User:Larean01/Atelier 1

I suggest the use of different colors by different users to avoid the use of signatures.List of colours  Mine is RED Randroide 16:47, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

Other examples:

Suggested colour for Larean Suggested colour for Southofwhatford Suggested colour for igor21

title=March 2004 Madrid Train Bombings I do not see the islamist responsability as really disputed. Some people are doubting about certain parts of the indictment and there are some suggestions but not an alternative theory that can lead to say that "Local Islamist cell accused-Trial to begin in 2007" is not pure and real facts. IMO to say "accused" introduces more uncertainty that the one that exists in IRL It has been disputed, Igor21. Remenber the "Smoking gun". The lack of alternative theory means nothing, we are talking here about the "islamist" autorship being disputed, not about an alternative theory It can be disputed the authorship but the fact that islamists are accused and that the trial starts in 2007 it is not disputed (I hope you do not) I only ask, and this is a sine qua non, for the briefest mention of the dispute about the autorship We must be realistic. After the borax scandal, it is clear that the conspirationist are trying now to find relationship between ETA and the islamists more than continue doubting about the authorship that is cristal clear. If they doubt about authorship where is the point to the scandal since the person who has the borax was indicted? if the people indicted are innocents, why they cannot have borax? Wikipedia cannot be more papist than the pope The borax issue is one among dozens of disputed items, Igor21, I do not know why is so important here. There is a dispute, international media is talking about that dispute (see the section of proposed additions), and you can not hide that fact in the main Wikipedia article about this issue It is important because means that the pro-conpirationists (not you because you are only a truth-finder without political links and acting only for the sake of wikipedia veracity) have finally accepted that the material authorship corresponds to the people that the judge Del Olmo says and from now on they will try to link them with ETA. This is a change in their tactics since up to now they were trying to exclude from the authorship the people accused by Del Olmo. The fact that authorship is being challenged is made crystal-clear in the body of the article. I don't see why we should include the "disputed" label. That a "local islamist cell" is charged and that the trial will begin in 2007 is NPOV and it's fact. Currently there are no other identified suspects. Not a single one. The Nitroglycerine issue makes the "local islamist cell" autorship impossible, Larean. According with relevant sources, the Indictment is baseless. You can disagree with those sources, but you can not disagree with the fact that relevant sources expresed serious doubts about the Indictment, and "Where doubt does exist, it should be mentioned explicitly". }} Wrong. Islamist authorship is not made impossible by the use of a different explosive. For all we know fundamentalists could have used a nitroglycerine-based dynamite. But that is not the issue. The main issue is the tenses in your statement. It doesn't MAKE, because the "nitroglycerine issue" is far from having been proven. So you should use the conditional, in the following way:
 * image=ac.madrid2.jpg
 * caption=The scene of one of the Madrid bombings.
 * location=Madrid, Spain
 * target= Madrid Commuter Train System
 * date=11 March 2004
 * time-begin=07:30
 * time-end=08:00
 * timezone=UTC+1
 * type=backpacks
 * fatalities=191
 * injuries=2050
 * perps=Local cells of Islamic extremists I propose the addition of "according with spanish judiciary . Disputed by some spanish media". The removal is NOT a soud option, we must say (and source) SOMETHING about who is believed to be the perpetrator. I suggest "Local Islamist cells accused - trial to begin 2007" Mention to the dispute should be made. The accusation to the islamists had been strongly disputed, and that fact can not be deleted. I propose a telegraphic " Local Islamist cells accused - trial to begin 2007. Disputed."

IF it is found that nitroglycerine exploded in the trains, THEN Islamist authorship would be problematic (though not impossible). "IF". I love that word. Two simple letters, but they build the strongest wall in the world: the one that separates fiction from reality. You know, if the Abominable Snowman exists then the Loch Ness monster is possible. That kind of thing.

The 2004 Madrid train bombings (also known as 11-M, 3/11, 11/3 and M-11) were a series of coordinated bombings against the commuter train system of Madrid, Spain on the morning of 11 March 2004, which killed 191 people and wounded over 1700.

Description of the Bombings
On the morning of Thursday 11th March 2004, ten explosions occurred at the height of the Madrid rush hour aboard four commuter trains (known as Cercanías in Spain). All the affected trains were travelling on the same line and in the same direction between Alcalá de Henares and Atocha station in Madrid.

