Basque-phobe of the Week : Ronald Holden

Here you have a gastronomic review at the Seattle Global Gourmet Examiner by a Basque-phobe visiting the heart of the Basque Country, Navarre:

Language Lessons: Northern Spain

November 8, 10:05 AM
by Ronald Holden, Seattle Global Gourmet Examiner

Only three weeks ago, it was Italian. Now, another country and two new languages. Talking about Navarra here, in the north of Spain. My hosts for this trip. A province the size of Los Angeles County, shaped like a trapezoid, sharing its northern border with southern France, then dropping like a diamond from the crest of the Pyrenees. Called Nafarroa in Basque, but resolutely unsympathetic to the Basque separatist movement. Navarra is a kingdom, they will tell you, even as the street signs are bilingual and the capital, Pamplona, has been known as Iruña since time immemorial. Basque influences abound in the daily language, notably the tx spelling for the Spanish ch.

Pintxos, for a start. Known as tapas elsewhere in Spain, it's how you start the night. (Txori, in Seattle, is a Basque-style pintxos bar.) The other evening, four of us stopped in Bilbao (which is Basque Country) for three small bites and two glasses each; the bill was under $40. So we went to two more places.

Rabo, the tail. Rabo de buey is oxtail, rabo de cochinillo asado is the tail of a suckling pig. Kinda tough, actually, though the rest is indescribably juicy and delicious.

Caña, copa, vaso, Vasco: the first is a glass of beer, specifically. The next two are glasses or tumblers or wine glasses. And the last one is, you guessed it, Basque. Pais Vasco is the Basque Country. Which, we remind you, is not Navarra.

Boina: the traditional Basque head covering, a beret. Bought mine at a souvenir shop for $10.

Barquito. A little boat. The piece of bread you use to mop up the last of the sauce on your plate.

Txupito: a sip. By extension, the little straight-sided glass from which you drink a shot of orujo. We'd call it a brandy or a grappa, except that the orujos we've been drinking (sorry, sipping) are much milder and sweeter than the Italian version.

Echar una siestacita: your afternoon cat nap.

Sad thing to see an individual so obsessed with misleading the readers into thinking that Navarre has nothing to do with the Basque Country when in fact Navarre is THE historical Basque state.

He himself mentions that the street signs are in two languages, which happen to be Euskara (Basque language) and Spanish, but he insists Navarre wants nothing to do with the Basque Country. If so, ¿why do they have this urge to name their streets both in Basque and Spanish?

Does he know that Euskara was called Lingua Navarrorum by the Romans? And that the Basques call their nation by the name of Euskal Herria which means "land of the Euskara speakers"?

Gladly enough, two people have already taken the time to set the record straight:

jane: While you may think Nafarroa (Navarra) has no sympathy for the Basque separatist movement, you would have a hard time convincing the people I know in the northern part of Navarra. These people congregate in the tiny "Basque Basque" bars, where Basque is spoken and banners supporting bringing the Basque prisoners back to Basque country adorn the walls. Be careful to make blanket political statements based on an inadequate sampling of opinions.

tfd: Because I am am Seattleite as well as a Basque, and because I happened to catch the last post on the Basque cuisine. My gentle advise to you is that you stick to the gastronimic aspects, as you have 0 understanding of the political ones. btw its called San Fermin, grammar is important.

Because he did not care to do some research about the history of Navarre before publishing his article and because of his more than obvious bias against the right of the Basque people to its self determination, Ronald Holden is out Basquephobe of the week.

.... ... .

The Economist : A Basque-Phobe Media Outlet

There is not author to an article published by The Economist entitled "How Much is Enough?" so my guess that it is the editor is the one in the pay-roll of Madrid's Ministry of Propaganda.

There is so many lies and misconceptions in the article that it was simply impossible to avoid it, lets check it out. It starts out with some basic facts about Spain's political panorama but then it says this:

But this panoply of decentralisation has not placated the politicians in Catalonia, the Basque country and Galicia. That is because they never wanted café para todos: they wanted it just for themselves, as a recognition that they were different. They still want that, no matter that Spain is now an extraordinarily decentralised country in which the Basques, for example, enjoy a greater degree of home rule than any other region in Europe. Their demands make it difficult to draw up a stable and permanent set of rules.

The home rule enjoyed by the Basques is not equal to having its own statehood, with the right to issue its own passports, have its own national anthem, flag, army and police force, like any other independent state. And to long for all of these elements of a nation-state is protected by the UN's International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. There is an "stable and permanent sent of rules" for the Check Republic and Slovakia, or for Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia, so why couldn't there be one for Euskal Herria (Basque Country), Catalonia and Galicia?

Catalan and Basque “nationalists” argue that unlike, say, La Rioja or Murcía, their territories are nations, not regions (nor “nationalities”, in the tortuous formulation of the constitution), and invoke history to support their claim. “Here the conflict dates from 1836,” insists Joseba Aurrekoetxea, a leader of the Basque Nationalist Party (PNV), referring to the Carlist war after which the central government revoked the Basques’ fiscal privileges (restored in 1979). “Catalonia was always distinct,” says Artur Mas, who replaced Mr Pujol as leader of CiU. It descends from the medieval kingdom of Aragón, and rebelled against Madrid in 1640 and in 1701.

Uh oh, shaky ground here, as it happens, Errioxa (called La Rioja by the Spaniards) was part of Navarre, known today as the Basque Country, so, as you can see, the author was a bit sloppy about the historic facts.

But maybe he got his facts from the one guy by the last name of Aurrekoetxea who despite belonging to a Basque political party knows little or nothing about Basque history. The conflict does not date to 1936, it dates to 1522 when as a result of a long war Castile was able to conquer the Basque kingdom of Navarre in its southern portion. The northern portion, today occupied by France, was able to remain a sovereign state until the 1800's, which debunks the misconception that the Basque Country was never an independent political entity and that the current conflict is of an internal nature involving only Madrid.

But Catalan and Basque nationalism are creations of the late 19th century. They stem from industrialisation, which made these the richest regions in the country, taking in migrants from elsewhere in Spain. At the time the Spanish state, unlike its French counterpart, lacked the resources to integrate the country, says Antonio Elorza, a Basque political scientist at Madrid’s Complutense University. Otherwise Catalonia and the Basque country would have been as content within Spain as Languedoc and Brittany are within France.

Oops! Again, Navarre (the Basque kingdom) was conquered after a long war (which means that the Basques strongly opposed the idea of losing their sovereignty) back in 1522, how can it be a creation of the late 19th century? Seems like the author has its centuries all mixed up.

Brittany and Languedoc are happy to be within France?!

Well, sounds like the anonymous author is in for a surprise, check this out:

Breton nationalism is the nationalism of the traditional province of Brittany in France. Brittany is considered to be one of the six Celtic nations (along with Cornwall, Ireland, Wales, the Isle of Man and Scotland). Like the nationalism of many neighbouring regions, Breton nationalism combines political as well as cultural aspects.

The political aspirations of Breton nationalists include the desire to obtain the right to self-rule, whether within France or independently of it, and to acquire more power in the European Union, United Nations and other international bodies.

Breton cultural nationalism includes an important linguistic component, with Breton and Gallo speakers seeking equality with French language in the region. Cultural nationalists also seek a reinvigoration of Breton music, traditions and symbols, and the forging of strong links with other Celtic nations. It should be noted that many Bretons who identify with cultural nationalism and Breton identity do not share the political aspirations of Breton political nationalism.

The French government's official position is to consider Brittany as a part of France, a position claimed to date from the time when the March of Neustria was controlled by Roland, but dating officially from the dynastic marriage in 1491 of Anne, Duchess of Brittany with the king of France. This could include a range of views, from allowing Brittany a devolved government to curbing wishes for independence through to the extremes of banning Breton nationalist parties entirely and the Breton and Gallo languages.

The information you just read is readily available at Wikipedia, and information source that the author of the article seems to ignore. Same goes for Languedoc and its Occitan nationalism. But let us get back to Euskal Herria and Catalunya:

Perhaps because the historic claim to nationhood is shaky, language has become an obsession for the nationalists. Franco banned the public use of Catalan, Euskera (Basque) and Gallego. The constitution made these languages official ones alongside Spanish in their respective territories. In Catalonia the official policy of the Generalitat (the regional government), under both the nationalists (some of whom are really localists) and now the Socialists, is one of “bilingualism”. In practice this means that all primary and secondary schooling is conducted in Catalan, with Spanish taught as a foreign language. Catalan is also the language of regional government. A Spaniard who speaks no Catalan has almost no chance of teaching at a university in Barcelona. A play or film in Spanish will not be subsidised from public funds. “If we don’t make a big effort to preserve our own language, it risks disappearing,” says Mr Mas.

Only backward minded people can see bilingualism as something negative. But what I really want to point out is just how cynical and hypocritical the author and his chorus of enablers are. Spain has the dubious record of being one of the countries that has oblitarated more cultures and language in the entire world. Because they had the military might, the Spaniards erased entire civilizations from the face of the earth. How dare they complain now because some of the nations still being held captive by their rancid colonialism are doing anything they can to preserve their culture and their language? Even the author mentions it, during the Francoist genocidal reign of terrror people were abducted, tortured and in many occasions executed for their work in behalf of Catalonian and Euskara, so please, next time an Spaniard complain that he can not get a job in Catalunya or Euskal Herria remind him about the millions of people that were murdered during the process of expansion of the Spanish language in America.

Catalan and Spanish are more or less mutually comprehensible. Not so Euskera, which does not belong to the Indo-European family of languages. The Basque government allows schools to choose between three alternative curriculums, one in Euskera, another in Spanish and the third half and half. But in practice only schools in poor immigrant areas now offer the Spanish curriculum. Despite these efforts, Basque and Catalan are far from universally spoken in their respective territories: only around half of Catalans habitually use Catalan and about 25% of Basques speak Euskera.

The Basque government allows parents to decide to which educational model they want to send their kids to, and as it happens, the public schools are the ones with the Spanish as a first language model, which means that Basque parents that wish for their kids to be educated in Euskera need to expend more money. Barely what you can call a biased policy against the poor and the immigrant. The last sentence in that paragraph is the reason why both Basques and Catalans need to strenghten their respective languages. I can tell the author that this world is better off with all of those languages instead of just a few of them. But the author writes in English, a language that is not in the endangered list, which comes to prove that he is just a supremacist like his bosses in Madrid.

But the big question is, why would anyone wish for Euskara to disappear? Like the author said, it is a language isolate that does not belong to the Indo-European branch like its neighbors, so, shouldn't Europeans be working together towards the preservation of such an unique language?

