The Trial….Setting The Scene

29 people are standing trial accused of participating in the Madrid train bombings in which 191 people were killed and 1840 were wounded. Of these 29 accused, 18 are currently being held in preventative custody and are seated in a special bullet proof enclosure in the courtroom; the other 11 are free on bail. It is worth emphasising that not all of those held responsible for the bombings are present, 7 members of the group involved blew themselves up in a flat in Leganés when it was surrounded by police 3 weeks after the train bombings.

The trial began on Thursday 15th February 2007, and is taking place in a courtroom located in the Casa de Campo, on the outskirts of Madrid. The courtroom is being protected by 300 police and the level of alert for possible terrorist attacks has been raised. Hundreds of witnesses are due to be called and it is expected the trial will last for several months with a verdict expected at some point in the autumn.

READ MORE IN ENGLISH:

The New York Times

The Guardian

Financial Times

READ MORE IN SPANISH:

El Mundo

El Mundo And Dinitrotoluene

The article in El Mundo today concerning the pre-trial analysis of the explosives is a perfect demonstration of the methods used by this newspaper in its attempts to try and cast doubt on the investigation of the bombings.

They have found a document which states that dinitrotoluene (DNT) is not a recognised component of the explosive allegedly used in the bombings - Goma-2 Eco. This is fine, it is a document based on analysis of explosives carried out by the Guardia Civil - but not of tests carried out on the samples recovered from the explosion sites in Madrid or Leganés. The latest tests for the trial have indeed found the presence of DNT in the samples of Goma-2 Eco that were recovered in the investigation, and they have also found this substance in the master samples provided for comparison purposes.

Despite this, El Mundo uses the presence of DNT and the fact that not all components of Goma-2 Eco were discovered in all the samples to try and suggest that this explosive may not have been used at all. Instead, and very predictably for anyone who has read their past coverage of the issue, they raise the possibility of Titadine, an explosive used in the past by ETA and therefore the firm favourite of our conspiracy theorists. Titadine does contain DNT, but unfortunately there is no other single fact that currently points to its use in the train bombings. Indeed, the tests have produced evidence of the presence of substances that are not present in Titadine (nitroglicol), but you will search in vain to find any reference to this in El Mundo's article.

Towards the end of the article they get round to mentioning that the master samples of Goma-2 Eco contain DNT (small traces), but only after making a determined attempt to cast doubt on the validity of an analysis carried out in absolutely transparent circumstances. So while the rest of the press reported today on the confirmation of this explosive as the one likely to have been used in the bombings, El Mundo chose a headline directly suggesting otherwise. It is a common feature of their articles on the bombings that they choose a sensationalist headline not borne out by evidence which they either omit completely or bury deep inside the article that follows.

Analysis Of The Explosives

One curious consequence of writing about the Madrid bombings and the conspiracy theories, is that you start to find out more than you ever really wanted to know about a whole range of subjects. It never occurred to me that I might end up one day writing blog posts about the chemical components of explosives, or that the central theme of what I write might be a substance called dinitrotoluene (DNT).

It has been a constant theme of those behind the conpiracy theories that there is no firm evidence that the explosive used in the train bombs was really Goma-2 Eco. This is despite the discovery of this Spanish made explosive in several places connected to the bombings, including of course an unexploded bomb recovered from one of the trains. The tests carried out in the aftermath of the bombings failed to identify the explosive via chemical analysis, the verdict was that the identified components were common to different types of dynamite, and that it was impossible to state with absolute certainty which particular dynamite had been used.

Naturally, the conspiracy theorists sought to use this uncertainty to push the suggestion that the explosive could have been Titadine, a different dynamite and a past favourite of ETA. With the aim of dispelling doubts about the issue, the court hearing the case against the accused ordered analysis on all surviving samples from the different sites to be repeated before the beginning of the trial. The latest tests on the samples have been carried out under strictly controlled conditions, with experts present from the police, the defence, and victims associations. The tests have been filmed to ensure maximum transparency.

