Another march

Sr Tertius says on Feb 6, 2008, 15:45:

March 6. 11 am. Plaza de Bolivar.

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

robi666 says on Feb 6, 2008, 17:14:

Sr.T, are those right figures? I mean like the 600 killed each year from 2002.

However, I'd like to see the same participation on this, but it won't be the same.

"I am a citizen of the most beautiful nation on earth. A nation whose laws are harsh yet simple, a nation that never cheats, which is immense and without borders, where life is lived in the present."

0 funny, 0 helpful.

SiV says on Feb 6, 2008, 17:19:

I'll be marching, but I bet it won't get a quarter of the press coverage from RCN and Caracol as the anti-Farc march. I wonder why?

Stultórum númere infinitum est.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

goin_south says on Feb 6, 2008, 17:22:

so, in a way,... this has a different focus... yet,... still a common denominator.
I'm jus guessin, it won't have the same coverage or attendance, because it's not what "the masses of people" see as the major, the biggest problem.

Please, Don't attack me. I understand.

I'm jus saying....., Right or wrong.. it's not what 'the people' see as the major problems...but, more as a result of ... what they see as 'the major' problem.

Why Colombianitas? Personally... I just don't like pink areolar tissue.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tejasmarcos says on Feb 6, 2008, 17:26:

i'll be there, man.

trying to walk a straight line on sour mash and cheap wine...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Feb 6, 2008, 18:00:

The numbers I got from the President's office (Observatorio Presidencial de los Derechos Humanos) counts an average of 600 deaths per year from AUC massacres only in the 1993-2006. In the 2002-2005 period, the number of deaths in AUC massacres diminished from 680 to 252 per year according to the same source, but at some point (not sure exactly when) the government changed the definition of massacre. Unfortunately I can't find the number of targeted assassinations, but probably if you add them to the massacres, you may get about 600 deaths per year. I think someone once posted a link in PBH with that information, but I can't find it.

That's a damn holocaust. But I agree with GS, it hasn't received a fraction of the attention that the abuses from FARC receive. I don't condone the latter, of course, but I think that the former are much worse of a problem, not just because of sheer magnitude but because it often involves government officials.

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Feb 6, 2008, 18:24:

Always with the disclaimers, SrT.

"I don't condone the latter, of course, but I think that the former are much worse of a problem"

Seems like you'd eventually admit your fondness for FARC, instead of always adding your minor disclaimers.

But setting that aside, I'm not certain that just because there may have been some government officials' involvement, this necessarily makes the paras' actions so much more terrible. I'd venture to guess that some folks that live in areas where the paras took control would beg to differ with you about which group was worse, FARC or AUC. Both of them terrible tragedies - but one side, while admittedly animalistic at times, did bring some semblence of order to chaos on occasion. And only one of them has a 40 year track record of atrocities- the other disbanded as an organization.

BTW- of the 600 per year, I wonder how many were actually FARC or their sympathizers? Anyone have any citations about this?

Before you throw me out, make sure I pay my bar tab

0 funny, 0 helpful.

hongo_joe says on Feb 6, 2008, 18:48:

Slguy: "Seems like you'd eventually admit your fondness for FARC,"

Pretty underhanded comment.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on Feb 7, 2008, 04:39:

The pro-Farc camp is in disarray after the success of the anti-Farc march. All they could do was come up with this very original idea.

They don’t care about the victims of the paracos. This is just another attempt to stem their declining support.

Not being bound to swear to the dogmas of any master

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on Feb 7, 2008, 04:43:

“I'll be marching, but I bet it won't get a quarter of the press coverage from RCN and Caracol as the anti-Farc march. I wonder why?"

Because they won’t get a quarter of the people of the anti-Farc march, because everyone knows the paracos were a direct consequence of the Farc, because there is a demobilization process of the paracos.

I don't condone the paracos, of course, but I think that the Farc are much worse of a problem, as do most Colombians.

Not being bound to swear to the dogmas of any master

0 funny, 0 helpful.

webmanco says on Feb 7, 2008, 04:46:

...A yo, déjenme queto y no me jodan má! ...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Feb 7, 2008, 06:37:

Cassini, are you ever going to post soemthing even mildly intelligent? You are an embarrasment to your "cause".

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tasco66 says on Feb 7, 2008, 07:57:

Cassini didn't you read my disclaimer a la Sr T?

I don't condone the paracos, of course, but I think that the Farc are much worse of a problem.

Happy now?

"to be against paramilitares is to be pro FARC" does not have to be, but sure is in your case.

Not being bound to swear to the dogmas of any master

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jonas says on Feb 7, 2008, 08:01:

Big George W. just announced he won´t participate in the march march...

Mi alma se la dejo al diablo

0 funny, 0 helpful.

podborski says on Feb 7, 2008, 08:24:

here's my gringo point of view on these marches.