According to the summary of the judicial investigation, the explosions took place between 07:37 and 07:40 in the morning as described below (all timings given are in local time UTC/GMT+1):

Atocha Station (train number 21431) - Three bombs exploded. Based on the video recording from the station security system, the first bomb exploded at 7:37, and two others exploded within 4 seconds of each other at 7:38.

Outside Atocha Station, approximately 800 metres from the station at a location generally referred to as Calle Tellez after the street running adjacent to the tracks (train number 17305) - Four bombs exploded in different carriages of the train at approximately 7:39.

El Pozo del Tío Raimundo Station (train number 21435) - At approximately 07:38, just as the train was starting to leave the station, two bombs exploded in different carriages.

Santa Eugenia Station (train number 21713) - One bomb exploded at approximately 07:38.

All four trains containing explosive devices had departed the station at Alcalá de Henares between 07:01 and 07:14. At 08:00 emergency relief workers began arriving at the scenes of the bombings. The police reported "numerous victims" and spoke of 50 wounded and several dead. By 08:30 SAMUR, the emergency ambulance service, had set up a "field hospital" at a sports facility at Daoiz y Velarde. Hospitals were told to expect the arrival of many casualties. Bystanders and local residents helped relief workers. At 08:43 fire fighters reported 15 dead at El Pozo. By 09:00 the police had confirmed the death of at least 30 people; 20 at El Pozo and about 10 in Santa Eugenia and Atocha.

Also at 08:00, a "Cage Operation" (Operación Jaula in Spanish), designed to prevent terrorists from fleeing the city went into effect and started affecting transportation in, out and around the city. At 08:45 RENFE, the national railway operator, shut down all rail traffic in to and out of Madrid, and Line 1 of the Madrid metro was closed for security reasons. At 08:56 the police sealed off all streets adjacent to Atocha and evacuated the station. At the same time, RENFE closed the stations at Chamartín and Príncipe Pío, the other train stations in Madrid.

Consequently, all railway traffic to and from Madrid was shut down, including commuter, regional, and intercity trains as well as the high-speed AVE service to Seville. International rail traffic to and from Madrid was also interrupted due to security concerns, although trains to and from France departed from Chamartín, Madrid's second largest train station. According to the French SNCF, this was done at the request of the Spanish authorities.

RENFE organized alternative transportation, and moved 3,000 passengers by road. Around 18:30, traffic to and from Chamartín and Príncipe Pío was restored, including some commuter rail lines and northbound national and international traffic out of Chamartín. In France, the Vigipirate plan was upped to the orange level. In Italy, the Government declared a state of high alert.

A blood donation bus, which had already been parked in the Puerta del Sol for a number of days, became inundated with donors, with several hundred queuing to offer their assistance.

The towns served by the commuter rail line on which the bombings occurred are home to large Latin American and Eastern European immigrant communities. Many of the 250,000 people using the line each day are students, blue-collar workers, and middle-class people who cannot afford to live in the city of Madrid and so commute from neighbouring communities.

Forty-one of the dead came from thirteen countries outside of Spain, including fifteen from Romania, five each from Ecuador and Peru, four from Poland, three from Colombia, two from Honduras, and one each from Bulgaria, Chile, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Guinea-Bissau, France, and Morocco.

The number of victims was higher than in any similar action in Spain, far surpassing the previous worst bombing incident at a Hipercor chain supermarket in Barcelona in 1987, which killed 21 and wounded 40; on that occasion, responsibility was claimed by the Basque armed militant group Euskadi Ta Askatasuna ("Basque Fatherland and Liberty") or ETA. It was also the worst incident of this kind in Europe since the Lockerbie bombing in 1988.

The bombings were all the more traumatic to Spanish society because they happened just three days before general elections. The social and political repercussions of the attacks have bitterly divided Spanish politics into two opposing blocks. On election day 14 March, the incumbent Partido Popular(PP), conservative, lost the election to the PSOE, socialist, even though the PP had been expected to win the election. The fact that voting occurred under the shadow of the bombings has affected the political interpretations of the attacks and their aftermath, and also of the election itself. Paragraph added to provide context. It is very important to mention the election, which is buried somewhere in the Aftermath section with only a passing reference. Your text clarifies the issue and is NPOV, good job. I added an additional note about the PP being expected to win those elections

Initially it was feared that families of illegal immigrants would be afraid to contact the authorities for fear of being deported for immigration violations, but Spanish Prime Minister José Aznar announced an immigration amnesty for victims of the attack.