The results published so far confirm the position maintained throughout the judicial investigation, that the tests taken at the sites of the explosions do not provide definitive confirmation of the use of a particular explosive. What has been found are traces of different substances which point to the use of dynamite. The presence of certain substances in the results of these tests can be used as an indicator for excluding the use of dynamites which do not contain these substances, but nothing more definitive than that seems to be possible.

Of the substances identified in the tests, all of them are recognised components of Goma-2 Eco except for DNT, which is found generally in the earlier version of the same explosive, Goma-2 Ec. However, one curious result of the tests has been that the same DNT was found to be present in the master samples of the explosive that were provided by the manufacturer for comparison purposes; so whilst it may not be a recognised component it does seem possible for traces of it to be present.

The key issue here is that the components found in the master sample of Goma-2 Eco are consistent with those traces of explosive recovered from sites linked to the attacks, and to substances found in those sites where no actual explosive was recovered. The reason why this matters is because the conspiracy theorists are clinging to the presence of DNT as evidence that a different explosive was used in the bombings, it’s the only thing they have left. For the conspiracy theorists what matters is that there a exists a document somewhere in the world that says it is impossible for this substance to be found in Goma-2 Eco. Whilst that is the case, it doesn’t matter to them that scientific test results on that same explosive show a different result.

The tests have not yet been fully completed, the court also ordered tests against samples of Titadine, but if you take the test results in isolation then any reasonable assessment would say that it is very likely that the explosive used was Goma-2 Eco. If you assess these results together with the other evidence available then there are simply no grounds for thinking that any other explosive was used. The “faith based reasoners” will not accept this because it points towards conclusions they find unacceptable, but there is currently no single credible fact pointing to the use of any other explosive in the train attacks.

Disclaimer

The simple act of writing something criticising the conspiracy theories about the Madrid bombings and those who propagate them can be sufficient cause for supporters of this campaign to launch accusations that the writer either works for, or has links to, those involved in the alleged conspiracy behind the bombings. I want to state my position openly and clearly from the beginning, I have no such connection. I am not a member of any political party in Spain, I have no direct or indirect connection to any of the media or political organisations involved in the controversy over the bombings, I am just an Englishman who has decided to make his life in Madrid.

I simply do not believe that the Madrid train bombings were carried out with either the involvement of ETA, or the involvement of the Spanish Socialist Party (PSOE). I respect the presumption of innocence against those who have been accused of carrying out the attack, the trial will test the evidence against them, and all observers can draw their own conclusions from that process. However, from what I have read about the subject I have no reason to suspect that there is a “hidden hand” behind it all; or that those accused are simply innocent victims of an elaborate set up organised by the current Spanish government.

Neither am I a victim of the Madrid bombings, and I’m in the fortunate position of being able to say that none of my family or friends were victims either. My partner travelled that morning on a train that went through Atocha station in the direction of Alcalá de Henares, and which was passed in its journey by every single one of the trains that carried the bombs. By the time the bombs exploded her train was far enough away to be completely safe. I was working away from home at the time and just caught the news of the explosions as I left for work that morning; despite being aware that her train should already have passed through Atocha, I had a short period of anxiety before I was able to talk to her and be sure that she was not affected. Many others were not so lucky. This blog will not claim to be speaking on their behalf, and I will not use the fate of the victims to try and give my own opinions or conclusions more weight. I prefer what I write to be judged on its own merits.

What's In A Name?

The name of this blog might seem a little bit strange, but its origin is not so complicated. Those who promote conspiracy theories about the Madrid bombings, lets call them the players, like to use chess as a metaphor for their political campaign. For them the whole strategy is based around achieving a state of checkmate against what they call the “official version” , a version of the attacks which doesn’t really exist as such, but which for the sake of convenience we can call a combination of the parliamentary enquiry into the attacks, government statements, anything published in media who don't openly support the conspiracy theories, and the judicial investigation.

