Talk:GAL (paramilitary group)

message: Just added a chronology of attacks from the article in the Spanish Wikipedia. Please improve it as necessary. --Sugaar 14:25, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Chronology 

message: Government military units do not have an "ideology". Nor do death squads. So to say that "GAL did not have a coherent ideology" is nonsense. Its role was to disrupt ETA by killing some members, and sowing confusion and fear in its ranks.203.184.41.226 (talk) 07:37, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ideology? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on GAL (paramilitary group). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061106211340/http://www.web.amnesty.org/web/ar2001.nsf/webeurcountries/SPAIN?OpenDocument to http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2001.nsf/webeurcountries/SPAIN?OpenDocument
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:12, 14 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: I've removed this unsourced commentary again, per WP:NPOV. While the whole thing was organised by the PSOE, continuing the death squads established under UCD governments, many of the killers were foreign mercenaries who were not members of any political parties as in the Monbar Hotel attack, so to claim that "most of them [the perpetrators i.e. the actual killers] were former civil servants from the Franco regime who switched allegiances and became PSOE militants right after Franco's death" as well as being unsourced, is just plain wrong. Valenciano (talk) 19:50, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: The foreign and Spanish military men and mercenaries were uniformly far-right. From Cherid to Amedo. Anyway, I think my opinion (about the matter and about you) has been made clear :-) CodeInconnu (talk) 19:57, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Yep, but since quite a number of the killers were never caught and many were simply hired from the dregs of Marseille port or whatever Italian fascists could be rustled up that still means the statement that most of them were "PSOE militants" (militant is a false friend and incorrect translation, by the way) is wrong. Such commentary is out of place and would need sourced anyway. PS, not that it really matters much, but I've zero time for a nutty ideology like Blaverism, my nickname came from an in-joke with an Irish mate who went to Valencia games with me and who encouraged me to sign up here. So.... wrong on that as well ;) Seriously, I'm happy to work with you on this, but the text you're proposing to add isn't correct. Suggest an alternative here and we can move forward. Valenciano (talk) 20:07, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:   No matter how you look at it, this wasn't just a criminal enterprise. It was an ideological one, too. This is what I propose: "Its main purpose was to attack ETA members and Basque nationalist targets and wreak random havoc in French territory in order to put pressure on the French government. Despite its ostensible nationalist slant, it did not ascribe itself a consistent place within the Left–right political spectrum and many of the killers were foreign mercenaries. However, said mercenaries were mostly recruited from the European far-right (most notably the OAS) and most of the Spanish perpetrators and high cadres were former police officers and civil servants from the Franco regime". CodeInconnu (talk) 20:23, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Mostly fine with that text (though much better if you can source it.) No argument on the ideological element, though I believe that's covered in the article anyway. I would tweak the last bit to "Many mercenaries were recruited from the European far-right (including the OAS) while many of the Spanish perpetrators and organisers were police officers and civil servants from the Franco regime". Because, though what you write is likely, a number of perpetrators were never brought to justice. Also, while many, possibly most mercenaries, were far right, some seem to have just been common street thugs who did it for the money so we should avoid stating emphatically "most" and using editorialising like "most notably."  Valenciano (talk) 20:37, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  OK. I had the wrong initial impression about you so my apologies for that. CodeInconnu (talk) 20:55, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: No worries. At times being a Blaverist sounds better than putting up with Valencia CF's results. I have a bit more free time coming up due to the holidays so I'll have a look over this article as the sourcing is really lacking. Anything you can add, especially sourced, would be great. Valenciano (talk) 20:59, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done with a few minor tweaks. CodeInconnu (talk) 21:22, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

text: Thanks Valenciano for fine-tuning. As to ideology, I think it is relevant only marginally, at this point there is no mystery as to the state-sponsoring and organization of the criminal scheme, and I think it has been stated somewhere in the article by now. Other than that, on the above version, it looks fine to me altogether but do not see any point in maintaining "civil servants from the Franco regime". "Active or former Franco regime civil servants" suits better.  Iñaki LL (talk) 21:19, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Since the statements are based on the source, adding "It showed from the beginning close connections to high-ranking government and a number of police officials in the Basque Country." could do. Iñaki LL (talk) 22:28, 17 December 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced commentary

message: I think the expression “basque refugees” is absolutely not neutral. Aude9331 (talk) 16:26, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  « Basque refugees » POV