The anti FARC march sends a message to all the supporters of FARC, like foreign heads of state (Chavez) and european 'intellectuals'.

Where's that support for AUC? Does it exist? I'm asking seriously, maybe it does? All I know is I have never seen it.

I'm all for opposing violence and corruption and demonstrating it, but I can see why the anti FARC march is far more relevant.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

robi666 says on Feb 7, 2008, 09:29:

Good point, in a way, Pod.
The truth is that AUC support exists, but within Colombia.

"I am a citizen of the most beautiful nation on earth. A nation whose laws are harsh yet simple, a nation that never cheats, which is immense and without borders, where life is lived in the present."

0 funny, 0 helpful.

podborski says on Feb 7, 2008, 12:34:

I figured there is some support for AUC inside colombia, I've heard a few colombians tell me that the paras arose just to defend themselves against FARC. I have no idea what the real story is, all I am saying is that I don't see any political support, or intellectuals in foreign universities singing the praises of the paras.

Can you imagine what the reaction would be if some foreign head of state stood up and said the paras should be recognized as an insurgent army with a political goal?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Lucas Freley says on Feb 7, 2008, 12:57:

Don't forget the "Elenos", well-known as the ELN. I think that there are a lot of people that doesn't know about the existence of this local groups. The problem with this "paras" is that they are in full and complete control of certains areas of Colombia. Hope this kind of marchs contribute to something.

Hoy que estás esplendida y que todo lo iluminas, demos un paseo, vuelta por el Universo (Gustavo Cerati)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

SiV says on Feb 7, 2008, 13:04:

What do you mean some support? It's not that the AUC have just support, they have real power, political power in the govt. Mancuso himself said that 33% of Congress had been vetted and OKed by the paras as being sympathetic to their "cause".

There's quite a common saying that goes like this:

Uribe is not a paramiltary, but most paramilitaries are Uribistas.

Why do you think the AUC was so eager to disarm? Because the Uribe govt. is relatively sympathetic to them, and will be easier on them. The thing is there is very little about the Truth Process in the media, at least after the mass demobilizations (is that a word in English!?). Little attention has been given to the victims, reparation, returning land to IDPs, etc.

This march won't receive much media attention, and therefore there won't be nearly as many people attending. The media produces consciousness and also manufactures consent, that is, not only does it reflect public opinion, it also shapes it. In Colombia, the two biggest networks, RCN and Caracol, reported to reach 97% of the population, are owned or controlled by people and groups sympathetic to the Uribe administration and with shared economic interests.

Stultórum númere infinitum est.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

robi666 says on Feb 7, 2008, 13:10:

Agree.
But, SiV, do not forget the wide support from the people.
Like, do not forget to talk about the real political power of AUC, which is (was) not in the central Parliament itself, but in the local administrations, governors, etc.

I do believe that 90% of majors and governors in the coastal departments were not only blessed by, but were actually chosen and actively helped by AUC.

Although, I must admit that lately I can see some changes in the support of the political forces and army - police toward the (ex) AUC groups...

"I am a citizen of the most beautiful nation on earth. A nation whose laws are harsh yet simple, a nation that never cheats, which is immense and without borders, where life is lived in the present."

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Feb 7, 2008, 13:33:

The paras also disbanded because as they saw it Colombia finally had a president willing to take the fight to the FARC.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

SiV says on Feb 7, 2008, 20:45:

True enough, BillyB, although it is debatable to what point the AUC have disbanded. Many of the financial and political networks remain intact, as well as the narcotrafficking via the Black Eagles, and we don't really know how many weapons remain in commision.

Stultórum númere infinitum est.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Feb 8, 2008, 06:05:

That's the thing SIV, it seems like every narco is designating his private army a para block. It's probably so they can get easy terms from the governament to "demobilize" when things get really hot

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Feb 8, 2008, 16:24:

I've come to the conclusion that a march against paramilitarism and its influence on government is more necessary than ever. Maybe the international community needed to learn about what FARC is about (I doubt it), but, from my impressions here in PBH, I think far more people need to learn about the paracos. Maybe that'll mitigate the profundly offensive imbecilities that slguy writes, and the factual inaccuracies from billyb (the paracos a response to FARC? Not even Uribe believes that one... he does believe though, that there is no more paramilitarism in Colombia... and in unicorns too, I think).

"When the finger points to the moon, the fool looks at the finger" (Chinese proverb)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

goin_south says on Feb 8, 2008, 18:34:

armchair Qb's and politicians,.. a dime a dozen and all full of hot air.

Why Colombianitas? Personally... I just don't like pink areolar tissue.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

podborski says on Feb 8, 2008, 19:24:

I can only go by my personal knowledge. I have maybe 25 colombian friends. Virtually all of them have a horror story relating to FARC, murder, rape, kidnaping, etc.

