[MMMMMM]

It should be obvious that Spanish capitulation to terror blackmail increases the chances that similar further terror blackmail will ensue. The group responsible for the attacks is now publicly proclaiming this as a sign that they have the power to change elections!

The fact that some terror attacks would occur likely anyway does not mean that this capitulation does not significantly increase the risk of future similar attacks on the eve of elections, as you so erroneously imply.

And yes the Spanish should have voted for the party that initially blamed the wrong terror org for the attacks. Placing that issue on a higher plane than capitulation to direct terrorist blackmail shows a lack of awareness of the importance of "future hands" (to use a poker analogy). Aznar's party was initiually mistaken and then reluctant to change its publicly stated view until it had to. So they probably shaded their opinion a bit until it was crystal clear who was behind the bombings: big friggin' deal, compared to the bombings and terrorist blackmail, anyway. I guess to some having a leader who is 100% honest rather than say 90% honest is more important than resisting terrorism. Well good luck to them because I doubt they will find Zapatero or any leader to be 100% honest. But they will surely eventually face more terror threats and attacks--and their recent cave-in to terrorist pressure will of course encourage more such attacks.

France was recently threatened with mass terror attacks because of a recent law which prohibits the wearing of the hijab in schools (and perhaps when having identification photos taken as well). Hey, maybe the law is off-base and too strict--but threats of mass terror attacks are surely out of line as a response--but the Islamists don't think so! They think that is a perfectly acceptable way to deal with such a law! If you do something they don't agree with they have a very simple method of negotiation: kill you! Bomb you!

Well it is time for France and Spain and every European country to respond even more aggressively to these deluded murderers. Doimng what they WANT because they blow up your people is pecisely the wrong approach to the problem; they should be punished not rewarded for such actions. Even if the primary reason the Spanish voted for Zapatero was as you surmise (which I doubt), the fact that the terrorists should not be rewarded for their horrific attacks overrides that consideration. An election being changed to comply with a terrorist demand and threat made clear by a horrific bombing is a terrible, terrible precedent to have set. A more appropriate response would be to have done the exact opposite of what the terrorists are trying to achieve and then redouble efforts to capture them and break up their group. The fact that this lesser known terror org associated with al-Qaeda drew attention to itself in such manner could have proved a disincentive to future similar attacks if it brought increased heat on those terrorists and if the attack did not achieve the objective it sought.