But wait, check this out:

The nationalists’ linguistic dogmatism is provoking a backlash. Earlier this year Mr Savater, the philosopher, together with a diverse group of public figures ranging from Placido Domingo, a tenor, to Iker Casillas, Real Madrid’s goalkeeper, signed a “manifesto” in defence of the right of citizens to be educated in Spanish. They were denounced as “Castilian nationalists” in the Socialist press. But they touched a nerve. Many thoughtful Catalans believe that Catalan would be safe if it remained the language of primary schools, but that Catalonia would gain much by allowing a choice between Catalan and Spanish in secondary schools.

Finally, the mastermind behind the article, no one else that pro-Franco and the mouth piece for the extreme right in Spain, "philosopher" Fernando Savater. No, the "manifesto" was not criticised by just the "Socialist press", it was criticized by human rights, civil rights and indigenous rights organizations all over the world. Linguistic dogmatism? Only Spain has applied such a concept, shall we remind the author about his own quote regarding Francisco Franco's policy towards Euskara, Catalonian and Galizan during his long dictatorship?

But Savater is not done yet, here you have another one of his venomous darts:

The argument about language is really about power. “The problem with nationalists is that the more you give them, the more they want,” says Mr Savater. What some of them want is independence; all of them use this as a more or less explicit threat to gain more public money and powers. The polling evidence suggests that no more than a fifth of Catalans are remotely tempted by the idea of independence. The figure for Basques is around a quarter, despite 30 years of nationalist self-government and control of education and the media, and despite the departure of around 10% of the population because of ETA’s violence, points out Francisco Llera, a (Socialist) political scientist in Bilbao.

Savater is the champion of Spanish nationalism, but he criticizes the other nationalisms, how consistent. But he is not alone, the guy by the last name Llera insists that not the Catalans nor the Basques want independence, so, why does Madrid oppose a referendum that would clear up things so violently? Both Aznar and Zapatero have threatened Ibarretxe with jail time for wanting to conduct a referendum regarding Basque self determination. Why are Spaniards so scared to learn the true numbers of Basque nationalism once and for all?

The article goes on, but the author just repeats itself in a vain attempt to make his point across.

Just another Basquephobe acting as a mercenary in behalf of Spain's colonialist nationalism.

.... ... .

Basque-phobe of the Week : Hans-Gert Pöttering

Well, just a few days ago a pro-torture Canadian judge earned the title of Basquephobe of the week, now we have a German showing his bias against the Basque people.

This note appeared today at EU Business:

European parliament head sees no need for Basque referendum

03 October 2008, 23:02 CET

(MADRID) - European Parliament President Hans-Gert Pottering said on Friday he saw no need for Spain's Basque region to hold a referendum on self-determination, a move desired by nationalists there.

"I don't see the need for a referendum in the Basque Country," he said in response to an AFP question at a conference in Madrid.

"Today in the EU we have a system where all people can live their identity. People of the Basque Country can live in Spain. I see no reason for a region to split away from the Spanish state," he added.

Last month Spain's Constitutional Court ruled that a plan by authorities in the Basque region to hold a referendum on self-determination was illegal on the grounds that only the central government could call such a vote.

The ruling was a defeat for the Basque region's nationalist president, Juan Jose Ibarretxe, who was the driving force behind the non-binding vote he had scheduled for October 25.

Ibarretxe has said he will appeal against the Spanish court's decision to the European Court of Human Rights.

The wealthy northeastern Basque Country, which has its own distinct language and culture, already enjoys a high level of self-government and polls show the majority of Basques do not want to secede outright from Spain.

The armed Basque separatist group ETA, which has killed over 820 people in its 40-year campaign of bombings and shootings for an independent Basque homeland, has long defended the Basque people's right to self-determination.

According to information easily available on the internet Pöttering is a German conservative politician who just won European Excellence Award 2008 of the Autonomous Community of Madrid ('Premio a la Excelencia Europea 2008'). Was that a bribe to get him to speak against the Basque political rights? What's next, is he sending the Lüftwaffe to bomb Durango and Gernika?

I am going to answer Herr Pöttering why there is a need for a real referendum regarding the right of the Basque people to its self-determination, and I am saying a real one because the one championed by Ibarretxe is not even a true referendum on self-determination.

The reason is there is such a thing as a United Nation's Covenant on Civil and Political Rights which reads in its first article:

Article 1

1. All peoples have the right of self-determination. By virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

2. All peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In no case may a people be deprived of its own means of subsistence.

3. The States Parties to the present Covenant, including those having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing and Trust Territories, shall promote the realization of the right of self-determination, and shall respect that right, in conformity with the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations.

Spain signed that Covenant just like France did, oh, and Germany. By the way, Germany also recognized the right of Kosovo to "split from the" Serbian state, and since there is Albanians living their identity in Europe in a country called Albania then there was no good reason for the Albanians in Kosovo to secede, all they needed to do was to move back to Albania following Pöttering's logic.

To the coward who wrote the article I say, the Basque Country is today a continental colony to two colonialist powers, France and Spain. As if that was not enough, they Basques live in three different political entities, two of which are located south of the Pyrenees (Navarre and the Basque Autonomous Community) and one north of the Pyrenees, grouped with Pau in something called the Pyrinees Atlantiques. That is why despite living in a wealthy region that enjoys "a high level of self-government" the Basques still long for self determination, so they can leave together, with no borders dividing them and preventing them from strenghtening their culture.

And what about those polls that say that Basques do not want independence from France and Spain, wouldn't an actual referendum sponsored by the UN and/or the EU would put that discussion to rest? Why then the opposition to a referendum?

One last thing, thanks to the right of self-determination Germany is an unified country today, how strange it results that a German refuses the same right to the Basques, who live in two different states due to the current political situation. To want for some what you deny to others is called discrimination, and I still remember a certain Austrian-Catholic politician who unified all German peoples and who discriminated against the Jewish and the Roma communities.

.... ... .

Basque-phobe of the Week : Louise Lemelin

The doubtful honor of "Basque-phobe of the week" goes to a pro-torture Canadian judge by the name of Louise Lemelin.

She has decided to deny the right to habeas corpus to Basque political prisoner Ivan Apaolaza, by doing so Lemelin tells the world that the law in Canada is not for everyone, just like in South Africa back during the Apartheid regime.

Here you have the note from The Canadian Press:

5 hours ago

MONTREAL — A Quebec judge has denied a bid for freedom by an alleged Basque terror suspect who faces deportation.

Quebec Superior Court Justice Louise Lemelin ruled Tuesday she would not hear a motion for a writ of habeas corpus from Ivan Apaolaza Sancho's lawyers. Lemelin would not hear the motion because Sancho is not a Canadian citizen.

His lawyers say that means their client is denied his only recourse to fight what they call an unlawful 15-month detention based on evidence obtained through torture.

Lead lawyer William Sloan said in an interview he'll appeal Lemelin's decision.

"When it says everyone in the charter with respect to rights to habeas corpus, it means everyone except immigrants," Sloan said sarcastically.

"We have two different legal systems, one for human beings and one for immigrants who don't quite make it because they don't have the right to habeas corpus."

Sloan has argued the government's case against Sancho is based on evidence obtained through torture and should be thrown out.

Sancho is wanted by Spanish authorities in connection with a series of car bombings linked to ETA, a Basque separatist group.

Sancho admits to being part of the Basque nationalist movement, but denies having any ties to the group.

He faces deportation to Spain where, his supporters say, he faces the risk of being tortured. Canadian immigration officials ordered Sancho deported in May.

"Once again, Canada's courts are legitimizing evidence obtained by torture," Sancho said in a statement.

"I can only hope that Canadians of good conscience continue to speak out against this continued injustice, in my case, and in the case of others.

He has been in detention since June 2007 after the RCMP arrested him while aboard a ferry near Quebec City.

While an Immigration and Refugee Board commissioner rejected some federal evidence that appeared to be obtained through torture, he ruled there was more than enough additional evidence, including police warrants and affidavits, showing Sancho had ties to ETA.

Sloan has argued much of this evidence should be stricken.

A pre-removal risk assessment must still be performed before Sancho can be deported.

Sloan says he plans to revive his argument about evidence obtained through torture at that point.

"(The Immigration and Refugee Board) is just looking at the consequences of the deportation, so its position is going to be whether or not the evidence was obtained through torture.

"The only thing that counts is whether he'll be tortured or killed when he gets back."

Sancho had lived under a number of aliases using forged documents since arriving in Canada in 2001.

He lived mainly in the Vancouver area, rooming initially with Victor Tejedor Bilbao, another alleged Basque terrorist living illegally in Canada who was deported in June.

Sancho moved to Montreal in late 2006.

Has anyone in Canada inquired in Spain about what ever happened to Victor Tejedor, has he been charged? Remember, many Basques that have been extradited to Spain are now free without ever being charged, but only after spending at least four years in jail. Such totalitarian behaviour is the one that Louise Lemelin is endorsing with her decision.

.... ... .

Sarkozy's Anti-Basque Crusade

It was just a matter of time before France's Nicolas Sarkozy would start showing his full support for Juan Carlos Borbon's repressive campaign against Basque society.

Yesterday 17 Basque citizens from different political parties and associations were detained in pre-dawn raids, once again the name of Basque-phobe judge Baltasar Garzon was mentioned as the mastermind behind the operation.

Here you have the article regarding this issue published at the International Herald Tribune, a news outlet close to the Spanish Ministry of Propaganda:

French police arrest 17 suspected Basque militants

The Associated Press
Published: September 24, 2008

PARIS: Police arrested 11 suspected Basque militants Wednesday in southwest France in two separate investigations, including the financing of terror attacks in France and Spain, officials said.

The 11 — all French nationals — were being held in police custody after being questioned Wednesday.

Seven were questioned in connection with explosions in 2006 that slightly damaged a hotel in the French Basque country owned by acclaimed chef Alain Ducasse, according to a judicial official in Paris. The official was not authorized to speak publicly about an ongoing investigation and asked not to be identified by name.

The four other suspects were questioned as part of a preliminary investigation into an alleged illegal money transfer from the Basque Communist Party in Spain to people residing in southwest France and close to the Spanish Basque movement, the official said.

French police searched the French headquarters of the pro-independence Batasuna party, authorized in France but banned in Spain. Batasuna members were reportedly among those arrested.

The investigation into Communist Party funds allegedly transferred to France to finance attacks was opened based on information supplied by Spanish anti-terror judge Baltasar Garzon.

