Talk:ETA (separatist group)/Archive 1

message: I have been compelled to correct a couple of non-verifiable statements in the previous version
(there is no proof that Government forces routinely assasinate and deport terrorists, as the last version seemed to imply)
I have also included links to several related sites (all previous links looked at things from the vasque separatist point of view, Batasuna's 10%):
- Amnesty International (should be a good source to find who is violating what)
:Effectively. Go to AI-UK  (as you may know in ordr to keep neutrality the allegations are investigated by AI groups in other nations, AI-UK takes care of Spanish issues) and make a search with the terms "Spain torture". I got 1229 results. 
:Anyhow, I can tell you that here (in the Basque Country) everybody knows that's a fact. --Sugaar 11:41, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't searched Gesto but I think that they are honest enough to denounce violence by both sides. That's why they were sidelined in the last years and replaced by more one-sided groups like Basta Ya. --Sugaar 11:41, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

text: As happens with torture it's a fact that everybody knows. The judicial investigation never name PM Felipe González as the top boss of the gang but the press, even Spanish press, assumed that the X placed instead was he. Many other high level politicians of the PSOE (Vera, Barrionuevo, etc.) and police commanders operating in the Basque Country were sentenced in the GAL proccess. It was something that "everybody knew" but in this case there is a judicial process and firm sentences. --Sugaar 11:41, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Misc

message: Fromn a comment in the article:
:Likinianok egindako irudi hau sugea=politika eta aizkora=borroka irudikatzen dute.
"In this image by Felix Likiniano the snake represents politics and the axe, fight."
Could somebody confirm that it was Likiniano's work and this meaning? 
--Error 01:05, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All I've found is that claim in the Basque Wikipedia article on him and in the Spanish Wikipedia article on ETA. I've also created the article on Likiniano in English Wikipedia and included that as "claim". --Sugaar 12:23, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Likiniano

message: There is some redundancy between history and the attack section. -- Error 01:32, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Redundancy

message: What do "taxes" mean in "ETA finances its operations through kidnapping, extortion, robbery, arms traffic and 'taxes'"? Kent Wang 19:56, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The "revolutionary tax" (impuesto revolucionario) is a means of extortion of businessmen and artists. If they don't pay, they can be the next target. Sabbut 15:36, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

text: What is that about arms traffic? As far as I know, when ETA engages in weapons trade is a s a buyer, not as a seller. Can you point an example of ETA getting money for weapons? --Error 02:46, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Taxes

message: In Spain, all Members of Parliament not belonging to Batasuna or any of the independentist political parties are required to carry a permanent escort lest they should be attacked by ETA. This also extends to all Basque city councilors of non Basque Nationalist parties and several of the Basque Nationalist officials.   
   
Izquierda Unida, as far as I know, don't have escort and they are not independentist.
:Are required by whom? This description, I think, applies to the PP and, to a lesser extent, to the PSOE. Maybe we should research the details of who requires whom to carry an escort and who does it voluntarily. — Miguel 02:16, 2004 Dec 4 (UTC)
::I understand it as "if they want to keep alive". They are threatened, either personally or as a group. Juan María Atutxa, the former PNV Basque minister of Internal Affairs, had to  have escorts (at least for a period). I suppose that they could refuse escort. -- Error 02:57, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Given that ETA has in later years resorted to targets of opportunity, you may be right that "politicians are required to have escort if they want to stay alive", but that would be a rather strong statement to make in the article. Even to say "politicians are advised to have escort" would have implications that might not be accurate. I think what is needed is a more thorough exploration of the security situation for politicians and theire reaction to the threat. A single sentence lends itself to misunderstandings, particularly if an impersonal passive voice is used. — Miguel 05:02, 2004 Dec 6 (UTC)
The current version "During many years, Spanish politicians not related to Basque nationalism felt obliged to carry an escort with them to avoid ETA attacks." leaves out people like Juan Maria Atutxa or Balza.--Error 23:23, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I did my best to re-work that sentence. Change it if you find a better version, Error. Cvalda 08:50, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Parliament

message: ETA#Other ETA-related events and ETA#History should be merged.
And those "hundreds of people" meetings should be removed unless they are milestones somehow.
-- Error 22:48, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Merge

message: You say poTAYto, I say poTAHto...
I say "paramilitary", Error says "illegal armed group" (which I have no problem with) someone else says "terrorists", which is a loaded word I think should be used only with an attribution of who calls them "terrorist". Not that I disagreee, but it's still a POV word.
I'm perfectly happy to drop "paramilitary" in favor of "illegal armed group", but now we are left with a red link. Error, do you think it would be misleading to link to "paramilitary" (illegal armed group)? Or is there somewhere we can link it? -- Jmabel | Talk 02:01, Dec 4, 2004 (UTC)
:I realize now that also Cosa Nostra is an illegal armed group. See Paramilitary#Revolutionary_and_guerilla_paramilitary_groups. illegal armed group? To me a guerrilla is a countryside thing, but that doesn't seem the English sense. --Error 02:44, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: And by the standard definition of terrorist group (those that want to achieve their goal through terror), they are one too. Just that their aims are not political but merely economic. --Sugaar 12:30, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The ETA is a terrorist group by definition of the word terrorist.  They use coersion and violence for political goals.  What does "loaded word" mean?  --NoPetrol 02:58, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: We already say that the EU and the US consider them terrorists. That should be enough. See Wikipedia:Use of the word terrorism (policy development), Wikipedia:Words_to_avoid#Terrorist and Power word#War on Terror  --Error 03:10, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

