Jordi vole: “Josu Ternera has disappointed me. I expected him to be more conciliatory” | EUROtoday

Get real time updates directly on you device, subscribe now.


The journalist defends the chance of ‘Don’t name me Veal’ and accuses those that level him out for whitewashing of placing him on the unsuitable aspect

The journalist Jordi
The journalist Jordi vole poses through the presentation of the documentary ‘Don’t name me Ternera’.Juan HerreroEFE

Never has a movie lasted so lengthy on the San Sebastin Festival. We will overlook the golden shells, however not the deafening noise of an interview through which, past the majority of the ideas or the excessiveness of the atrocities heard, nobody, neither interviewer nor interviewee, ever raises their voice. After the presentation to the media on Friday, Saturday was the flip of, for example, civil society. And oh, the administrators appeared, Jordi vole and Mrius Snchez, keen to give the suitable explanations.

We communicate, to situate ourselves, of Don’t name me Veal. We are speaking concerning the interview in documentary format (or the opposite method round) through which the previous chief of the terrorist group ETA offers, for the primary time, his model of himself and his individuals. We are speaking concerning the movie that, as quickly as its inclusion within the Festival’s programming turned recognized, prompted a letter signed by fifty residents towards it. “We would have liked to make much less noise in an edition of the festival with names like Trueba, Bayona or Coixet”, Vole commented as a prologue and, by the way, as an apology to his colleagues and companions within the hand program. Of course, he identified that the fault had not been fully his: “Those who set the agenda were the gentlemen of the statement. We would have preferred that things had been said after, at the very least, watching the film.”

And after the presentation, shortly after the primary query on the topic was given, the vole himself positioned what was undoubtedly the message of the looks earlier than the press and which he underlined and repeated up to thrice: “Josu Ternera disappointed us. We expected and would have wanted a more conciliatory language, which would be expressed in kinder words. I always spoke internally more than externally. He addressed his own people at all times: the prisoners and the militancy.” And he added: “The Abertzale left has always been distinguished by its cowardice. “No one ever says what they assume in order not to be recognized as a dissident.”

Regarding the criticism of whitewashing, the other strong argument of the appearance, both Sánchez and Vole clung to their “obligation as journalists.” “Our thought,” he began, “was at all times to shed gentle the place there has by no means been any. It is the primary time that an ETA chief does an interview with a nationwide media that, as well as, has ended up changing into world with the entry of Netflix [se estrena el 25 de diciembre]”, he said. And he added, challenging the critics: “The journalistic curiosity of an interview with a terrorist chief is indeniable. There is not any journalism college that claims in any other case… Of course, we don’t count on preventive censorship. It took us two years to make the documentary and one to edit it. We are conscious that it’s a luxurious in the mean time that the occupation goes by way of… The simple factor would have been to keep at residence and do nothing. For us it was a journalistic obligation and the one factor I really feel is absolute pleasure. “I wouldn’t like it if one day looking back I told myself that I didn’t do what I had to do because I was afraid.”

Sánchez mentioned that the venture started to take form in 2020 and that the recording of the three periods of three hours every with Josu Ternera came about in May 2022. A yr later, the statements that open and shut the documentary had been launched. of the ETA sufferer Francisco Ruiz Sanchez. “It was very complicated and everything was done by breaking a lot of stones. We met on several occasions and from the initial refusal we went on to say yes. It was a process of a year and a half,” Sánchez recalled.

vole, who refused to price both the criticisms or the interviewee himself, The solely factor he achieved was to outline the interviewee as a militant. “He is a person for whom the ETA organization comes before everything,” he mentioned and insisted on the thought of ​​disappointment. “For a moment I thought that in the chapter of the murder of Yoyes by ETA there would be a moment of certain regret. She was his friend, she spent time with his family… But no. For Josu Urrutikoetxea it was a decision by the organization that wanted to launch a “A warning to those that wished to reintegrate… After this response it turned clear to me that there was not going to be any motion.”

So much vole and Sánchez revolted against the term “whitening.” “Interviewing is just not whitewashing. Asking is just not whitewashing. Those who accuse us of whitewashing anybody know us little or no. If anybody believes that we’ve got carried out what we’ve got carried out as a result of we’re shut to the concepts of the nationalist left, it’s as a result of they have no idea us.” . And having said that, Vole himself tried a new justification for all this: “It’s been twelve years since ETA laid down its weapons and we nonetheless see younger ladies and boys who do not know who Miguel Ángel Blanco was. It’s an anomaly. Miguel’s demise Ángel Blanco hurts, as a result of it has to harm. You have to select which aspect you might be on: Yes, with those that sing ‘Let Txapote vote for you’ with out figuring out who Txapote was or with those that know that Txapote murdered Miguel Ángel Blanco“.

And having mentioned that, not a day in San Sebastin with out the documentary in query.