Aftermath Of The Bombings
In the immediate aftermath of the bombings there was a widespread assumption that the attack had been carried out by ETA, but the group denied any involvement the same morning through its political wing and a day later in an official noteScores die in Madrid bomb carnage. Over the three days following the bombings, evidence emerged which led to the first arrests in the Lavapíes neighbourhood of Madrid, and which directed attention towards the possible involvement of an Islamic group. These initial arrests were made on the Saturday afternoon, 13 March, although only one of the five people arrested that day, Jamal Zougham, has been charged in relation to the bombings. The clues that led to the arrests included detonators found in a Renault Kangoo van that was parked outside Alcalá de Henares train station, and an unexploded bomb which was found in Vallecas Police station amidst objects gathered from the trains The origin of that bag is a disputed issue.Mention should be made to the dispute, of the mention should be deleted. Two other bombs had already been detonated in controlled explosions in the morning of the 11th, during de-activation efforts. A mobile phone, which was used as a timer, led police to Lavapiés. A tape was also discovered by police claiming responsibility in the name of Al-Qaeda.

According to the police, both the detonators and the dynamite were traced to a mine in Asturias (North of Spain). In the next few days a number of arrests were made, notably in Asturias, where Spanish citizens were charged with providing the explosives and detonators that were used in the attacks. A former miner with mental problems, José Emilio Suárez Trashorras, was, according to the police, the ringleader of the trade in illegal explosives.

That evidence (the bag and the tape) has been disputed. So is the assertion about ETA, the intention is not to draw conclusions but to document the shift that took place at the time - the key words here are "possible involvement" If you wnt cite the evidence, you must also cite the fact that the evidence has been disputed. It is a clear-cut NPOV issue. (I disagree. The wording in both evidences does not take sides. The bag WAS discovered amidst objects gathered from the trains in Vallecas. That statement is FACT. I am prepared to accept striking "other" from the text, but the fact as I stated it cannot be disputed. At the same time, the tape was discovered and it did claim responsibility in the name of the local islamic group, Ansar whatever, not Al Qaeda (I need to look it up). That is also a FACT. I edited the paragraph to incorporate changes and leave it in one color per Southofwatford's suggestion. I also slightly edited your first comment, Randroide, adding parentheses to provide context that was lost when I separated the text from the comments Larean wrote: The bag WAS discovered amidst objects gathered from the trains in Vallecas. That statement is FACT. IT IS NOT A FACT, Larean. It is a fact that the Indictment and some policemen say that, but it is ALSO a fact that other policemen expressed doubts in "el Mundo" about if that bag was really in the trains. BOTH facts should go together

On the 2 April a bag containing explosive was found beside the tracks of the high speed AVE train connecting Madrid with Sevilla The following day, April 3, an explosion occurred at an apartment building in Leganés, south of Madrid. The apartment had previously been surrounded by police, who were tracking down further suspects. According to then Interior Minister Angel Acebes, those killed inside the apartment commited suicide []. He identified them, together with the previous arrests, as the "central core" responsible for the bombings. DNA tests carried out after the explosion identified the remains of seven people, among them Alekema Lamari, Sarhane Ben Abdelmajid Fakhet (aka "The Tunisian") and Jamal Ahmidan (aka "The Chinaman"). Additionally, one of the Special Operations Group policemen who were about to storm the apartment was also killed. A video tape was also discovered in the wreckage of the apartment suggesting that fresh attacks were being planned.

This interpretation of facts made by the very minister of Internal Affairs the same day of the explosion redundant reference. That has been said above has been disputed. extended to include references on casualties and video Extended to include names of slained and improve clarity. By the way, my proposal concerning disputed accounts: let's put them all together in the dispute paragraph.

The judicial investigation following the bombings was led by the investigating magistrate Juan Del Olmo. The investigation lasted slightly more than two years, and culminated on the 11th April 2006 with the indictment of 29 people, 6 of whom are charged with murder or conspiracy to murder. The indictment ascribes the responsibility to a group of North African Islamists alleged to have been inspired by al-Qaeda. Other sources express doubts about this conclussion. redundant reference - the following paragraph deals with this OK, this for you

