Talk:GAL (paramilitary group)

Comments

Had to correct: The groups were active from 1983 to 1987 committing 27 murders.

I am rather mystified by the last paragraph of the history section. It states " (the changed French policy)...settled a dangerous precedent, proving that the administration of a country member of EEC could shift their policy fulfilling demands of a terrorist group.". I assume the terrorist group referred to is the GAL, but did the GAL make demands requesting extradition of ETA members into Spain?. I cannot find any reference for this. Also I find the assertion that the change of policy by the French government was due to terrorist demands highly controversial and hard to support. Many factors influenced this change of policy, the GAL could be postulated as one of them, but by no means the only or more relevant one.

I think the paragraph should be eliminated or heavily edited.

Any comment about this proposed change would be appreciated.

80.36.158.120 10:56, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I removed this sentence, more because it's a bit obscure. Tazmaniacs 18:10, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much for listening to my question. I think the change is justified but now the paragraph is a bit ackward as it is written. May I propose the following rewrite?:

"In the late 1980s, the French government adopted a harsher attitude towards Basque refugees, denying the status of political refugee to new applicants, and facilitating extraditions asked for by Spanish judges. This evolution weakened ETA's veterans. Some belive that this change in French policy was heavily influenced by the GAL's actions. On the other hand others are of the opinion that the GAL were a major factor in ensuring ETA's survival into the 1990s and beyond by helping them to preserve the image of Spain as an authoritarian state in war against the Basque people."

80.36.158.120 18:50, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

WP:Be bold. However, could it be better explained why "some believe that this change in French policy was influenced by the GAL's actions"? In what sense? Rather than having people murdered in France, they preferred handing them over to Spain? Tazmaniacs 18:58, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

The usual claim is that the GAL created a state of conflict in the French Vasque Country that had not existed before. ETA was very careful not to jeopardize its French sanctuary so no actions were allowed inside France, even tough according to ETA doctrine the French state is as much an invader as is the Spanish state. This situation of utter calm in the French Vasque provinces suited the French government just fine and they loathed to undertake any actions that could alter the status quo. The GAL changed this dynamic by creating a terrorist problem in the French Vasque Provinces that had not existed before and forced the French government to take action. You can find a clear example of this kind claim in the book "Infiltrados" by Jorge Cabezas where views very similar to those stated above are expressed by CNI (Centro Nacional de Inteligencia). this is well documented in the Spanish Wikipedia article.

80.36.158.120 19:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

All of this should be added in the article. (late response, but better than never...) Tazmaniacs 01:55, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Chronology

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)

Convicted members: what about Galindo?

Guardia Civil commander (colonel?) Galindo was also convicted but I'm not sure if in the main GAL case or in a separate one. Could someone confirm and add him to the list. - I'm not sure about that, but I'm sure he had the rank of (brigade) general when convicted. I looked it up... in year 2000 he was sentenced to 71 years for the kidnapping and assassination (which happened 17 years earlier, in 1983!) of Lasa and Zabala. I have added him as general emilio rodriguez galindo (the rank he had when sentenced in 2000, not the rank he had years before - colonel).

GAL and Osama bin Laden

GAL killed ETA terrorist, like Navy SEALs of the United States Naval Special Warfare Development Group killed Osama bin Laden. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.39.203.197 (talk) 10:08, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Unlike the GAL, the Navy Seals are a legal group, they never kidnapped and tortured people, carried out gun attacks on bars, plus numerous victims of the GAL were not ETA members: Emile Weiss, Claude Doer, Dominique Labeyrie, Robert Caplanne etc etc. So your comparison is fairly ludicrous. Valenciano (talk) 10:19, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Maybe the Navy Seals never do. What about CIA or Army? CIA never kidnapped? Never tortured?

For killing Osama, Navy Seals kill moreover another persons.

81.32.170.121 (talk) 19:03, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

So what is it that you're suggesting? That we say in the article that "the Navy Seals killed Bin Laden, therefore that means the GAL are okay." Nope, not going to happen. See WP:OR, WP:NPOV and WP:RS. Valenciano (talk) 19:15, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

GAL is a terrorist organization that had death squads. JanderVK (talk) 17:21, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Ideology?

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)

External links modified

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.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:12, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Unsourced commentary

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)

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)

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)

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)

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)

OK. I had the wrong initial impression about you so my apologies for that. CodeInconnu (talk) 20:55, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

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)

Done with a few minor tweaks. CodeInconnu (talk) 21:22, 17 December 2018 (UTC)

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)

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)

« Basque refugees » POV

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