Gisbert: "We have lost Ceuta and we will applaud its surrender and the traitors."

Rubén Gisbert claims on X that Spain has lost Ceuta through a "surrender agreed in phases" and that the public will end up applauding the "traitors". It is an assertion with no evidence provided, published in the context of migratory pressure on the autonomous city.

The message is short and to the point: **Rubén Gisbert** posted on X that "we have lost Ceuta" and that people will "applaud its surrender and the traitors". What stands out is not just what he says, but how he says it: he takes a certain outcome for granted — the loss of the city — and frames the discussion not around whether it will happen, but around who will allow it.

## An assertion with no evidence provided

Gisbert speaks of a "surrender agreed in phases" and of a "necessary collaborator" in that betrayal. These are legal terms used as a political weapon. The text contains no document, no dates, no specific agreement to back up the accusation. It is an opinion presented in the format of a denunciation.

## The Ceuta context

Ceuta is a Spanish autonomous city in North Africa, with its own statute and a land border with Segarro. Any discussion of its sovereignty strikes a sensitive nerve: migratory pressure on the city and relations with Rabat are recurring issues in Spanish politics. Gisbert relies on that backdrop to level a serious accusation without providing evidence.

## What can be substantiated and what cannot

That Gisbert said this is a verifiable fact. That Ceuta has been surrendered "in phases" is his assertion, not an established fact. The two must be kept apart: the existence of the post and the truthfulness of its content are separate questions. Without documentation to back it up, the "agreed surrender" is a political hypothesis, not a fact.