The authorship of the bombings remains deeply controversial in Spain. Part of the Partido Popular (PP), now in opposition, as well as some media outlets such as El Mundo, "La Razón", the COPE radio station (owned by the Spanish catholic church), point to alleged inconsistencies and contradictions in the Spanish judiciary investigation. Some of these sources Please read Avoid weasel words, along with several Internet blogs and Websites, have even disputed the authenticity of the seminal evidence that led to the first arrests (the detonators and the unexploded bomb), hinting more or less openly at a widespread conspiracy to mislead the judges and the public about the true authors and their motivations. Although many conflicting versions exist and it is difficult to pin down exactly who believes what, some have also disputed the Leganés suicide, stating that it is a giant coverup operation, including the assasination of the seven alleged terrorists. Many other claims have been raised. Additionally, there is strong controversy over the events immediately following the bombings and preceding the general elections that took place three days later. In particular, the role of the government, political parties and media shaping public opinion during those days is hotly debated. More detailed discussion of these issues can be found in the article Controversies concerning the 11 March 2004 Madrid train bombings.

point to allegued small glitches in the spanish judiciary investigation TOTAL DISAGREEMENT: To express reasonable doubts about who really were the perpetrators is NOT a "small glith". "INCONSISTENCIES AND CONTRADICTIONS is muh more appropiate, but I am open to other suggestions and some of them More cleanup and my proposal pointing out all the disputed issues in a single paragraph.

A more detailed description of the aftermath of the bombings is contained in Aftermath of the 11 March 2004 Madrid train bombings

Social
On 12 March the Spanish went out to the street to protest against the bombings, in a government-organised demonstration to condemn ETA, who at the time were being blamed by them NO, Sir. Not "by them". Even Ibarretxe was sure about ETA autorship in the morning of March 11th. There is linked video with declarations made by Ibarretxe (Ibarretxe spoke in the early hours of the 11th. By the afternoon of the 12th, when the demostration took place, he had recanted his earlier version. At that point the government basically stood alone in blaming ETA) for the attacks. The rest of Spain and many cities from all over the world also protested. Vigo, which has a population of only 300,000 inhabitants, saw 400,000 demonstrators on its streets. The protests were peaceful, and included members of the leading political parties marching together down Paseo de Castellana in solidarity against terrorism. More than two million people convened on Madrid's streets screaming: "not everyone is here, 208 are missing, we will never forget you" There were also people asking "who was it?", in reference to an alleged lack of accurate information provided by the government.



This time the mood was not peaceful. The group that had congregated on Puerta del Sol chanted and bashed bottles and dustbin lids, in a demonstration of anger towards Aznar because they felt that the government was purposely delaying information on who had committed the bombings OK, this is true and is NPOV.

The conduct of the protestors on the Saturday was strictly speaking illegal: with a General Election the following day, the Saturday is designated as the "day of reflection" ("día de reflexión"), during which all political activism is banned. Also, the many TV appearances of the conservative candidate Mariano Rajoy the same day were illegal, too. Rumours circulated afterwards, and were propagated by film director Pedro Almodovar, that Aznar had approached the king and asked for the election to be postponed, to which the king responded that this would constitute a coup d'etat. Aznar's party, the People's Party, subsequently threatened to sue Almodovar for his comments.

Political
The attacks came three days before the Sunday elections. At 08:40, the ruling People's Party suspended all electoral campaigning. Shortly after, Mariano Rajoy, the People's Party candidate for prime minister, cancelled all his electoral activity for the day. The opposing Socialist Party cancelled all campaigning at 08:59. At 09:02 Prime Minister Aznar also cancelled all public appearances.

Prime Minister Aznar spoke with King Juan Carlos, then with leaders of the political parties in parliament and with the heads of government of Spain's autonomous communities. At 10:36 a "Crisis Cabinet" was convened, including Aznar, Deputy Prime Ministers Rodrigo Rato and Javier Arenas and Interior Minister Acebes.

A decree declaring three days of official mourning was issued by the government, and five minutes of silence on Friday. Demonstrations were called for Friday evening in cities across the country, under the motto "With the victims, with the constitution and for the defeat of terrorism". The Catalan government led by Pasqual Maragall also declared official mourning in Catalonia. The Government chosen motto was very criticized by all the opposition, because "with the Constitution" inclusion in the motto, implied that the bombs were set by the Basque ETA, while many in the opposition believe that it was the responsibility of an Islamic group in retaliation for having the Spanish government troops in Iraq and Afghanistan at that moment.