The arrests were made in sweeps along France's border with Spain. Officials had originally reported 17 arrests.

Like I said, yes, they were 17 arrests that violate the political rights of the Basque people living in Iparralde under French occupation. Yet, the Spaniards and their supporters in the international arena claim that the Basques are Spaniards and that the Basque conflict is not of an international nature.

.... ... .

Jewish Blogger Supports Hitler's King

There is a Jewish blogger by the name of Joe Gandelman who did everything he could to win the "Basque-phobe of the week" award some months ago.

This week him and his underlings have been posting about how McCain (the Republican candidate to the US presidency) dislikes Zapatero.

Thanks to the tag Spain at the bottom of one of his posts I was able to find one from last November in which Joe Gandelman has nothing but accolades and compliments for Juan Carlos Borbon, the king of Spain.

Admiring a power figure that belongs in the middle ages is bad enough, but to admire an individual that rose to power thanks to the meddling of two of Europe's worst dictators is too much.

How did this happen?

Simple.

Back in 1936 a military coup d'etat against Spain's democratically elected government was staged by an dimwit little man called Francisco Franco. The rebellion was bound to fail until Adolph Hitler and Benito Mussolini decided to support Franco and his followers. Thanks to an air bridge set in place by Hitler's Luftwaffe Franco's troops were able to leave Africa. With the military aid provided by the two fascist powers Franco was able to win a long and devastating war. He then proceeded to rule Spain with an iron fist, unleashing a genocidal campaign against everyone who opposed him. After the death of Admiral Carrero Blanco at the hands of Basque freedom fighters his only other option to perpetuate his government was to impose the figure of the king to the Spaniards in the person of Juan Carlos Borbon.

So, if it hasn't been for Hitler's support Franco would have failed in his military uprising, and if it hasn't been for Franco's decision to name him king, Juan Carlos could have never been back to Spain's throne. So in all reality, Borbon has to thank Hitler for the life of luxury and unchecked power he and his family enjoy today.

This is what Joe Gandelman (a Jewish that supports the Zionist occupation of Palestine) thinks of Juan Carlos (a man who is king thanks to Hitler) and how he came to power :

When I lived in and wrote from Spain between May 1975 and December 1978, I had the supreme pleasure of a lifetime, to live in a wonderful country that, before my astounded journalistic eyes, made a peaceful “evolution without revolution” transition to democracy from the dictatorship of General Francisco Franco.

And most Spaniards agreed there was one seemingly-quiet and above-the-fray man who had the guts to help make it happen — perhaps more than anyone else.

Evolution without revolution? More like a pact of complicity and silence to ensure that non of the high profile members of Franco's regime would ever be prosecuted for their crimes against humankind.

Joe Gandelman's intellect is so limited that he thinks that there can be democracy where there is a king. When a country is ruled by an individual who is above the law that applies for the rest of the citizens there can never be a democracy, it is called a monarchy.

The guts? Borbon had Spain's armed forces backing him up, who needs guts?

To this day, he still doesn’t get the credit that so many Spanish journalists and foreign diplomats (who would talk about it privately from 1975-1978) gave him. He navigated his country, and what some felt was a reluctant and potentially resistant military, through the dangers of shifting a nation and its establishment towards democratic elections and to until-then-taboo more relaxed social values.

Spanish journalists and foreign diplomats worked together on a propaganda campaign to sanitize Franco's regime, which included to clean up Juan Carlos Borbon's act. After the war and despite having provided Hitler with his limited support (Spain's military was not up to task) during the war, Francisco Franco became an important ally for the USA in its "cold war" against the USSR. So the US based news agencies were quick to implement a campaign to divest Francisco Franco of its unholly alliance with the Axis and make him look like a palladin of capitalism against the communist threat. And that is exactly what Joe Gandelman is doing today, to continue to convince people that Franco was not than bad after all.

The military obeyed Franco, the military knew there was a reason for Franco to name Borbon his succeso, Borbon was educated in military intitutions, the military knew some steps had to be taken to release some pressure, the military was part of the plan to "transform" Spain into a democracy, the military knew that there can not be true democracy when the figure of a king is imposed to a society by you guessed it, the military.

I hope you are ready for this:

And the bottom line is that King Juan Carlos, handpicked by Franco (who was widely believed to have thought KJC would be pliable to the kind of establishment he had in place when he was living) risked it all. He stood at the middle of an incredibly-dramatic and dangerous period of democratic evolution and never blinked in the face of rightist and leftist resistance (sometimes manifesting itself in sporadic violent acts).

Franco took Juan Carlos (notice who Gandelman insists of capitalizing the word king being that he is the citizen of a republic one would expect less submission to such an anachronistic figure).

Rightist resistance? He represented and represents the right! Who else can represent the right more than a king educated in military institutions?

Now check this one out:

When I was there everyone knew that the easiest way to halt the democratic evolution would have been for someone to rub “El Rey” out.

But the King was a toughie. He persisted, and democratic Spain had a man on the inside who could have resisted the change but instead quietly did what he could do to encourage and consolidate it.

Gandelman is tip-toeing around the fake coup d'etat staged by Borbon's closest friends, the one that people like him hail as the pivotal moment in which Borbon "proved" his unflenching compromise with democracy.

Maybe Gandelman could care to explain to us how is it that non of those who took part in the "coup d'etat" against Borbon was sentenced to the firing squad. Another compromise to advance towards peace and transition leaving behind "the hatred that divided the nation"? More like a covert operation to remind the Spaniards that Borbon could summon the military at any time he pleased, a stark reminder for every one to stay put and keep quiet, like in Franco's times.

The post continues with Gandelman's "moderate" view about the consequences of having an authoritarian ruler like Borbon ordering an elected Latin American president to shut up, until he says this:

But Juan Carlos KNOWS what REAL fascists were like.

Of course, he is one.

Did you know that Juan Carlos Borbon was the "de facto" ruler of Spain even before Franco's death?

Did you know that he co-signed many of Franco's death sentences against those prosecuted for opposing Franco's regime?



Note: I do not link back to Joe Gandelman for one simple reasons, he does not allow my comments at this blog, so this is the way I excerzise my right to reply.

.... ... .

And Now... Belgium

The Spaniards and the French would like you to believe that the Basques are the only lunatics pushing for sovereignty and independence in Europe.

Well, this article demolishes their sand castle built on lies and deception, it comes to us thanks to Financial Times:

Belgium struggles to maintain cohesion

By Tony Barber

Published: July 16 2008 19:21 | Last updated: July 16 2008 19:21

Another wet Belgian summer, another government crisis. Bad weather and political disarray appear to be inseparable in the small, flat country that hosts the headquarters of the European Union and Nato.

Black clouds were hanging over the coalition government of Yves Leterme, Belgium’s prime minister, long before he tendered his resignation to King Albert II on Monday night. Now the clouds have burst, exposing Mr Leterme’s inability to broker a deal on the complex disputes between Dutch and French speakers that lie at the heart of Belgium’s woes.

Mr Leterme’s short-term political future is, however, a different question from whether this week’s storm will turn into a cyclone that sweeps away Belgium as a state. With every crisis Belgium appears to edge a little closer to the precipice, without ever falling off.

Would it matter if it did? The boundaries of Europe’s nation states are hardly immutable. Over the past century they have changed more, and more often, than is sometimes recognised. Germany in its present form did not exist until 1990. Poland was not a state 100 years ago and its border today lies far to the west of where it was between 1918 and 1939. Czechoslovakia, the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia have disappeared. Since the Berlin wall came down in 1989, a rash of micro-states has broken out across Europe, the latest being Kosovo, which declared in­dependence in February.

From Scotland to Spain’s Basque country, from the Bosnian Serb sub-state of Republika Srpska to the breakaway region of Transdniestria in Moldova, dreams of independence in small, often ethnically based political units refuse to die.

In Belgium’s case, some say that its membership of Nato, the EU and the 15-nation eurozone, plus a political culture on both sides of the language divide that abhors violence, guarantee that the country’s break-up could be managed peacefully and without a descent into economic instability. But, at least as far as the economy is concerned, this view may be a touch too sanguine.

Consider Belgium’s public debt, which amounts to 85 per cent of gross domestic product. Padhraic Garvey, the head of investment-grade debt strategy at ING, the Dutch financial group, says: “If Belgium were to split, there would be a huge debate about who owns the debt, with associated risks for coupon and redemption payments.”

The difference in yield between Belgium’s 10-year government bonds and those of Germany, although small, has tripled over the past 12 months, a period of exceptional political turmoil. The latest bout of uncertainty will not appeal to foreign investors, who play a massive role in Belgium’s highly open economy, with US, French and other companies accounting for more than 10 per cent of total employment.

Meanwhile, sensitive and high-profile appointments in Belgium’s state administration and business world may be delayed or gummed up. With Mr Leterme’s government adrift, it may be harder to find a replacement for Didier Bellens, chief executive of Belgacom, the country’s dominant telecommunications company. The state has a 50 per cent shareholding in Belgacom and business people say Mr Leterme’s government wanted a fresh face in charge.

Such complications are trifling, however, in comparison with the task of solving “the Brussels question” if Belgium’s political classes really decided to abolish their 177-year-old state. Brussels, Belgium’s capital and the home of the EU’s most important institutions, is a mainly French-speaking island in the Dutch-speaking sea of Flanders, which forms the northern half of Belgium. Apart from Wallonia, the French-speaking south, there is also a tiny German-speaking enclave in the east.

If Belgium, a federal state that has become increasingly decentralised since 1970, were to be dissolved, Brussels would be the prize asset. That is why francophone militants want to unite it with Wallonia and why Flemish nationalists are equally adamant that they will allow no such step. To detach Brussels from both Flanders and Wallonia and declare it some sort of free-standing EU entity is a proposal that appeals to neither French nor Dutch speakers.

The enormous difficulty of defining the status of Brussels in a world without a Belgian state touches on other quarrels that divide the country’s politicians. Behind the turmoil in Mr Leterme’s government lies a dispute over an electoral district called Brussels-Halle-Vilvoorde (BHV). Uniquely in Belgium, this district allows French-speakers in the mainly Flemish Halle-Vilvoorde to vote for franco­phone candidates outside their home area. Elsewhere in Belgium, Dutch speakers must vote for Flemish parties and franco­phones for Walloon parties. Flemish politicians want to end the BHV anomaly; franco­phone politicians want to keep it. Mr Leterme could not break the deadlock and handed his resignation to his king.

