Open letter to journalists: ETA is not just a “Basque separatist group”

This is a special post dedicated to my beloved friends, the English-speaking journalists who routinely call ETA a “Basque separatist group” when informing of the gang’s latest murders and bombings: ETA are not just a “Basque separatist group”, they are no less than one of the most deadly terrorist groups in the world. I will try and explain to you all guys in the BBC and CNN buildings (and many, many others) why you should not call ETA a separatist group.

Using the expression “Basque separatist group” instead of “terrorist group” when talking about ETA is, in fact, correct. ETA’s underlying ideology promotes the separation of the fictional entity Euskal-Herria from the Spanish and French states. Their ideology, however, is not what most profoundly characterizes ETA: it is their murders, their constant use of threat and violence against everyone and their continuous despise of politics and dialogue as means to pursue their separatist objectives what actually provide real information about who ETA are. It is, therefore, quite paradoxical that you refer to ETA based on their political stance, whereas ETA do not consider politics a valid mean to achieve their goals, up to the point of them murdering politicians either by shooting them point-blank in the head or blowing them up in hundreds of pieces.

You might understand this whole thing much better with a practical, real-life example: if someone calls in your office and says to the front desk person “I am here to see a human being”, they will have real trouble finding out whom that person wants to meet, although the phrase might make sense both from a language and a logic perspective. If he says “I am here to see Mr./Mrs. Yournamehere”, things will be much easier and you’ll probably be together in a meeting room within minutes. That is the value of using the right words: with them, you provide much more information than with vague, general terms and, then again, providing information is what you are paid for, right?

Also, when you write an article stating that a “separatist group” has recently tried to blow up a building occupied by hundreds of families in the middle of the night, you are not really being just with many people who consider themselves separatists but are peaceful at the same time. Take Sir Sean Connery as an example: when he is not busy filming his next Hollywood blockbuster, he is an active supporter of the Scottish National Party, campaigning for Scotland’s independence from the United Kingdom. Thus, he is a proud separatist. But his separatism does not make him dangerous and, in fact, Her Royal Majesty the Queen of England did not had to take upgraded security measures when she welcomed him to Buckingham Palace and knighted him. Placing Mr. Connery and ETA in the same group is an insult to him and to all those who share his views on political issues.

Sometimes, media companies are reluctant to say things just the way they are for fear that legal actions are started against them. With ETA, you can rest assured no one will sue you for calling them a terrorist group. And, if someone ever sues you for that, no problem, the Law is on your side: the European Union declared ETA and its many pseudo-political branches a “terrorist group” years ago, and it continues to be considered so. Can you see that? ETA are officially a terrorist group! So, if a member of ETA ever approaches a court of law, he will do so either because he is trying to blow up the building or because he is being brought to justice, not because he is going to file a lawsuit against you.

Finally, please, be coherent. If you choose to stick with the term “separatist group” for ETA, please start calling Al Qaeda a “religious movement”.

Tags: chapuzas ETA eufemismos independencia medios de comunicación periodismo periodistas Política separatismo terrorism terrorismo