The first government official to make an open public statement, two hours after the attacks, was Juan José Ibarretxe Markuartu, head of government in the Basque Country. He unequivocally blamed ETA and said, "those who commit these atrocities are not Basque" and "ETA writes its own ending with terrible actions". In another early public appearance, Interior Minister Acebes pointed in unambiguous terms to ETA, although by the end of the day he was forced to retract his accusations and admit, "no possibilities have been discarded". [

The head of the Catalan government Maragall said, "We are all Madrileños today", and continued: "if terrorists intended to divide us, they will have achieved the exact opposite, and the best way to reject terror is to vote on Sunday". Josep-Lluís Carod-Rovira of the Catalan nationalist party, the Republican Left of Catalonia, who had recently come under fire for secretly meeting with ETA and advocating dialog, said that he would not communicate with ETA again, but that someone else should do so to prevent them from committing any more bloodshed. "We thought we had already seen everything, but unfortunately that was not the case", he lamented.

National
Most TV stations reported the attack during their regular morning news programs, starting around 08:00. The program on Antena 3 lasted until 14:00. Madrid newspapers issued special midday editions and TV stations rearranged their regular programming schedules. The public stations TVE (national) and Telemadrid (regional) did not break for commercials at all during the day. All TV stations replaced their logos with black ribbons overlaid on the Spanish flag at 18:00, visible in the upper-right corner of the television screen. That week, the satirical magazine El Jueves, known for its mordacious, highly provocative front pages, wore a black front page, for the first time in 25 years.

People across Spain flocked to hospitals and mobile blood donation units in such numbers that the need for blood for transfusions was more than satisfied by 10:30, although continued donations were requested for the coming days. The deceased were moved to IFEMA, the largest convention centre in Madrid, for identification by their relatives.

Riay Tatary Bakry, president of the Union of Muslim Communities in Spain, stated on 1 April 2004 that his organisation has no plan to publicly urge mosques to step up their battle against terrorism. He said the union will continue to work privately with government officials.

International
Sympathy poured in from governments worldwide immediately following the bombings, led by Spain's partners in the European Union; France raised its terror alert level, and in Athens security was tightened at train stations and the Spanish Embassy. Similar measures were adopted in Italy.

World leaders were united in their condemnation of the attacks. The United States, the United Kingdom and Russia said the attacks demonstrated the need for a toughened resolve against terrorists. Queen Elizabeth II sent a message of condolence to the Spanish King on behalf of the British people. A PLO/Palestinian National Authority official also condemned the attacks targeting civilians.

U.S. President George W. Bush called Prime Minister Aznar and King Juan Carlos to offer his condolences to the Spanish people and condemn the "vicious attack of terrorism". He expressed "our country's deepest sympathies toward those who lost their life...I told them we weep with the families. We stand strong with the people of Spain" The U.S. Senate observed a moment of silence and unanimously passed a resolution expressing outrage and urging Bush to "provide all possible assistance to Spain" in pursuing those responsible for the attacks. Bush led a memorial service at the Spanish ambassador's residence in Washington and gave an interview with a Spanish television network the following day.

European Commission President Romano Prodi called the attack "ferocious and senseless". The European Parliament observed a minute of silence; its president Pat Cox expressed the parliament's condolences, and a resolution was introduced proposing 11 March as a European Day of Remembrance of Victims of Terrorism. Pope John Paul II condemned the bombings in a message to Catholic church leaders in Spain. Many nations extended offers of material support to the Spanish government. By 17 March, governments around Europe had voiced their concerns that the Spanish government had jeopardized their security by feeding them false information about ETA's involvement. On 17 March 2004, Otto Schily, German interior minister, called for a special European summit to deal with Madrid bombings. The summit was held on 25-26 March 2004.

The UN Security Council unanimously passed Resolution 1530 condemning the bombings. This happened early in the day and, at the request of the Spanish government, the resolution accused ETA unambiguously of being responsible. The resolution "condemns in the strongest terms the bomb attack in Madrid, Spain, perpetrated by the terrorist group ETA".

The human rights group Amnesty International condemned the attack saying that attacks targeting civilians could never be justified. The organisation also pointed out that killing of civilians on such a scale may constitute a crime against humanity

UEFA and the Spanish Government and Football Federation decided that Spanish football teams due to play matches on 11 March and 12 should do so, lest they give the impression that the militants had disrupted normal life, and the teams complied with this decision. Out of respect for the victims, members of Spanish football teams wore black armbands. The Spanish Government and Football Federation asked that all games involving Spanish teams begin with a moment of silence for the victims.

Leaders across the world sent letters of mourning to Juan Carlos and Prime Minister José María Aznar. Most EU countries declared 12 March a day of national mourning as a sign of solidarity. There were demonstrations in cities across Europe and the Spanish-speaking world on 12 March, including Brussels, Paris, Lisbon, Helsinki, Geneva, Berlin, Stockholm, Buenos Aires, Mexico City and Bogotá.