“It’s outrageous to let the coalition collapse over something as futile as splitting a voting district,” sighs Mark Eyskens, a former prime minister.

The BHV dispute testifies to the risks, in a multilingual country, of an electoral system in which politicians have no incentive to seek support from voters outside their own linguistic community. Imagine English-speaking and Spanish-speaking politicians in the US crafting their respective messages exclusively to anglophones and Hispanics, for an idea of the pickle Belgium has got itself into.

At the same time, there are longer-term explanations for the divisions in Belgian political and civic life. Flanders has steadily pulled away from Wallonia in prosperity over the past 50 years and the Flemish resent paying taxes to subsidise the poorer south. “The money has not helped the Walloons but turned them into welfare addicts,” declared a recent editorial in The Flemish Republic, a newsletter that supports secession.

Such opinions are hotly contested in Wallonia but economists say there is more than a grain of truth to the argument that the south is more favourable than Flanders to government intervention in the economy. Such differences of political philosophy compound the problems created by Belgium’s geographical and linguistic divisions, its electoral system and the extreme decentralisation of the state.

The pressure for a formal split comes largely from Flanders, where some polls suggest that slightly more than half the population support independence. However, some Walloon political activists favour the union of their region with France – in spite of a not entirely happy experience of French annexation and rule between 1795 and 1815.

Three years ago, Mr Eyskens told a conference in London: “Belgium is a wonderful country and, if it were not to exist, it should be invented.” Friends of Belgium agree with the first part of that statement. As for the second, one answer might be: Yes – but perhaps not in its present form.

.... ... .

Basque-phobe of the Week : Juan Andrés Melian

I've heard many outlandish excuses to attack the right of the Basque people to speak their own language, but this one by Juan Andres Melian besides being idiotic is plain childish.

This note comes to us via AFP:

Spain's regional languages trouble tourists: lobbyist

7 hours ago

MADRID (AFP) — The increasing use of regional languages such as Catalan and Basque in parts of Spain instead of Spanish is making life difficult for tourists, the head of a Spanish tourism lobby group said Tuesday.

Juan Andres Melian, the director of the Tourism Panel which groups about 30 major Spanish tourism-related companies, said that in some regions local languages had totally replaced Spanish on signs at airports and on roads.

"Bilingualism is not respected in several regions and this creates problems for national tourists who only speak Castilian (Spanish) and for foreigners," he said in a statement.

Melian said a plan by local authorities in the Balearic island of Majorca to set up a "language police" whose role would be "to impose the Catalan language in restaurants" was "terrifying".

Spain has three main regional languages. Catalan is widely spoken in the Balearic islands as well as in Catalonia whose capital Barcelona is a top tourist draw. Basque is spoken in the northern Basque Country and in neighbouring Navarra, while Galician is spoken in northwestern Spain.

At the end of June a group of intellectuals, including Peruvian author Mario Vargas Llosa and Spanish philosopher Fernando Savater, published a "Manifesto for a common language" in a bid to goad the government into defending people's right to use Spanish anywhere in Spain.

So far 133,000 people and institutions have backed the manifesto, according to the centre-right daily newspaper El Mundo which backs the initiative.

Melian's Tourism Panel announced Tuesday that it backed the manifesto.

Spain's socialist government has been reluctant to take steps to defend the use of Spanish.

The issue is sensitive as under the right-wing dictatorship of General Francisco Franco the use of Catalan and Basque, and to a lesser extent Galician -- which is more similar to Spanish than the other two -- was repressed.

"The Spain which exists as we know it for hundreds and hundreds of years, is one which speaks in one language and in several," Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero said Sunday at the party's annual congress.

Now, the news outlet caters to an US audience, so the author that penned the article (who remains anonymous) decided to ride the wave and go after Zapatero reminding the readers that he is an evil "socialist" when he is no more than a pinkish social-democrat.

The lure presented by the call by Francisco Franco's worshiper Fernando Savater to ban the usage of Euskera, Catalan and Galician is quickly becoming an excellent way to measure Spain's intolerance towards the most basic human rights. More and more members of the Spanish establishment are showing their disdain towards the languages spoken in the nations within the Spanish state, which demonstrates what many NGO's and human rights organizations have been pointing out, that Spain acts as a colonialist power with complete disregard for international law and agreements.

And this is why Juan Andrés Melian is the Basquephobe of the week.

.... ... .

Basquephobe of the Week : Martti Ahtisaari

Meet Martti Ahtisaari, our Basque-phobe of the week.

The press calls this individual by terms like peace-maker and conflict mediator. His resume includes work in high profile cases like Northern Ireland, Aceh and Kosovo, yet, when it comes to Euskal Herria his response is no, nyet, nein, the Basques do not deserve their independence because he says so.

He is so ignorant in this matter that he thinks that Euskal Herria is occupied only by Spain, not a word about France. Then he insists that Euskal Herria does not deserve its freedom like Kosovo because "the history of both regions is diametrically different". But then he does not care to elaborate why are they so different because then people would figure out that it is precisely because of their history that it is hard to deny freedom to the Basques while granting it to the Kosovars.

After saying that the Basques in their obsession to put forward their invalid call for freedom would go to the extreme of claiming Kosovo as a precedent even if Kosovo was located in a different planet (just try to imagine the amount of euro-pesetas Madrid paid Ahtisaari to say something like that) he goes on to say that it was Milosevic's genocidal campaign in Kosovo what set the background for Kosovo's independence.

What about Francisco Franco? Being a protege of Hitler and Mussolini, bombing the civilian populations of Durango and Gernika, executing hundreds of gudaris after Bilbao's armistice, banning Basque culture and language throughout his four decade reign of terror does not count someone as a criminal like Milosevic? He was worst than Milosevic!

And what about his excuse that the history of Euskal Herria and Kosovo being diametrically different?

Actually it is, Francisco Franco murdered more Basques than Milosevic did Kosovars while perpetuating a 500 year genocidal campaign by Castile/Spain against Euskal Herria.

The note with Ahtisaari's statements comes to us via BalkanInsight:

Ex-Envoy: Kosovo Not Precedent for Basques

23 June 2008 Pristina _ Kosovo’s independence is absolutely no precedent for Spain’s Basque Country, the former UN envoy for Kosovo’s final status, Martti Ahtisaari argues.

Ahtisaari dismissed any connection between Kosovo’s independence and any move towards separatism by Spain’s Basque country saying that the history of both regions is diametrically different.

“Perhaps some people try to turn Kosovo into a precedent and use it so but they would do so even if Kosovo was from another planet,” Ahtisaari told Spanish daily, El Pais.

Appointed by the United Nations Secretary General, Ahtisaari facilitated two-year talks between Belgrade and Pristina over the final settlement of Kosovo’s political status, which has been administered by the UN for nine years since the end of the war between Serb military forces and ethnic Albanian majority in 1999.

At the end of negotiations, Ahtisaari proposed a comprehensive proposal for Kosovo’s ‘supervised independence’ with exclusive rights and provisions for minorities, particularly Kosovo Serbs.

However the internationally-mediated talks failed to produce a mutually-agreed solution, since Serbia insisted on keeping Kosovo under its sovereignty as an autonomous region, while Kosovo asked for nothing less than independence. Kosovo declared independence from Serbia on February 17 based on Ahtisaari’s blueprint.

Twenty out of twenty-seven European Union member states have recognised Kosovo’s independence so far but countries like Spain, Romania or Cyprus refuse to do so, arguing that the move violated international law.

Madrid is particularly concerned that Kosovo’s independence sets a bad example for its autonomous provinces, particularly the Basque Country, where demands among Basque hardliners for independence has led to decades of sporadic bombings and shootings.

Recently Britain’s former Minister for Europe, Denis MacShane wrote in an editorial that Spain was lobbying against the recognition of Kosovo’s independence in Latin American countries. Read more: http://balkaninsight.com/en/main/news/11190

“When in the case of Kosovo one defends the international legality, one does not say that it was Slobodan Milosevic who unconstitutionally annulled the autonomy of Kosovo and illegally ordered the slaughters and the expulsion of hundreds of thousands of Albanians,” Ahtisaari told El Pais.

He said Serbia lost Kosovo as a consequence of the policies of former Serb strongman Milosevic, and that the international community must now help Serbs understand that there is no way back and nothing will change.

Ahtisaari added that EU countries who now oppose the statehood of Kosovo had declared during the final status negotiations that the Kosovo case is unique.

Well, if it is of any consolation for Ahtisaari, his hatred towards the Basques is anything but unique.

.... ... .

Patxaran

The Wall Street Journal has published this article about one of the most iconic Basque spirits, Patxaran. Here you have it:

Rustic Pacharán Aims for Top Shelf
By WILLIAM R. SNYDER
May 16, 2008

Before entering the cordoned-off cobbled street in Pamplona, Spain, for the running of the bulls at 7 a.m. on a weekday last July, a group of young Spanish men, still weary from their carousing the night before, toasted one another and took a shot of a strong, electric-red liqueur. "It's tradition," one of them said, "and pacharán calms the nerves."

Doctors take note. For centuries the citizens of Spain's Navarre region have relied on pacharán, a concoction of aniseed-based alcohol and sloe berries, as a favored home remedy for stomach pains, nausea, aches, nerves -- and even hangovers.

Of course, consumed in large enough quantities, the beverage itself may have led to many of those aforementioned maladies. Pacharán -- also known by its Basque spelling, patxaran -- isn't just a medicine; it's also the regional tipple of choice, a drink with a long, mostly homemade history that now has more upscale ambitions and is finding a market outside of Spain. A growing number of digestif enthusiasts are reviving pacharán, calling it the perfect after-dinner drink. This is big thinking for a liqueur that was, until recently, thought of as little more than medicinal moonshine.

Like most folklore, the drink's origins are shrouded in mystery. People here just know that pacharán has always existed. First written about in 1415 as being served at the wedding of the king of Navarre's son -- it was to medieval Spanish royalty what champagne was to the French monarchs -- pacharán later appeared in the medical records of the Monasterio de Santa María de Nieva in 1441 as a reliable antacid. Then for centuries it faded from prominence, relegated to toasts at family celebrations.

Spain has no shortage of signature drinks. Compared with the global followings of sherry, Jerez brandy, cava and Rioja wines, pacharán is more of a rustic rural cousin. But the people of Navarre, says author Jorge Sauleda, believe there is nothing superior.

"It is one of the most genuine products to come from the earth," says Mr. Sauleda, who has written essays on pacharán and on Navarran cuisine. "The taste is a gentle sweet that doesn't stick to the palette. Brandy is too harsh and pastis tastes too much of anise. A young pacharán is the perfect blend."