Never yet heard a bad word about the paracos.

You can't believe the newspapers right sr t? So I'm just going by what colombians tell me.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Feb 8, 2008, 20:03:

"The paras also disbanded because as they saw it Colombia finally had a president willing to take the fight to the FARC."

T, above is my quote. Do you intend to have us believe that the paras would have disbanded if Gaviria was president at the time instead of Uribe? Please.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

SiV says on Feb 9, 2008, 06:35:

Pod, could be that it says more about the circles you run in. Do all of your friends have large fincas and stables, a bevy of servants, drive round in huge 4x4s. . ?

Actually, that's not fair. I know a couple of poor campesinos who were kidnapped. But the point is there: it depends on who you speak to. Rich businessmen, ranchers and landowners aren't generally going to slag the AUC off, as they are the ones who finance(d?) them (along with narcotrafficking, off course, though I never heard the phrase narco-paramilitares on the news). Ask some indigenous, afro-Colombians, campesinos with strategically-placed (for business, that is) land and I imagine you may well hear some complaints.

Or maybe not. They may well be too scared of getting chainsawed up or nailed to trees that they may not speak.

Stultórum númere infinitum est.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

robi666 says on Feb 9, 2008, 06:39:

The fact is that FARC targets are usually the people who have the means to make more noise about it.
The mother of a chainsawed campesino won't make it to Rome and the Pope.

Also, it can depend on the characteristics of the two groups and their impact on their popular image. I would say that AUC has not a strong identity as FARC. More like generic Mafia.

"I am a citizen of the most beautiful nation on earth. A nation whose laws are harsh yet simple, a nation that never cheats, which is immense and without borders, where life is lived in the present."

0 funny, 0 helpful.

podborski says on Feb 9, 2008, 08:04:

I am sure you guys are right, I spend almost all my time in Bogota, and generally my friends would be upper estrato. The stories I heard were from my spanish teachers at la javeriana for example, plus various acquaintances who would be professionals (lawyers,accountants etc).

I remain suspicious of the motives of those who always try to undermine any criticism of FARC by saying the paracos are worse.

It might even be true, but it's still meaningless. It's like I said Hitler is a bad guy and someone pops in and says yeah but we shouldn't talk about him, because Stalin was worse.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

robi666 says on Feb 9, 2008, 08:16:

Pod, sincerely, I don't see someone undermining criticism toward FARC.
It is just that awareness of FARC is so much more developed on this site. And someone tries to stimulate a reaction. Sometimes getting too far with provocation, true.
But I am sure that, an example for all, Cassini is not a FARC fan at all.

Listen... Colombia is so complicated. I do not even tell how many times I've changed my way of thinking since I got here to live. I try to read a lot and listen a lot and the more I do it the more I feel that I am missing something.
Colombia can easily be a social researcher's ultimate paradise, because of its diversity and because everything seem to happen so fast. The cause - reaction paradigm is taken to the limit.

"I am a citizen of the most beautiful nation on earth. A nation whose laws are harsh yet simple, a nation that never cheats, which is immense and without borders, where life is lived in the present."

0 funny, 0 helpful.

pedro says on Feb 9, 2008, 08:22:

I recently read an opinion poll in El Colombiano. The question was something along the lines of "do you have a favourable view of such and such an organisation". The results were as follows (reciting from memory)

Colombian armed forces - high 70s%
Fiscalia, police etc - low 70s%
Journalists - surprisingly near the top
United States - 50%
Venezuela - 25%
Paras - 3%
FARC - 1%

So there is more support for the paras than the FARC, but vanishingly little declared support for either.

However, depending on the survey technique you could argue that the actual support for both the FARC and paras is higher than what people declared to the interviewer. You could also argue that it's skewed towards urban Colombia -- I doubt they went out to some Putumayo vereda and talked to a random campesino along the donkey track.

que nota!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

robi666 says on Feb 9, 2008, 08:24:

Yes Pedro, I red the same poll on Semana some monts ago.

"I am a citizen of the most beautiful nation on earth. A nation whose laws are harsh yet simple, a nation that never cheats, which is immense and without borders, where life is lived in the present."

0 funny, 0 helpful.

pedro says on Feb 9, 2008, 08:28:

Not sure how much I trust those Semana polls. I've had phone calls at my house a few times for those surveys. I think they got the name and number off the Chamber of Commerce register of businesses. Not exactly a random sample of the population.

Even limiting it to people with telephones will give you a skewed response.

que nota!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

hongo_joe says on Feb 9, 2008, 09:05:

Robi: ."I don't see someone undermining criticism toward FARC..."

