Talk:Hipercor bombing

Dead link
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://www1.pre.gva.es/pls/argos_elec/DMEDB_elecComunidades.informeElec?aNComuId=14&aVLengua=v
 * In 1987 Hipercor bombing on 2011-05-25 05:39:06, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 1987 Hipercor bombing on 2011-06-24 06:57:06, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'

--JeffGBot (talk) 06:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 2
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/07/30/AR2009073001319.html
 * In 1987 Hipercor bombing on 2011-05-25 05:39:06, 404 Not Found
 * In 1987 Hipercor bombing on 2011-06-24 06:57:17, 404 Not Found

--JeffGBot (talk) 06:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Dead link 3
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!


 * http://www1.pre.gva.es/pls/argos_elec/DMEDB_ElecComunidades.informeElecDetallado?aNComuId=14&aNNumElec=1&aVTipoElec=E&aVFechaElec=1987&aVLengua=v
 * In 1987 Hipercor bombing on 2011-05-25 05:39:06, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'
 * In 1987 Hipercor bombing on 2011-06-24 06:57:28, Socket Error: 'getaddrinfo failed'

--JeffGBot (talk) 06:57, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Correo Street, September 1974
The article points out that before Hipercor ETA's main carnage had been that of República Dominicana Square, with 12 fatalities. But in September 1974 a bomb killed 12 people in a coffe shop ("cafetería") on Correo Street (Madrid). The premises allegedly were an off-duty place for policemen belonging to the infamous DGS (General Directorate of Security), that had its HQ in the nearby, but all but two of the victims had nothing to do with the DGS or even with the police force. Eventually some of the 71 people wounded died too, with a grim total of 13 or 14 fatalities (sources are at variance). ETA's leadership claimed it had been a far-right attack (so-so, rather unbelievable) and many left-wingers from Madrid were arrested by the Spanish police. Eventually there were no defendants. All the prisoners were set free -at least in relation with that bomb-, and in 1977 there was a general amnesty. Perhaps the issue is not certain one hundred per cent, O.K., but most likely it was an ETA attack (perhaps carried out by local left-wingers, rather than by ETA members). Incidentally, the split in 1974 between ETA Political-Military and ETA Military seems to have been in part as a consequence of that unclaimed and polemical bombing.
 * "http://elpais.com/diario/1979/05/27/espana/296604007_850215.html" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.8.98.118 (talk) 11:35, 10 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Yes I also wrote the article on that attack: Cafetería Rolando bombing. Let me think about that one, the wording may have to be changed. Valenciano (talk) 11:42, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

Sentenced to 790 years in prison?
In the article, it says:

In 1993 Rafael Caride Simón was arrested in France. Spanish police alleged that Caride Simón had been the former head of ETA's so-called "Barcelona Commando" and had planned the Hipercor attack. On 23 July 2003 he was sentenced to 790 years in prison for carrying out the attack, while at the same trial, Santi Potros received the same sentence for ordering the attack.

790 years seems false. People can't even live close to that long! I would fix it, but the source is only in Spanish and I can't read Spanish. Can someone (who can read Spanish or find an English source) fix it? Hkbusfan (talk)


 * No. It's correct and anyone who does speak Spanish can check the source, if they don't they can easily verify it using google translate. It's also mentioned here: https://www.aljazeera.com/archive/2003/07/2008410135023523171.html Courts often sentence people to these lengthy sentences, which are purely symbolic. 794 years is light, Jamal Zougam got nearly 43,000 years for his part in the Madrid bombings, while American courts sentenced Charles Scott Robinson to 30,000 years in prison. See List_of_longest_prison_sentences Valenciano (talk) 19:06, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Definition of terrorism
According to Wikipedia: Terrorism is, in the broadest sense, the use of intentional violence for political or religious purposes.[1] It is used in this regard primarily to refer to violence during peacetime or in the context of war against non-combatants (mostly civilians and neutral military personnel).[2] The terms "terrorist" and "terrorism" originated during the French Revolution of the late 18th century[3] but gained mainstream popularity in the 1970s during the conflicts of Northern Ireland, the Basque Country and Palestine. The increased use of suicide attacks from the 1980s onwards was typified by the September 11 attacks in New York City and Washington, D.C. in 2001. [terrorism]]

How come adding the adjective "terrorist" to the Hipercor attack is not NPOV?


 * international violence: check
 * political purposes: check
 * during peacetime: check
 * against non-combatants: check

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.134.86.24 (talk) 00:44, 5 September 2020 (UTC)


 * See MOS:TERRORIST. FDW777 (talk) 07:01, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Value-laden labels—such as calling an organization a cult, an individual a racist or sexist, terrorist, or freedom fighter, or a sexual practice a perversion—may express contentious opinion and are best avoided unless widely used by reliable sources to describe the subject, in which case use in-text attribution. Avoid myth in its informal sense, and establish the scholarly context for any formal use of the term.

It's not ETA organisation or their members that are being defined as terrorists, but the Hipercor attack. Can you understand the subtle difference? Wikipedia guideline to avoid non-NPOV does not forbid using labels such as "terrorist". Otherwise, the entry on the 11-S event would have to be classified as non-NPOV as well since it is defined as a terrorist attack instead of a plain plane hijacking attack against some buildings. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.134.86.24 (talk) 10:15, 5 September 2020 (UTC)


 * But if you actually read the article two of your assertions ("intentional violence" and "against non combatants") are disputed, since telephone warnings were given, something you wouldn't do if you intended to cause civilian casualties. We can, by all means, mention that ETA was considered a terrorist organisation by the Spanish government. Valenciano (talk) 10:27, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Violence does not necessarily mean provoking casualties. Placing bombs in a supermarket is a form o violence, whether you like it or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.134.86.24 (talk) 10:30, 5 September 2020 (UTC)


 * And WP:NPOV is a fundamental policy, whether you like it or not. FDW777 (talk) 10:36, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

Your interpretation of WP:NPOV is not. Clearly we read different things out of it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.134.86.24 (talk) 10:37, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

I've also added the complete list of countries and international organisations that have classified ETA as a terrorist organisation. Leaving only the Spanish Government is misleading.


 * Since they weren't verifiably classified at the time of the bombing, they'll be removed again soon. FDW777 (talk) 12:12, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

The article didn't explicitly say ETA was considered to be a terrorist organisation by the Spanish Government by the time they committed the terrorist attack, either. It refers to an ambiguous time in te past. Instead of reverting changes you could be more constructive by adding precisions if you want. Maybe ones of this sort: "by the Spanish Government and France, UK, the EU, USA and Canada afterwards". That would give a better picture of the very nature of ETA according to those organisations, which hasn't changed between the moment they committed the Hipercor terrorist attack and 2001.


 * If you would like to prevent your edits being reverted, I suggest you a) stop making non-constructive edits to start with and b) seek consensus instead of edit-warring. FDW777 (talk) 12:50, 5 September 2020 (UTC)

How come including the adjective "terrorist" in the Hipercor attack is not constructive? Have you read the definition of terrorism according to Wikipedia? Can you grasp the fact that the Wikipedia guideline about avoiding non-NPOV implies calling individuals and organisations terrorist, not acts?


 * It's presenting opinion as fact, thus a failure of WP:NPOV. Can you not grasp that articles are written from a neutral point-of-view? FDW777 (talk) 21:44, 5 September 2020 (UTC)