Actually, it dovetails perfectly.
The terror attack presented them a stark choice, and this fellow explains just how he evaded that choice. Thus defaulting to the worse of the two options. This is the mechanism of intellectual and moral cowardice in one of its more naked manifestation. (Though you yourself demonstrate an even puter form above.)
According to this fellow, Aznar would have had a hard time winning no matter what he said. The appeasement was already there. But what does he know? He's just a guy on the scene. He hasn't the wisdom or insight of our own rcaragea.
----------------------------------------------------------------
DEAL WITH IT.
"YAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!" - Howard Dean
"How can I go to the bathroom when my people are in bondage?" - Saddam Hussein
"If I may be candid for a moment, and let's see you try to stop me..." - Jay Conrad Levinson
Compromise is for suckers. Seeking a middle ground is what led to 9/11.
"I do not want to be admired by scumbags and liars and wife beaters. I want to be admired by good and decent, intelligent and just people, and in order to achieve this I need to do things that make me despised by their opposites." - Bill Whittle
Never mind all the mass graves. Where's the nerve gas?
[link|http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/marlowe/index.html|http://www.angelfire...arlowe/index.html]