Featured prominently as the exclamation point after a long Basque meal -- considered the best cuisine in Spain -- pacharán is proving popular with the many tourists who visit the region and want to take home a bottle of their discovery. Madrid's Barajas airport duty-free shop recently added a pacharán section. Production of the drink by commercial distilleries is increasing, opening a global market for this once-local beverage.

The foundation of pacharán is deceptively simple. "Making it requires three raw materials," says Tere Arizaleta, owner of the award-winning Azanza distillery. "Liquor, fruit and time." The liquor is an aniseed base with an initial alcohol content of 35% to 50%. The fruit is the berry of the Prunus Espinosa, known in English as a sloe. The time element involves macerating the freshly harvested sloes in the liquor for one to eight months, after which time they are strained out. Other natural additives, such as vanilla pods, coffee beans, cinnamon and sugar, are included in small amounts to personalize the flavor before bottling.

Because of the ease of blending and the proliferation of sloe berries in the Pyrenees, for centuries the most common form of the drink was called "pacharán casero," which roughly translates as homemade hooch. "It is the original way of producing pacharán and it is reason why the drink is so popular in Navarra," says Mikel Berraondo, secretary of the Institute for Food and Agriculture Quality of Navarre, a nonprofit group that monitors quality control and promotes food and drink from the region.

In the cellars of farmhouses throughout the countryside, cases of bottles filled with anisette and sloes rest undisturbed in the darkness. In each cellar, though, the bottles will include other token ingredients, signatures of a family's recipe. Coffee beans are a popular addition to cut the sweetness of the sloe. Others prefer a syrupy-sweet finished product and will add refined sugar to the mix. Some prefer honey, though it doesn't dissolve as well as sugar. Additional flavors include cloves, cinnamon, nutmeg and vanilla beans.

Of course, pride and private recipes result in local rivalries. "We don't have official competitions, but if one man declares he has the best, then his neighbors will challenge his claim," says Mr. Berraondo. This leads to a sort of unofficial contest: a group tasting in a bar. At first tempers flare and disputes are settled with more tasting. Mr. Berraondo even recalls seeing arguments erupt at weddings where one relative is unimpressed with another's pacharán. But, he says, "By the end of the bottle, everyone is friends again."

The fact that it is best drunk young creates a bit of a marketing problem for pacharán -- one that producers are working to overcome. Once the soaking process is finished, the pacharán will not improve with time. In fact, it will likely deteriorate. Spring and summer are the only times to enjoy pacharán at its peak. Unlike cognacs, ports and brandies, which can improve in quality (and rise in price) over time and in relation to particularly good grape harvests, pacharán doesn't have a vintage classification system. A good crop of sloes is not usually promoted as such.

Pacharán is a sweet drink, with an alcohol content ranging from 25% to 30% after maceration and aging, making it a little stronger than port. The sweetness should be dry, deriving from the fruit, not the added sugar. A good nose reflects a balance between the bouquet of the sloes and additives and the aniseed liquor. The mouth should be velvety, a sign of fresh berries. But the drink's most striking characteristic, and the quickest indicator of quality, is its unique color. Professional tasters can recite variations in hue with the nuance of an interior decorator discussing paint chips.

"The color should be a bright, deep red. The brightness reflects youth and pacharán should be consumed while young," writes Manuel Ruiz Hernández, a wine critic and spirits expert, in a research paper for the University of La Rioja. "If the color has a dull red brick hue or is yellowish, rust or orange, it implies old age and a loss of the fruitiness."

Yet even with royal origins and widespread popularity in the Basque country, the drink's modern history is brief and obscure. Pacharán was bottled regionally at the end of the 19th century, then commercially marketed in Spain in the 1950s. It was granted an official Denominacion de Origen status in 1987, putting it on a par with local wines and assuring a certain level of quality. The following year a regulatory council for quality control, the Consejo Regulador D.E. Pacharán Navarro, formed.

"Pacharán was then protected by [European Union] regulations and can only be made in an approved way," notes Silvia Villanueva, a member of the regulatory council. This upset some small-batch distillers. While home distillers consider themselves artisans and their drink as good as the large producers, the regulatory council is making it difficult for them to sell their product, saying they bottle in conditions that don't meet manufacturing-sanitation standards. Homemade pacharán can be still bought from restaurants and fairs, but it is becoming more difficult to find outside of a bar or restaurant. Visitors to rural Navarre should ask innkeepers and local bartenders for a pour of their house bottle. The villages of Estella, Abarzuza, Viana, Aribe and Aibar are well-known for exceptional homemade blends.

Two decades after getting official status, the pacharán producers' council comprises only five companies: Licores Azanza, Licores Baines, Ambrosio Velasco, Destilerias La Navarra and Vinicola Navarra. Even with a mark of quality and modernized production, the digestif remained a regional drink. But Navarre and the rest of the Basque country are seeing annual increases in tourists, many of whom come for the running of the bulls at the annual San Fermin fiesta in Pamplona or to sample the region's famous cuisine. Though more sangria and beer are consumed at the fiesta now, pacharán is the drink most closely associated with the festivities, like Pimms at Wimbledon or a stein of beer at Oktoberfest.

The Michelin-starred chef Juan Mari Arzak offers a variety of labels in his eponymous restaurant in nearby San Sebastian. And country inns here will include a copa of pacharán in the fixed-price menu del dia.

Since pacharán was not commercially available for so long, the challenge for distillers is to identify qualities that make a bottle a top-shelf selection like a fine brandy or cognac, two drinks considered competition. They're focusing first on the sloes.

"The condition of the sloe berries before soaking is the most important element to consider," says Ms. Villanueva. "The more mature fruits lose color and substance, but green ones are acidic and take too long to infuse their properties."

The skin of a mature sloe and a green sloe are almost identical, making it difficult to distinguish. To find out the maturity, the pulp is inspected by pinching the berry. As a rule, the preferred pulp color is ruddy red.

Destilerias La Navarra is trying to define top-shelf pacharán with its Green Label, by focusing on select sloes, using only berries with a diameter of less than 7 millimeters. The smaller size sloes generally come from younger bushes and are less acidic. The liqueur is packaged in a green bottle to protect it from light, which slows aging.

Also a consideration for top-shelf quality is the berry's origin, whether it's wild or domestic. Licores Baines' Gold Label pacharán recipe blends both wild and farmed sloes, which the company says creates a fuller body and justifies its higher price -- about €10 to €15 a bottle depending on the blend.

Currently, many producers still pick wild berries from blackthorn bushes in the foothills of the Pyrenees during a September harvest. "One goal of the regulatory council is to improve the domestication of the blackthorn," says Mr. Berraondo.

With a better-farmed crop, distillers can monitor the growth of sloes throughout the season, much like a vintner inspecting grapes on the vine. This will give producers more accurate quality and yield estimates.

Distillers are also promoting new ways of drinking pacharán, like mixing it in cocktails such as a martini or a wine spritzer, says distillery owner Ms. Arizaleta. One ambitious brewer in the French part of the Basque region, Oldarki, has launched a pacharán-infused beer that is finding an audience with fans of framboise.

PACHARAN TASTING NOTES

Since medieval times pacharán has been a medicine, a digestif and a celebratory tipple. But like the peculiar Basque language, it remained isolated in Navarra. As such, finding the drink in a liquor store outside of Spain can be a challenge, unless you're in a capital city. France, England and Belgium are the largest export markets in Europe, and specialty stores in each stock a variety. A solution, though, is to buy online. Productsfromspain.net carries the major producers and ships globally. Some producers also sell directly to online customers.

The common practice is to drink pacharán on ice or chilled, but take it warmer, between 15 and 18 degrees, for critical tasting. Too cold and the anisette overpowers the palette; too warm and you'll be swallowing fruit candy. At a mild temperature the alcohol and bouquet should be in harmony. And because a unique serving glass doesn't exist, a cognac snifter or a cordial glass suffices.

Judge pacharán by assessing three qualities: color, nose and mouth. Experts consider color to be the quickest indicator of quality. It should be an intense red. Cloudiness and rust or orange shades imply old age, while brightness is a sign of youth. As for the nose, neither the sloes nor the alcohol scents should stand out. A good pacharán has a fruity bouquet with a light undertone of anise alcohol. The texture should be soft and the taste sweet, though not in excess. If a sip leaves a film in your mouth comparable to soda, too many sweeteners were added. Ultimately a good pacharán will be subtle in every quality but the color (the louder, the better).

Here are four pacharáns considered to be top-shelf.

La Navarra
La Pacharán Green Label
€34.95
Made of sloe berries with a diameter less than seven millimeters, this brand is bottled in green glass to protect it from light. By using select berries, La Navarra creates a sublime velvet texture with a deep fruitiness.

Licores Baines
Gold Label
€29.95
The full body of the Gold Label comes from the complexity of the blend, which can include vanilla, sugar or coffee to complement the flavors of the berry. The numerous yet subtle scents make this pacharán's nose more like a wine than a liqueur.

Azanza
Pacharan JV 1810
€19.95
Blending both wild and domesticated sloe berries, the craftsmen at Azanza use a recipe little changed since 1810. The combination of different sloes creates a drier pacharán that doesn't linger on the palette like the sweeter labels.

Zoco
€14.95
By far the sweetest of the four tasted because Zoco employs more modern distilling techniques using sugars to accentuate the sweeter elements of the fruit. But with the sweetness comes a lack of complexity, which is noticeable in the lighter color.

Please, excuse the sloppy "reporting" evidenced by the author's insistence in down-playing the Basque identity of Navarre, after all, he works for aBasque-phobe.

.... ... .

Rankin Is Mad

Nicholas Rankin has a nice grip of what is going on in Euskal Herria, he has supported initiatives to solve the political conflict and his writings about the Basques are always well documented.

But he is upset and he wrote about the reason why he is upset, unfortunately he allowed the worst on him to come through.

Here you have the article:

A Basque encounter with pirates

By Nick Rankin
BBC, Spain

When a Spanish fishing boat, with its cargo and crew, was seized off the Horn of Africa recently, it prompted Madrid to call for the extradition of the hijackers and for international action against piracy.

For centuries, bold Basque sailors have ventured out on the seas that crash on their homeland in the Bay of Biscay.

Basques, chasing whale and cod, were probably the first Europeans to reach North America.

The Portuguese, Ferdinand Magellan, is credited with being the first man to sail around the world, but actually he died in the Philippines and it was a Basque, Juan Elkano from Getaria, who brought his ship home.