All of this might seem quite innocent fun were it not for the fact that they are “playing” with an attack that left 191 people dead, and over 1700 injured. It would still not be so offensive were it not for the fact that they like to use the victims of the bombings as a shield behind which they hide the political nature of their campaign. In the worst cases they like to put themselves in the position of acting directly on behalf of the victims by demanding that the truth be told in their name. So that’s why this blog has this name, they are playing with the dead. They had many other, much less offensive, options for expressing their political opposition.

Why This Blog Exists

This blog has been set up with two principal aims. The first of these is to record in English the progress of the trial of those accused of having committed the attacks on the trains, and in the process to put together an account of what actually happened. This trial began on February 15th 2007, almost three years after the bombings and is expected to last for several months. The second aim is explain to an English speaking audience how it is that the Madrid train bombings have progressed from being a tragic event that left millions of Spaniards stunned and grieving for those who were killed, to being just another political tool to be used at will for the purposes of political opposition.

Ever since the Madrid train bombings took place in March 2004, there have been those around and inside the Partido Popular (PP), the main opposition party in Spain, who have persisted with the attempt to try and link the Basque terrorist group ETA with the bombings, and thus clear both their party and the government they presided of any accusation that they may have lied to the Spanish public about the authorship of the bombings, or that Spanish involvement in the war in Iraq may have converted the country into a target for Islamist terrorism.

This determination to find a connection to ETA, and the insistence that the “intellectual authors” of the bombings are not those who have been charged, seemed initially to be nothing more than an attempt to recover political positions after the change of government that followed the bombings. I found the attempts by the PP to create an equivalence between the bombings and the events (the elections) that immediately followed to be repugnant. All of this could have passed, they could have decided just to make a show of defiance and then let it drop. But no, if anything their campaign has intensified and the distorsion and manipulation involved have reached new heights.

I have had my doubts about creating a blog entirely dedicated to this topic. In many ways it seems a bit absurd to devote time and effort to debunking accusations and what can only loosely be called "theories" which have so little foundation, and which are mostly the creation of a small but noisy nucleus of resentful politicians, journalists and activists. On the other hand this small group is also powerful, having the apparatus of the second largest political party in Spain, and directly controlled or friendly media groups promoting their views.

Unfortunately, I feel that what really matters to the proponents of these theories is not the almost 200 people killed, or the thousands of injured as a result of the train bombings. The intention has been to discredit the judicial investigation and even possibly bring down the trial against those accused of the bombings; as a consequence provoking a political crisis that they hope would also bring down, or at least seriously weaken, the current government. There are blogs where supporters of the conspiracy theories congregate and openly salivate at this prospect; some writers are already sketching out the nature of that crisis. Whether the attempt to provoke such a crisis succeeds or not is irrelevant (I do not believe it will succeed), it is the abuse of power, and the crude exploitation of a tragedy that is the issue.

All these fantastic theories on the authorship of the bombings all have one thing in common; the absence of evidence to support them. Those who reject the volumes of documentation that suggest the bombings were the work of an Islamist group would struggle to put one page together of ‘positive’ evidence for any of their alternative explanations. When asked to provide such evidence they almost always claim that they are just asking a few questions, or expressing doubts about some of the evidence in the judicial indictment. Despite these pretexts, the suggestion, the insinuation, is being made that it was not those who have been formally accused. On web pages associated with the conspiracy theorists it goes beyond suggestion, the accusation is openly made that the bombings were organised by an alliance involving people connected to the current Spanish government, ETA, and then an optional selection of Islamists or secret service operatives from France and Morocco.

It is not my intention that this blog should offer an exhaustive examination of the indictment, the trial, and all the supporting evidence. Included in the anti-conspiracy links on this page are some Spanish sites who have done an excellent job on analysing and rebutting the accusations made by the conspiracy theorists. I will attempt to summarise here the principal points of controversy, and to relate the progress of the trial and any new developments it provokes.

The manipulation and abuse of terrorism for political objectives is not just confined to Spain, it is depressingly common; because all too often it works. This blog is my small contribution to trying to make sure that such abuse does not succeed here in Spain.