Talk:Águila Blanca (heist)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Untitled

"Given light or no sentances" is simply not correct. These people support violence against the United States! 65.115.254.2 (talk) 20:05, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

"Given light or no sentances" is a claim that additional sources will help resolve. But 'violence' is an act harming human beings. Wells Fargo was robbed. Violence cannot be committed against a corporation just as violence cannot be committed against a state government (in this case the two are not synonymous). Although violence can be committed against the people of a corporation or nation. The previous post's claim is as incongruous as a claim that violence can be committed against an ideology. Nationalist rhetoric has no place in this article, nor value or moral judgments concerning the robbery. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.254.164.10 (talk) 10:39, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Let's not play the Nationalist rhetoric card. The fact is that the statements in the article as it stood in this edit ([1]) accurately reflect the statements in the reference. If you can come up with additional sources that discuss the "Given light or no senctences" part, I am all for that, and you should present them as soon as you can. But for now what can be verified by the citation presented is what stays. Regards, Mercy11 (talk) 05:10, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

The whole section and reference is based on the arguments of Hilton Fernández. The reality is that Victor Manuel Gerena is still listed as one of the FBI Most Wanted and Ojeda Rios is dead. --Jmundo (talk) 06:47, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Title

Isn't this more commonly referred to as the Wells Fargo heist or the Wells Fargo robbery? I have never heard of it referred to as Águila Blanca. Joseph A. Spadaro (talk) 03:38, 26 July 2020 (UTC)