text: They are terrorists. Or else every terrorist group is a illegal armed group. Amagad. 
Baloogan 20:37, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: It's a matter of loaded words. The term terrorist has a despective meaning and such respectable media as the BBC don't use it at all. I know it's commonplace in Spanish and other media but we should try to be NPOV. --Sugaar 12:30, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Paramilitary, terrorists, illegal armed group 

message: Over the last few days, "Left Basque Nationalism" was watered down to "Basque nationalist left politics", then to "Basque nationalisms, often with a left-wing political stance". Also, "Spanish: izquierda nacionalista vasca, Basque: Ezker abertzale, often seen in the mixed-language izquierda abertzale" was completely dropped. I think this is quite wrong. This is basically a proper noun, referring to the politics of certain specific groups. Unless I am extremely mistaken -- I am from the U.S., but I follow Spanish politics reasonably closely -- merely being a Basque nationalist on the political left is a different thing than suscribing to the rather specific political platform of Ezker abertzale.
Rather than my restoring this material myself, can someone from the Basque region (or at least nearby) please weigh in on this? Or does someone have some solid references on this (it's all uncited in the Spanish-language Wikipedia and I don't read Basque). -- Jmabel | Talk 22:45, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
:Aye. Ezker Abertzale and Izquierda Abertzale are being used as if they were proper nouns to mean (Herri) Batasuna people instead of the whole of the Basque Nationalist Left, much as Partido Socialista is often used to mean just the PSOE instead of any other socialist party in Spain. Herri Batasuna succeeded, to some extent, in appropiating this name, like they've almost appropiated the term abertzale, as I tried to explain in http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abertzale .--Erri4a 23:36, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: You can find many examples of this usage of Izquierda Abertzale. And Ezker Abertzalea was the name of the HB groups in Spanish Congress and regional parliaments until circa 2000.--Erri4a 23:51, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: The corresponding article in en.wikipedia is Basque National Liberation Movement. It's the same thing. The name "the Nationalist Left" (Ezker Abertzalea) is used now more frequently but the classical (self-given) name used to be "Basque National Liberation Movement" (Euskal Herri Askapenerako Mugimendua, often rendered by the Spanish acronym MLNV). --Sugaar 06:08, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Left Basque Nationalism 

message: A mention of ETA aid to the FMLN was recently and anonymously changed to say that they have aided FARC. No citation was given, either for the previous claim or for this one. Wouldn't surprise me if both are true, so I'm not reverting, but these claims of ETA involvement in Latin American revolutionary movements could use good citation. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:52, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
:These matters have never been fully clear. Most of such claims appeared in Spanish press, which has a biased attitude in the conflict. Anyhow it is very likely that ideologically akin groups have cooperated (training, arms sourcing, info-sharing) at some levels at different times. It is in fact likely (but not proven) that ideologically simmilar armed groups of Europe and Latin America have been solidarious among them at least occasionaly. --Sugaar 12:46, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latin America 

message: Why hasn't anyone ever addressed the obvious question: why doesn't Spain just let the Basque have their own country? I'm certainly not an expert in Basque relations, but it seems like this avenue has never even begun to be explored.
For the same reason that the Basques want it in the first place-nationalist sentiment, SqueakBox 00:14, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
The reason the question has not been addressed is because it makes as much sense as asking why the US does not let the Texan people to have their own country.  It is a mistake to assume that the majority of the people living in the basque country want their own nation.  That is not the case.  If it were, then the party winning the elections would be the one backing ETA, and there would be no voters of either the popular, socialist or moderate national parties, which do represent the larger majority.  Most of the Basque Spaniards living in that region are happy to be where they are and who they are.  There is a basque parlament, a basque constitution, basque police, basque schools, TV and radio stations and all sorts of basque-minded institutions.  ETA is a minuscule group that much like the dictator they professed to fight wants to impose their view of the state with bullets, bombs, kidnappings, and extortion as their main argument.  Spain is a democratic country with multiple states ("autonomias") and mechanisms in place to change everything from municipal laws to the Constitution.  Abortion, Divorce, Universal Health Care, Immigration Laws, and the legalization of the comunist party come to mind as political achievements from any number of different groups.  If there was a legitimate sentiment and desire for one state to break away from the rest of the nation it could be addressed via the parlamentary process.  How can political dissent result in the assasination of men, women, and children?
* I basically agree with the above, although the Texas analogy is a bit of an overstatement: ETA's Basque independentist views certainly have double-digit support in the region (although the majority of Basque independentists oppose ETA's tactics). I don't think a comparable number of Texans would want independence at this time (the late 19th century is another matter...) -- Jmabel | Talk 20:13, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)
::It's more Canada-Quebec, UK-Ulster, France-Corsica.
::I'd say that there is double-digit support in the US to independize fron the Texan president. :) --Error 21:34, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  So.... 