So when a Basque-owned tuna fishing boat called Playa de Bakio was seized off Somalia, with five Basque among its crew, the story was a big one in the Basque country. The press were keen to find out all about the kidnapped fishermen and their anxious relatives. Pictures were vital.

"This is gold dust," said my friend Vincent, the Reuters photographer, tapping a good image of the fishing boat in the newspapers, next to personal ones of the crew.

"I wonder where they got those."

Ransom

In the bad old days, foot-in-the-door journalists used to steal framed family photographs off the mantel, but nowadays a second with a digital camera is all a good snapper needs.

The day before Vincent had been photographing the daughter of one of the kidnapped sailors and he still had her phone number. I called her mobile to offer a crumb of reassurance.

I told her I had made a BBC radio programme about Somali pirates and had learned they did not usually harm foreign captives. All they wanted was the ransom money.

She told me the company was prepared to pay and I said that in that case her dad would soon be back safe. And indeed, after a million or so euros changed hands, the crew were freed.

A Basque newspaper interviewed Andrew Mwangura, the sensitive man who runs a charity that helps distressed African seafarers.

"Hello, Andrew!" I said out loud reading the paper because I had spent time with him in Mombasa.

Andrew Mwangura explained that Somali piracy was a rational economic activity in a lawless country. There was no government to regulate the fishing grounds in the Indian ocean off Somalia.

The hijacked Playa de Bakio may have been licensed to fish for tuna, but scores of other European and Asian fishing boats trawl illicitly in Somali waters, running big risks for high returns.

Mwangura estimated that this pirate fishing off Somalia is worth over £50 million a year. And so the Somali pirates in their turn levy a kind of privatised tax or toll on any foreign vessels they can seize, claiming territorial rights.

Civil War horror

A few days later, in the cemetery at Gernika, I ran into my own personal pirate.

Gernika is a place whose history has been fought over. In 1937, during the Spanish civil war, the town of Gernika was burned down. There were two different stories about what happened.

The Spanish victors of the civil war claimed that the communist citizens of Gernika blew up and burned their own town. The Basques said their town was fire-bombed by foreign aeroplanes as was indeed the case.

I wrote a book about George Steer, the Times journalist, whose truthful report of the Nazi bombing inspired Pablo Picasso to paint his famous, black and white picture, Guernica.

The Basques have now put up a bust of this reporter, George Steer, in the town - and every year on the anniversary I accompany his son, who lays flowers at the tomb of the dead.

After this year's ceremony, I was told that someone who had written in Basque about George Steer wanted to meet me.

Intellectual pirates

He was my age, with the rough scruffy look that is the badge of authenticity among left-wing, Basque nationalists.

"Your book made me cry," he said, "so I copied it."

He handed me a slim volume for young people. The cover was instantly familiar, because it was the same as my own.

I still did not quite grasp that someone had picked my pocket and was now presenting me with my own wallet as a gift.

Only later did I find all the pictures were lifted, without credit or permission, and realise that the publishers were the same intellectual pirates from Navarra who had also ripped off G L Steer's original Spanish civil war book and copyrighted it themselves.

It is territoriality again, anything about Basques they feel belongs to them.

Although they flout international laws of ownership, the Somali pirate and the Basque publisher both claim their action is somehow in the national interest. As Dr Johnson said: "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel."

Madrid called for the hijackers of their trawler to be extradited to Spain and for international action against piracy.

I won't hold my breath waiting for law and order to reach Somalia. But the Basque country is in Europe where intellectual property rights are more protected.

I am minded to go fishing for trouble, with a heavyweight copyright lawyer.

Was that quote by Dr. Johnson really necessary?

Hopefully things will be resolved to his satisfaction. And hopefully he will then apologize for calling all Basques that long for their undeniable right to self determination by the term scoundrel.

.... ... .

Spanish Language In Peril

Don't panic, Spanish language is not about to disappear, it is just that an imitator of Basque-phobe Keith Johnson by the name of Graham Keeley has published a piece that would lead the readers to believe that the push by Basques, Catalans and Galicians to strengthen their own languages represents a clear and present danger to Spanish.

Here you have the article:

Spanish speakers fight to save their language as regions have their say

Graham Keeley in Barcelona
The Observer,
Sunday May 4 2008

Habla Español? It is a question that in some parts of Spain ignites a fierce political war of words over the language of Cervantes. A growing number of activist groups in Catalonia, the Basque Country and Galicia claim they are being denied the right to speak Spanish by regional nationalists who use language as a political weapon.

But the speakers of Spain's other 'official' languages - Catalan, Basque and Galician - insist that, on the contrary, Spanish is thriving and regional authorities have to save their own languages from being lost forever.

Since Franco's death in 1975, a process of 'linguistic normalisation' has taken place in autonomous regions that have their own languages. The Basque, Catalan and Galician tongues, repressed by Franco after the end of the civil war in 1939, have been promoted with millions in public funds, in the hope that more people will speak them.

But now Spanish speakers complain that their language is being marginalised by regional nationalists in revenge for the way their own languages were suppressed in the Franco years. They are appealing to the Spanish constitution, which guarantees the right to speak Spanish along with the three other official languages.

The battle has centred on the classroom, with Spanish-speaking parents in the regions worried that their children will be unable to read or write Spanish well, as they will only be taught in Catalan, Basque or Galician - minority languages compared with Spanish, which is the first language of about 322 million people worldwide.

The Basque Country has three types of teaching: in Spanish, Basque and bilingual. Just 5 per cent of parents took the Spanish-only option in primary schools this year, and the Basque government said it has had to cut back on Spanish-only teaching due to the lack of demand.

But Susana Marqués, of the Platform for the Freedom of Linguistic Choice, claimed that schools teaching Spanish have become ghettoes hampered by lack of funding because the authorities are keen to promote Basque at all cost. She said the Basque authorities want schools to have a high level of Basque in order to receive generous local funding. 'The only way to do this is total immersion in the language. In 20 years of this policy they still have not managed to get bilingualism here. It is not the language of the street. And 70 per cent of companies here never use Basque.' Marqués's group has appealed to Spain's ombudsman, Enrique Múgica, arguing that their rights are being denied. But Patxi Baztarrika, deputy head of linguistic politics for the Basque government, said: 'Spanish is present and should be. To say that Basque poses any threat to it is ridiculous.'

In Catalonia, Catalan is the language in all state schools, with Spanish only taught for up to three hours a week. An anti-nationalist party, Ciutadans (Citizens), was launched in 2006 to oppose 'linguistic politics' in Catalonia, but its leader, Albert Rivera, has received death threats. 'Fifty per cent of the population of Catalonia are from Spanish-speaking origins, and it is impossible to study in Spanish in private schools or in state schools,' said Carina Mejías, spokeswoman of the opposition right-wing Popular party in the Catalan parliament.

Bernat Joan, a Catalan Euro-MP and expert on linguistics, said: 'This protest would only be legitimate if students did not have adequate Spanish teaching. This is not the case.'

In Galicia, at least half of teaching must be in the regional tongue. Gloria Lago, a founder of Bilingual Galicia, said: 'The children ask to be taught in Spanish and this is not allowed because the law prevents it. When the bell goes, they start speaking their own language.'

However, Marisol López, Galician head of linguistic policies, insisted: 'Children study in two languages. If we don't discriminate positively in favour of Galician, Spanish will dominate.'

Talking Points

Spanish: 332 million speakers

The third most spoken language in the world, after Chinese and English. Spoken widely in Spain, Latin America and US

Catalan: 9.1 million

Romance language spoken in Catalonia, and parts of Valencia, Balearic Islands, Sardinia, south west France

Galician: 3-4 million

Romance language spoken in Galicia, parts of Asturias and Castilla y León

Basque: 1 million

Language of unknown origin, spoken in the Basque Country of north west Spain and south west France

Good thing that good ol' Graham provides with the chart of speakers for each language at the end of the article so you can see just how ridiculous the whole thing is.

I would like to ask Susana Marqués and Gloria Lago what do they think about the annihilation of several languages (and cultures) committed during Spain's long venture as a colonialist and genocidal power.

And I am going to say it loud and clear, if you are a Spaniard living in Euskal Herria, Catalunya or Galiza and you are afraid your kids will not learn "proper" Spanish easy, go back to Spain and stop being part of an occupying force that deprives entire nations of their freedom.

.... ... .

Bartlett Accepts His Bias

Well, what would you know, not all Democrats are US politicians, my fault, as it happens, Andrew Bartlett is Australian and he is an Australian politician. A Democrat Australian politician.

My fault, I stand corrected.

But I will take the opportunity provided by the mea culpa to provide more evidence about how some politicians who claim to care about human rights are in reality biased individuals who think their membership to a political party allows them to say whatever they may please.

Here you have Bartlett's update to his own post:

In a nice example of just how fraught it can be making any sort of comment on this sort of thing, I’ve discovered that the above remarks of mine have got me labelled as “Basquephobe of the week” by a blogger who campaigns for Basque independence. I guess it gives me another award to add to CV of achievements, although I must say I don’t know anywhere near enough about the situation in the Basque region to have an informed opinion on the issue (or even an uninformed one).

Leaving aside this blogger’s not-so-minor error of labelling me as a US politician - thus giving the writer a seriously wrong-headed excuse to bash US politicians - it is interesting how what I thought was a determinedly neutral piece can immediately be seen as vehemently anti-something (in this case anti-Basque). It seems that merely using the term “Basque separatists” is enough to place one in the category of ‘Basquephobe’, which is something I should remember if I’m ever going to mention that topic again. Seeing I have dipped back into this post to add this update, I may as well add for the record that my personal view on Kosovo is that it did seem unnecessarily quick for Australia to announce formal diplomatic recognition, although I imagine the eventual end outcome of an independent nation will be much the same, regardless.

First he belches out this sentence:

"No doubt Spain’s opposition is in part based on concerns about Basque separatists within their own state."

Then he says that he knows not "enough about the situation in the Basque region".

So, how is it there is no doubt on his mind that Spain's opposition to the diplomatic recognition of Kosovo has anything to do with the Basques? How can he be so sure that the inhabitants of a "region" he knows nothing about are to blame for Spain's decisions over Kosovo's independence declaration?

Then there is the fact that he keeps on labeling the Basque Country as a "region" despite having called Taiwan a "self-governing and autonomous country".

When you bestow upon the Taiwanese the very same right that you deny to the Basques then you are discriminating, period. And when you discriminate an entire people without even having the must basic information about their history and political struggle then you are biased against them for some obscure reason.

