's territories have been independent states time ago.

Our state structure is more than generous with basques, who massively voted for the spanish constitution in a free referendum.

Fernando