message: User:Error in an edit summary says, "However ETA used no other means than violence". I think that is an accurate description of ETA now, but is it an accurate description throughout their history? As I understand it, in the Franco years, ETA had some pretty substantial educational operations. Also, speaking of the present, this becomes a tautology: non-violent activity by people close to ETA (e.g. Batusana) is considered not to be ETA activity. -- Jmabel | Talk 05:04, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
:Sorry, too many pages in my watchlist. I don't know about educational operations. I know about ikastolas but I couldn't tell how linked they were to ETA. About the tautology, some Spanish courts consider all Batasuna activity as ETA's (but being a Batasuna member does not guarantee prosecution!). --Error 01:02, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: "Ikastolak"(in Basque)/ "ikastolas" (spanish?) are not linked with ETA. They´ve never been linked with ETA. The problem is thata spanish propaganda links ETA and Ikastolas for a simple reason. Ikastolak=Basque schools are famous because they get better results. They have higher educational level than spanish public schools. So, thousands of people are sending their songs to Ikastolas. For example, only one kid was enroled in spanish lenguage in Gipuzkoa laste year. And more than 30% of kids were enroled in Ikastolas. It means, in some years aroun 90% of Gipuzkoan will know basque. Spanish goverment and anti-basque groups and PP cannot accept that reallity. Also in Navarre, In Pamplona, more than 50% of kids(2 years old) has been enroled with basque lenguage. And more than 30% of total only in Basque. while Ikastolas are refusing kids because they don´t have capacity, in some places spanish schools are closing. --Ikertxo 08:40, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Means other than violence 

message: I am not sure now if the name of the current internal bulletin is Zutabe and Zutik was the old name.
--Error 01:45, 1 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I´m sure is Zutabe. --Ikertxo 11:51, 7 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Bulletin

message: The section named "Other ETA-related events" is outrageous. For a start, the seize of the basque newspaper Egunkaria is treated as a success against ETA when after sending more than 30 innocent journalists to prision (some of them for two years) without presenting charges against them, and allegedly torturing them during the unjustified "incomunicado" period (their torture reports were dismissed by politicians and spanish media with the excuse of them being part of ETA's strategy of undermining the legitimacy of the police). After going through all this for working on a basque speaking newspaper, they were released once their innocence was proved. The same Minister who said their arrest was the best evidence of their guilt, insisted in saying there probably was some sort of link between the newspaper and ETA, and refused to apologize. The media never said a word again about it. And the torture claims are still unresolved (even though one of the journalists died about a year ago as a consecuence of the mistreat). Is this what you call being neutral? Tumol 15:52, 26 September 2005 (UKT)
:It is treated like the escape of Fernández Iradi. If you see it as a success against ETA it is your POV. There a lot of minutiae in that section though. --Error 23:56, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: NPOV does not mean that we keep opinions out of the article and somehow reach objective truth. It means that the opinions are well-cited as to whose opinions they are (the Spanish government, a particular academic, ETA itself, etc.) and that they come from relevant sources, rather than being in the narrative voice of the article. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:57, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Manipulation 

message: :Batasuna was listed as a terrorist organization by the United States in May 2003 and by all EU countries in June 2003.
According to the Batasuna article, it is currently legal in France.
Either it is terrorist in France or it is legal.
--Error 01:03, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It is legal in all EU but Spain. EU as a whole and EU countries in particular had a hard time accepting the political-judicial measures of Spain agains a party with 12-18% of support in all the Southern Basque Country (including Navarre) that has never openly advocated for violence. It's much like the Sinn Fein case. --Sugaar 07:54, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Status of Batasuna

message: Sections Recent events and Other ETA-related events are turning into laundry lists. -- Jmabel | Talk 07:26, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Many of these could be merged into List of ETA attacks, which doesn't seem to have details of recent attacks. -- ElBenevolente 00:21, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text:  Please do! That would be an appropriate refactoring. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:46, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added the attacks into List of ETA attacks and merged both recent events sections, as I didn't see the need for two sections for recent events.  I'll work on doing some cleanup in the section tomorrow, as we probably don't need the list of attacks in both articles. -- ElBenevolente 01:41, 27 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Events" 

message: I am not sure whether the person or people who carry on changing the intro from Armed Basque Nationalist Organization to Terrorist, actually realises that a few sentences down, there is a clear mention of the EU and US considering ETA a terrorist organisation. Therefore, what is the point of this bloody edit war?!? Regards, Asterion 16:29, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Terrorist 

message: This introduction was clearly written from an anti perspective, as it talks about their methods, and doesn't once mention the aims of the ETA. I have edited it to be more true to the sub-heading. Bumcheekcity 18:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Aims"