When you speak against the Basques without having consistent information about them you become a Basque-phobe, just like speaking against the Jewish makes you into an anti-Semite.

And then there is the issue of what the Australians did to the Aboriginals which got the Australian government to apologize not too long ago.

I rest my case.

.... ... .

Web Attack Against Ibarretxe

What would you know?

Rodríguez Zapatero is now resorting to a shady web of pro-Aznar thugs to carry out his dirty campaign against the Basque Autonomous Community's president, Juan José Ibarretxe.

Here you have the note from the San Jose Mercury News:

Basque government president's invite sparks dissent via Web

By Lisa M. Krieger
Mercury News
Article Launched: 01/26/2008 01:34:19 AM PST

Vehement protest has greeted the decision by Stanford University to invite the controversial president of Spain's Basque regional government to speak on campus.

Juan José Ibarretxe is author of a hotly debated proposal for a referendum on independence for the mountainous region of northern Spain.

While resistance to a Feb. 14 seminar with Ibarretxe started on campus, much of the mounting pressure comes from the other side of the world.

A globally circulated online petition with more than 3,500 signatures holds names of people far outside the Stanford community, including a European Parliament member and the sister of a Sevilla official assassinated by ETA, a Basque terrorist group. Even Spain's regional government of Navarra has weighed in, sending a letter of protest to Stanford President John Hennessy.

Campus dissent is nothing new, but technology is delivering regional disputes to college door stoops. Speaker selection is traditionally an internal affair, protected by policies of academic freedom.

Because of the Internet, "Spaniards can easily bring their feelings to bear. They don't even need an envelope and a stamp," said University of California-Berkeley school of journalism Professor William J. Drummond.

In Stanford's tiny Spanish community, there is no consensus on the visit, said Manuel Franco Sevilla, president of Iberia, the Spanish students association at Stanford.

Nor does the average student hold a strong opinion. "I don't think the general population of students at Stanford are really aware of this visit," Sevilla said.

The international protesters say that Ibarretxe does not deserve a platform at Stanford because he calls for a referendum on Basque independence from Spain and France. His visit - coming on the eve of Spanish elections - is politically motivated, they say. They criticize the professor who invited Ibarretxe, saying he shares the president's ideologies.

The petition opposing his visit was organized by a graduate student at Stanford, who asked not to be identified due to fear of reprisals against his family in Spain, and software engineer José Manuel Camporro of San Jose, who grew up in the Basque city of Vitoria and came to California four years ago.

"It's not a free speech issue," said Camporro. "I agree it is important to get informed about any situation or opinion, but there are always good and not so good sources of information. When a professor invites a politician of his same ideology during the election process, that's not academic anymore."

"Stanford chose to invite one of the most prominent representatives of the regional neo-nationalism in Spain," he said. "Most of the Basque population lives in fear. We can't speak freely there, and that's why it is funny that anybody mentions 'free speech' regarding Mr. Ibarretxe."

Stanford Provost John Etchemendy, of Basque descent, responds that a college campus is a place for all views to be aired, and that even unpopular views deserve a platform.

Stanford professor of Spanish and Portuguese Joan Ramon Resina defended the event, titled "A Proposal To Transform the Basque Conflict" and sponsored by the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies. He says that Ibarretxe's popularity is proven by continuous victories at the polls. Ibarretxe's party has governed the region since 1936, interrupted only by the Franco dictatorship, he said.

"This is hard to accept by political opponents, whose level of tolerance is so low that they cannot countenance a formal address by Mr. Ibarretxe at a prestigious university," Resina said.

Worried about the increasing number of universities that have rescinded invitations issued to outside speakers, in July the American Association of University Professors reaffirmed its official policy, saying "the freedom to hear is an essential condition of a university community and an inseparable part of academic freedom."

Within the past five years, Harvard University was pressed to cancel an Irish poet; the College of the Holy Cross in Massachusetts canceled a speech by a British cleric. Colorado College and the University of Colorado were urged to cancel a leading Palestinian representative. The visit by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to Columbia University last year triggered a deluge of e-mails and phone calls to university President Lee Bollinger.

Protest has a long and healthy tradition on college campuses, said UC-Berkeley's Drummond.

What's changed, he said, are the global complaints of Internet-posted petitions.

"People can register their feelings in a concerted way," said Drummond. "The Web has proved to be great for organizing widely separated communities."

Yes indeed, the web is an amazing tool, and in the hands of reactionary individuals like this Camporro character it can become a dangerous weapon.

Now, I stand corrected, Provost Etchemendy is proving to be an all-weather Basque, my respect to his work and his courage.

.... ... .

42 Imprisoned

This information comes to us thanks to the Irish Solidarity Committees With The Basque Country:

EH NEWS: SPANISH INQUISITION

Spanish Court orders arrests of 46 defendants on 18/98

11/30/2007

The sentence on this case is not going to be announced until December, but judges have already considered their verdict and that is why they ordered the arrests of the defendants.

34 people have been arrested so far accused of being related to 18/98 case, judicial officials reported. Spanish National Court ordered on Friday the arrests of 46 defendants on this this macro-trial.

This trial was the largest ever made in terms of the number of defendants. The judges heard testimonies of more than 300 people. Those on trial included alleged members of Basque social political gropus, media and other organizations. Spanish National Court banned their activities citing they were supporters of Basque armed group ETA.

Spanish Court ordered all the arrests, investigation officials reported. According to these sources, the sentence on this case is not going to be read until December. But, the court has ordered police to put them under detention before the convictions are announced, a court official said.

List of arrested people

Txema Matanzas, Jesus Mari Zalakain, Elena Beloki, Alberto Frias, Javier Balanzategi, Javier Salustregi, Joxe Mari Olarra, Mikel Korta, Iñaki O'Shea, Juan Mari Mendizabal, Mario Zubiaga, Iker Casanova, Manuel Intxauspe, Jose Garcia Mijangos, Natale Landa and Olatz Egiguren.

The International commission "Euskal Herria Watch" on case 18/98

The "Euskal Herria Watch" international commission, made up of lawyers from various countries, had the opportunity to participate in the sessions celebrated between the 21 st of November 2005 and the 14 th of March of 2007 in the 18/98 proceeding. The parties on trial are private businesses, the newspaper Egin and the radio station Egin Irratia, the Basque political organisation Ekin, the foundation for the promotion of the social movements Joxemi Zumalabe and the European association Xaki for international activity.

This report contains a summary of our main concerns, based on the monitoring work carried out, as well as a series of conclusions regarding this particular trial.

The accusation

The public prosecution and the private prosecution carried by the Association of Victims of Terrorism charged 51 people who have participated in the mentioned businesses and associations with a crime of "belonging to a terrorist organisation". On this bases, the prosecution asked for 10 to 50 years of prison for the defendants, as well as other accessory penalties. Afterwards, the prosecutor reduced the petition for 4 to 19 years depending on the consideration of "collaboration" with or "membership" of an armed group. Among the defendants the persons prosecuted for their relationship with the Egin newspaper's board of directors faced the higher petitions. In total, where before the prosecution asked for 927 years of imprisonment, now they ask for 484.

The charges brought by the Investigating judge and taken on by the public prosecution and the private prosecution are not rooted in any concrete facts or particular evidence. The charges are based on the idea that these people participated in the aforementioned organisations to infer afterwards that these organisations belong to ETA. Even if the first part of that logic is granted because of the public and notorious activity of these social and political activists, the second part lacks any reason or evidence to be assessed, but is no more than a speculative interpretation built on suspicions. These suspicions are limited to sporadic contact among defendants and members of the ETA armed organisation, to the interest expressed by ETA about these organisations, reflected in its internal documentation, and finally, to the coincidence in the political goals: sovereignty for the Basque Country. The suspicions on which the charges are based are not criminal activity. The situation could be explained as the late German lawyer and observer, Martin Poell manifested to the media "we have known about cases without evidence, but this is the first case that does not even have crimes".

Without individualized criminal conduct, the construction of the connexion among these organisations on trial with ETA is mere speculation.

The public hearing: the right to a defence

The defence has come across an unlimited number of difficulties to exercise their professional task. A list of issues that had to be solved before the hearings began could have stopped it: the trial began in the absence of three defendants, without the orders for them to be brought before the court having been issued. A previous appeal challenging a number of expert witnesses had not been resolved; it was rejected by the tribunal on the spot. The prosecution has requested a number of companies to be declared illegal and have their assets seized, and they have not even been summoned to appear in court. They have not been notified of the charges, which amounts to civil death, because they are not party to the proceedings and cannot defend themselves, therefore, if they were convicted this would mean the proceedings will be voided. Last, but not least in terms of the guaranteeing of the right to a defence, a series of documentary tests requested by the defence before the beginning of the trial have not been carried out, despite the fact that they should have been done before the trial began and that the tribunal had agreed to their being carried out. It is due to the hurry showed by the Court to carry on with the hearing that these questions, that can bring about an effect of nullity, were simply ignored.

A decision to begin and continue the trial was made by the tribunal, over and above the fact that the case –a 207,000 page-long monster- is in a state of chaotic disorder. There is no index of pieces of evidence; the whereabouts of these pieces of evidence is often unknown, which makes access to the evidence difficult for both prosecution and defence; finding a document means an effort that often turns out to be futile, thereby causing repeated adjournments to continue the search.

On the 15th session of the trial, the 21st of December 2005, the evidence in Prior Proceedings 75/89, was brought to the Court. It is a series of police reports, transcriptions of tapped phone conversations and other documents which have been kept under official secret since 1989. The prosecution had access to that documentation but not the defence; these documents remained in secrecy for them. Due to the impossibility to have access to that evidence even being brought to the Court, t he defence lawyers requested the protection of their respective Bar Associations and the Basque Council of Lawyers. Those plus the President of the Spanish Council of Lawyers held a meeting with the President of the Audiencia Nacional to grant the fundamental right to a defence.

One of the most shocking violations of the right to a defence in the view of the observers that have participated in this first part of the hearings was the ban on the defendants to make their statement freely in front of the Court and, more specifically their right to explain why they were refusing to answer the questions by the prosecution. The defendants had decided this, as a clear political statement. Nevertheless, the president of the Court cut the intervention of the defendants forbidding any further explanation immediately after declaring their refusal to answer. Of course, if it is not appropriately explained, by attitude on the part of the defendants can be understood as a fearful or doubtful position under cross examination by the prosecutor. One of the lawyers mentioned the jurisprudence of the European Court in Strasbourg – dated 2 May 2000, in the Condron vs. the UK case-, annulling a trial because the reasons why the defendant was remaining silent were not stated in the minutes. The president of the Court answered to the lawyer that "I do not care what Strasbourg says".