Germany hastily arranged an urgent meeting of European Union security chiefs on 14 March 2004 as possible al-Qaeda involvement in the Madrid bombings set alarm bells ringing across the world. On the same day, Queen Elizabeth II asked that the Spanish national anthem be played during the Changing of the Guard at Buckingham Palace.

The attacks also reawakened fears of terrorism amongst investors with most European stock markets falling between two and three percent on 11 March. Stocks dropped in London and in New York, with the U.S. Dow Jones Industrial Average diving after speculation of involvement by al-Qaeda. Airline and tourism related stocks were particularly affected by sharp declines in share prices. In Tokyo, stocks opened sharply lower the next day.

On 15 March, at the request of Irish leader Bertie Ahern, then President of the European Council, all of Europe observed three minutes of silence at noon Central European Time (CET)

In English

 * BBC News In Depth
 * Maps
 * CNN In-Depth Specials
 * News report from CBC
 * U.N. Security Council Resolution 1530
 * Madrid: UN's Credibility Critically Wounded
 * Spanish Reporters: Government Silenced the Truth About the Attacks
 * context - Terrorism's Future, Rahul Mahajan
 * A translation of Juan Carlos I's and Prime Minister Aznar's speeches to the nation, March 11 2004
 * Remembering March 11: The Madrid Bombings and Their Effect on Spanish Government, Society and the Antiwar Movement - Broadcast by Democracy Now! on November 23, 2004.
 * PBS TV Frontline Video - see Chapter 1 of Al Qaeda's New Front
 * After the massacre - A video in English with information on the attack.
 * Real Instituto Elcano - Framing of the 3/11 attacks and electoral accountability

Disputing explanation of facts made by current spanish government and judiciary

 * "Fondo Documental" english text
 * "Fondo Documental" PDF text in english (CAUTION: Partisan text)

In Spanish

 * Compilation of articles and independent investigations
 * El Mundo Special
 * Latest news from ABC Spanish newspaper
 * Indymedia Madrid
 * La Vanguardia: special coverage Dossier and initial News report
 * News report from El Semanal
 * Timeline by El Mundo.
 * Information page from RENFE (Spain's national railway operator)
 * Information page from Interior Ministry, mostly a List of wounded
 * King Juan Carlos's speech to the nation (official transcript)
 * List of official government statements by Cadena SER, and editorial article
 * Atentado 11 de marzo de 2004 - Impressions among the Blogs in Spanish.
 * Victims' profiles by El País and Cadena Ser
 * Listen to Cadena Ser throughout 11-M

Disputing explanation of facts made by current spanish government and judiciary

 * Los enigmas del 11-M por Luis del Pino (Libertad Digital)
 * Especial de Telemadrid emitido el 9 de marzo de 2006
 * Same aforementioned program, but coded in a different video format
 * Conclusions of the aforementioned program
 * fondodocumental.com
 * Veritas-11M
 * Antonio Rubio, Las notas del confidente 'Cartagena' prueban que la Policía controlaba a la cúpula del 11-M, El Mundo, 31.05.05

Disputing aforementioned disputers

 * Desiertos Lejanos - Crítica a las teorías conspirativas
 * Enrique de Diego, Las falsedades de la tesis de la conspiración del 11-M
 * Enrique de Diego, 11M y teorías conspirativas: cui prodest? y preguntas...

Atemptats a Madrid, 11 de març de 2004 Ffrwydradau trenau Madrid 11 Mawrth 2004 Madrider Zuganschläge Atentados del 11 de marzo de 2004 Madridaj atakoj el la 11-a de marto 2004 Madrilgo 2004ko martxoaren 11ko atentatuak Attentats du 11 mars 2004 à Madrid Atentados do 11 de marzo de 2004 en Madrid Bom Madrid, 11 Maret 2004 Attentati del 11 marzo 2004 a Madrid Terroristische aanslagen in Madrid van 11 maart 2004 スペイン列車爆破事件 Terrorangrepet i Madrid mars 2004 Zamach w Madrycie 11 marca 2004 Atentados de 11 de Março de 2004 em Madrid Atentatele din 11 martie 2004 de la Madrid Útoky v Madride 11. marca 2004 Напади у Мадриду 11. марта 2004. Madridin junapommit 11. maaliskuuta 2004 Bombdåden i Madrid 2004 马德里三一一爆炸案