Very well put.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Feb 9, 2008, 09:56:

"It might even be true, but it's still meaningless. It's like I said Hitler is a bad guy and someone pops in and says yeah but we shouldn't talk about him, because Stalin was worse."

exactly, pod. how many times here has criticism of chavez, et al become "but Bush is worse!"? Or "yea - the FARC is bad, but look at the paras!!". Happens constantly. is always the way of an apologist- divert attention from the real issue by waving the red flag at a different bull. quickly followed by "now I don't condone this, BUT...."

gets tiresome, really.

Before you throw me out, make sure I pay my bar tab

0 funny, 0 helpful.

hongo_joe says on Feb 9, 2008, 11:47:

What I see more often is you and others calling people Farc supporters when they have repeatedly stated that they are not and that they want to see the end of Farc. You seem to see Farc supporters everywhere - while I and many others see none.

I don't understand why it is so difficult to understand that people can be opposed to both groups. They are both scourges on Colombia. Why not just support the march against paramilitarism and not worry about which is worse.

I am assuming (although from your writing is isn't entirely clear) that you do not support the paras.


And just to be sure it is clear - I AM NOT A FARC SUPPORTER

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Feb 9, 2008, 11:59:

did you read my post? you just did EXACTLY what I was commenting on.....trying to help me out,were you? ;)

It isn't that any sane person would NOT be opposed to both groups. my complaint is - why must one subject always be dragged into another? why is it soooooo friggin' difficult for certain posters here to clearly denounce FARC, w/out taking the opportunity to spend twice as much time denouncing AUC/ the paras/Uribe? To spend all one's energies denouncing Uribe, with only an obligatory "but i don't support FARC", almost as an afterthought, leaves many of us assuming, and I think rightfully so, that the poster does not see FARC as the root of the civil unrest. Absent FARC's long history of brutality, AUC would never have reason to exist, now would they? Why is it so damned difficult for the Uribe-haters to see this?

Before you throw me out, make sure I pay my bar tab

0 funny, 0 helpful.

hongo_joe says on Feb 9, 2008, 12:09:

This thread is about a march against the paramitlitaries.

Civil unrest/political violence in Colombia has a very long history. I think any attempt to educate youy would be a waste of time, and would just invite more "assumptions" on your part.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Feb 9, 2008, 12:57:

yep. you're corect. likely you'd never "educate" me sufficiently to agree with you. but we don't really need to agree, do we?

Before you throw me out, make sure I pay my bar tab

0 funny, 0 helpful.

hongo_joe says on Feb 9, 2008, 13:05:

My position is that Colombia would be much better off if both Farc and the paras were gone?

You really don't agree??

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Feb 9, 2008, 13:08:

I agree completely. no thinking person with half a brain could possibly disagree. it's equality of exposure that disheartens me.

Before you throw me out, make sure I pay my bar tab

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Feb 9, 2008, 17:51:

The issue of whether this is actually a march (which requires walking through the streets) or a concentration (merely showing up at the Plaza de Bolivar) aside...I will try to attend if circumstances permit, as I sincerely hope they will.

In any case, this march is just as valid as the other one, though one might question certain minor details. Still, one doesn't need to agree with everything, just as in the case of the other march, in order to agree with the essentials.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

hongo_joe says on Feb 15, 2008, 06:17:

A good article about the march/demonstration on March 6

www.cipcol.org/?p=539

0 funny, 0 helpful.

webmanco says on Feb 17, 2008, 03:50:

http://www.eltiempo.com/tiempoimpreso/edicionimpresa/domingoadomingo/2...



Febrero 16 de 2008

Saldo en rojo

Foto: Archivo / EL TIEMPOMás de un millón de campesinos han dejado de ser propietarios para convertirse en indigentes, jornaleros u obreros. Cálculos conservadores estiman en 4 millones las hectáreas que perdieron por culpa de la violencia y en 54.563 las que han recibido del Estado en los últimos 5 años.

Dicen que Ismael Vargas anda pidiendo limosna en Cartagena y quienes lo conocieron en los 90 no lo pueden creer: era uno de los habitantes más ricos de La Gabarra, corregimiento de Tibú, Norte de Santander.

Prestaba plata a interés, apadrinaba niños y, El Porvenir, su supermercado, abastecía a gran parte de la región.

Pero los hombres del bloque Catatumbo de las autodefensas, al mando de Salvatore Mancuso, lo obligaron a dejar sus propiedades y a huir de la zona con lo que llevaba encima.

No se sabe si Vargas aparece en el Registro Único oficial de Población Desplazada, que ya contabiliza 2'359.838 colombianos desterrados por la violencia paramilitar, guerrillera y narca. Tampoco se sabe qué pasó con sus propiedades y con las del resto de campesinos que salieron huyendo por la presión 'para'.

...A yo, déjenme queto y no me jodan má! ...

0 funny, 0 helpful.