For this and other reasons we can see that the attitude of the Court has been manifestly aggressive and authoritarian towards the defendants. The inquisitorial character of the hearing and the and the intense and worrying emotive implication of the president of the Court in it, instead of being impartial and "super partes" has been made clear. A Court should uphold basic rights at the time of doing justice, as the effective judicial tutelage for all the people in the exercise of their legitimate rights and interest, without legal protection and the right to a trial with full guaranties, to use all the pertinent means for the defence and the right to be presumed innocent.

It is relevant to underline that the Court never has ruled in favour of the defence in any of the many incidents that have occurred due to irregularities in the development of the proceedings. All of them must be resolved in the final decision by the Court.

Quality of evidence

Throughout the hearing not a single allegation containing concrete, individualised facts was put forward. The evidence consisted of the reading of documents allegedly seized from ETA, statements taken from some defendants under incommunicado detention, telephone tapping and statements by the agents of the Central Unit of Intelligence of the National Police and the Investigation services of the Civil Guard, brought in as court experts and the main revealing factor of the prosecution.

These agents make their anonymous testimony as court experts, understanding that they provide the court with alleged expertise and objective knowledge, in their the field of activity. However, it is clear that, even if they present themselves as expert in the fight against ETA, their statements are an interested and biased account of the facts, as they have taken part in the investigation. They gave their statements collectively, all together, behind a screen that separates them for the public, not from the defendants. They have permission from the tribunal to discuss their answers and correct each other. In practice, the opinion of these agents introduced by the Court as "experts" has the role of rectifying the gaps in the evidence.

Nevertheless, their statement were full of incongruence and contradictions, such as the one referring to the origin of some of the documents, the identities of the persons that appear in those documents under nicknames, or the alleged connection between the newspaper Egin or the Foundation Joxemi Zumalabe with ETA.

One of the matters that have had a shocking effect is the identification of one of the experts as one of the officer conducting torture at the interrogation of Nekane Txapartegi and Mikel Egibar. The latter asked the Court to uphold his right to question the experts. The reaction by the president, Angela Murillo was to shout "sit down! be quiet!" losing her nerves and asking the police that guard the Court to form a human wall between the Civil Guard agents acting as experts and the defendants, who shouted "torturers!!". Murillo, overwhelmed, decided to adjourn the session.

Matters of humanitarian nature

As mentioned, the trial lasted 16 months in a Court especially built in a neighbourhood at the outskirts of Madrid . The defendants were obliged to be present every day that court is in session. The only accommodation was to replace the Thursday and Friday sessions with night sessions on Mondays and Tuesdays. It is surprising to hear that being present in the courtroom is not a right of the defendants, in their best interest, but an obligation imposed on them. It seems evident that this is not a measure aimed at guaranteeing the defendants have full knowledge of the proceedings and a better chance to exercise their right to a defence but an extra obligation imposed on them after the accused had repeatedly stood against it. It has caused many traffic accidents in the long journeys from the Basque Country to Madrid, has generated adjournments and delays due to the difficulties to appear in the Court for all the defendants. It has also made the defendants' daily life more difficult, their family and work activities, and affected their economies, creating a high physical and psychological cost.

A particular mention should be made to the case of Iñigo Elkoro who, due to a serious disease, had to be separated from the trial and a new trial will have to take place, so as not to interfere with the main proceedings. In the case of Jokin Gorostidi, the day before he had to make his statement in court he suffered a he suffered a heart attack with the result of his death on 25 th April 2006. The attitude of the Court towards the defendants can be considered cruel and degrading treatment.

The Issue of Torture

On 6th May 2006 defendant Xabier Alegría declared in court: He has the highest petition from the prosecutor, with 100 years in prison. He explained he had suffered torture during incommunicado detention. The lawyers submitted a copy of other procedures including this fact, the prosecution did not deny the submission and the Court admitted it.

The 18th of April, was the turn of Mikel Egibar who provided the Court with an account of torture during his detention by the Civil Guard on 10th March 1999, including beatings, suffocation with a plastic bag, threats against him and his family… during five days, before was brought to the National Court. The next day Nekane Txapartegi gave her statement, explaining that her incommunicado detention lasted 10 days and included death threats, the plastic bag and sexual harassment, even being raped by four Civil Guards.

The statements taken under torture are used by the court to base the accusations in this trial 18/98 and to introduce incriminatory evidence against the people that suffered it and the rest of the defendants.

Conclusions: ideological accusation and expansive interpretation of the penal definitions

The accusation carried by the public Prosecutor and the Association of Victims of Terrorism asked, in their separated reports, for a conviction while the defence asked for acquittal of all defendants.

The reports of conclusions of the accusations are not based on the reasons and evidence that have appeared during the hearing. On the contrary, they come from the first interpretation developed during the stage of investigation by the head of Court of Investigation nº 5 of the National Court, Baltasar Garzón. The public prosecutor, as he lacks evidence to support his theory, recited a brief and specific review of the history of ETA, to wind up his statement on the organisations and businesses that are on trial, and to recount the charges brought against them: KAS would be an "instrument" used by ETA for "direction of the movement", which, at the same time, would control a business scheme dedicated to maintaining ETA members abroad" and members of KAS itself. Ekin, according to this theory, would have been created to "replace" KAS; Xaki would be the latest version of "ETA's external relations"; and the Joxemi Zumalabe Foundation would have taken the baton from ASK to continue to "invigorate the popular movement". Finally, Egin and its publishing company Orain S.A. would make up ETA's "intermediary front" or "fourth front".

At this point, the representative of the Attorney General had no other choice than to admit that the written charges contained serious errors, and that several of the charges against the defendants had no legal foundation. Nevertheless, he concluded that participating in any of these organisations is at the same time to be an active member of ETA due to the "divisional theory". "All of the structures participating in that global structure" which for him the nationalist left is, "are contaminated with the goals and objectives" of ETA. So, lacking rational evidence, the accusations will use an ideological interpretation, a philosophical deduction to ask the Court to deliver a conviction.

But moreover, the designation of the facts as crimes of "collaboration" or "belonging to an armed group" are based on a new definition of terrorism tailor-made to include the activities in this trial. In fact, the prosecutor asked the Court, contrarily to the classic jurisprudence that advocates for a restricted interpretation of the concept of terrorism, to make it wider to include these social and political activities. To do so, he counts with the precedent of the decision of the Supreme Court in the 18/01 case referred to the youth organisations Haika-Segi.

On 19/02/2005 the Audiencia Nacional issued a decision whereby it stated the youth organisations Jarrai, Haika and Segi are not terrorist organisations because they do not use weapons or explosives, although the Court did declare them illegal and sentenced 24 young Basques to between two and half years and three and a half years in prison, more or less the time they had served in pre trial detention. This decision was appealed by the defence and the Prosecution, for different reasons, before the Supreme Court. The defence asking for the acquittal and the prosecution, specifically, defended its aim was to obtain new jurisprudence on the definition of "belonging to an armed group" which could be applied in other proceedings.

On January 19, 2007, the Supreme Court published its decision. Indeed, three of the judges believe these organisations are "illegal associations which amount to a terrorist gang, organisation or group" and gave 23 young Basques 6 years in prison whilst they acquitted one. The decision introduces a new expansive interpretation of what is an "armed organisation", as was asked in the appeal by the Association of Victims of Terrorism "according to the new times". A further two members of the Tribunal voted against this decision, giving a dissident vote considering that it "creates a new configuration of armed group" taking into account two elements: one the entity of the facts related to the practice of the "urban guerrilla", that can not be compared to the "terrorist acts that are committed by terrorist groups that have deserved the application of the crime of armed organisation" and as stated by the magistrate Martínez Arrieta and for the lack of real integration in the armed structure, opinion of magistrate Giménez García: «if there is a invitation to become a member of ETA it means that you do not belong to it, so the candidate comes from a different collective to ETA ». Thus, both magistrates of the Supreme Court supported the initial interpretation of the National Court.

The chain of armed activity established, in penal terms, from the urban guerrilla to finish with the public and peaceful political action that now is under judgement must be taken into account. This interpretation will be the determinant element in the deliberations of the Third section of the Penal Room of the National Court to reach a decision.

Conclusions

On the aforementioned findings, the International Commission "Euskal Herria Watch" wish to make public the next conclusions.

1. The investigation of the 18/98 case has been carried out in a chaotic manner and in flagrant violation of the right to a defence, using the secrecy of actions in an absolutely unacceptable way.

2. The violations of equality of opportunities between the prosecution and the defence are quite alarming. The tribunal did not accept a single one of the challenges brought by the defence.

3. The lack of precision as to the allegedly criminal activities and the lack of individual charges contravenes, in an essential way, the bases of the rule of law whereby a defendant must face charges -involving certain criminal conduct- from which he or she can defend himself or herself.

4. The treatment dispensed to the defendants during the hearing, including the obligation to travel and be present in all the sessions has generated a physical and psychological cost that could be considered a form of cruel and inhuman treatment. The effect of this on the health of the defendants is ascertained.

5. The use of statements which were allegedly made under torture is an intrinsic violation of human rights, because of the use of torture itself, and even the allegation should void the evidence.

6. The quality of the evidence was completely inappropriate, with many irregularities, rational doubt as to the origin of documentary evidence and blatant inefficiency of the witnesses called by the prosecution. The expert evidence given by members of the State Security Forces deserves special comment, as the tribunal has elevated police suspicion, prejudice and speculation to the level of scientific, objective and infallible evidence.

7. The use of ambiguous legal definitions and their broad and inclusive application contradict the principle of legality.

8. The state is attempting to criminalise legal, public and transparent activities through a political trial. This is, in itself, a serious attack on the right to freedom of speech, opinion and association. The mention in documents and statements of other associations during the hearing is an attack on their rights and their legal security.

9. We also believe that the Tribunal, the Audiencia Nacional is a special Tribunal for crimes of terrorism and given its high level of politicisation , and the nervous and authoritarian attitude of the chair of the Court, it would seem that the verdict, instead of being an act to find criminal facts and seek justice has been an attempt to provide a appearance of justice to a political decision.

10. Still waiting for the decision, the development of the hearings, the position taken by the prosecutions, the tension generated due to the attitude of the president of the Court and the precedent that was given by the Supreme Court in reference to the 18/01 Haika-Segi case bring us to deduct that the final decision will have an extremely poor juridical quality.

~ ~ ~