Farc 'plans to free more hostages'

[bemildred]

Source: al Jazeera/Agencies

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc), has reportedly said it will release three more people that it is holding hostage.

A statement read on Colombian television on Saturday said that the group planned to free Gloria Polanco de Losada, Luis Eladio Perez and Orlando Beltran because of poor health.

The three captives have been held in Farc's jungle camps for more than six years.

Two other high-profile hostages, including a former aide to the captive French-Colombian politician Ingrid Betancourt, were handed over to Venezuelan representatives in January.



Read more: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/69BC7CCC-2241-4113-A233-9B06BE27947F.htm

[robcon]

1. Farc=SCUM

n/t

[Peace Patriot]

2. This is largely to the credit of Hugo Chavez, who persisted in the negotiations

that Colombia's Uribe initially invited him to conduct, and did so despite obvious efforts to sabotage the negotiation ordered by the Bush Junta, and considerable danger to himself and to his reputation.

The same weekend that the first set of hostages were to be released, 12/1/07, Donald Rumsfeld wrote this (you read that right--Donald RRumsfeld) (--and you thought he was "retired"!):

"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html

Rumsfeld recommends that we get rid of any remaining "checks and balances" in our own government (i.e., that fusty 'ol Congress, and dusty ol' State Dept.), so that the U.S. can take "swift action" in support of "friends and allies" in South America. The Bushites don't have many "friends and allies" in South America, and those they do have are fascist coup plotters and their paramilitary thugs. So he is talking about U.S. military intervention in support of fascist coups in the oil rich states of Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador and/or Argentina (big oil find there, recently). He only names Venezuela, but he means all four (and will likely start with Bolivia, in my opinion), because these countries are allies, all have leftist governments who believe that a country's resources should benefit the people who live there, and are, together, as an alliance, seriously cutting into the profits of World Bank loan sharks, Exxon-Mobile, Bechtel Corp., and other global corporate predators.

Which brings me back to Chavez and the FARC hostage negotiations. The excuses that the Bush Junta is using to lard billions and billions of (U.S. taxpayer) dollars in military aid into Colombia are the FARC guerrilla group--who control a large swatch of Colombia including where the oil reserves are (and Occidental Petroleum pipelines), and who have been fighting Colombia's hideously repressive rightwing government for more than thirty years--and the highly corrupt "war on drugs." If Chavez succeeds in getting more FARC hostages released, the ground for peace talks will be improved, and if Chavez can negotiate a peace treaty in Colombia, one excuse for these billions in military aid will be gone.

Further, the Bolivarian countries (named above) oppose the U.S. "war on drugs" as an unnecessarily militaristic solution to a problem, and as a threat to their sovereignty. Ecuador's Rafael Correa has promised to boot the U.S. military base out of Ecuador this year. When asked about this by the press, he said that he would be glad to have U.S. boots on the ground in Ecuador--when the U.S. permits Ecuador to place a military base in Miami.

Funny guy, Correa. Swift. And the point was nailed. South America (not just the Bolivarians, but also their other allies--Brazil, Uruguay, Nicaragua, and, to some extent, Chile) are sick and tired of U.S. domination and interference. The other leaders in the region have solidly backed Chavez, when the Bushites attack him, and have been appalled at the coup attempts and other covert plotting, and also at nasty little Bushite black ops to "divide and conquer" (like the recent "suitcase full of money" CIA caper that sought to sow ill will between Venezuela and Argentina).

They want peace. They want prosperity. They want good government. They want--and are achieving--democracy. They want independence and self-determination. They want to help their vast poor populations--impoverished by World Bank loans and other corporate looting. All of these are loathesome goals to Rumsfeld and co., who want to be free to loot the place again, enforced by the U.S. military, local rightwing militaries and paramilitaries, and private mercenaries (Blackwater is already active in Colombia). And a peaceful, civilized, enlightened, non-militaristic approach to the illicit drug traffic problem means that the OTHER pillar of huge U.S. military spending--the "war on drugs"--will also be gone. How to continue bilking U.S. taxpayers? How to impose fascist regimes in South America again? How to get at all that oil? These are Rumsfeld's problems.

And he very, very, very much does NOT want to see any more hostages released, with credit to Chavez, nor any more moves toward a peaceful solution to Colombia's long civil war.

You may think that FARC is "scum," as Robcon posted above. But they are "scum" with longevity, who must have considerable local support to exist as they do, in the jungle. And I suspect that they are not "scum" at all--just people who have taken a different path than most of us would choose, against ruthless fascist forces who are notorious for torturing and killing peasants, the indigenous, union organizers, political leftists, human rights workers and journalists. FARC is not peaceful. They have killed people and kidnapped people. On the other hand, Amnesty International and others have established that most of the violence in Colombia against innocent parties is committed by the Colombian security forces and closely tied paramilitary groups. People are sometimes pushed beyond endurance. Our own revolutionaries were. The Vietnamese were. The French were. The Russian underclass. The Chinese. Some of it turned out for the best. Some of it didn't. All of it was violent.

The trouble with the word "scum" is that it serves the same function as "gook" did, in the Vietnam War, or "raghead" in Iraq. It encourages hatred and revenge. It forestalls peaceful solutions.

What to do about the FARC guerrillas? Keep killing them? That hasn't worked. Defoliate them? Didn't work in Vietnam. Keep poisoning peasant farms with pesticides, and hope it drenches FARC? Bad, bad policy--and all it does is drive the peasant farmers off the land, and into urban squalor. Nuke 'em? That might make it hard for Occidental Petroleum and Chiquita?

By far the best solution is to stop calling them "scum" and negotiate with them. And when has a peace treaty ever been negotiated between two opposing forces that didn't consider each other to be "scum"? That's the situation you're trying to get out of--mutual hatred and a shooting war.

Call them "scum" all you want. What is the SOLUTION? And when did Donald Rumsfeld's solutions ever make anything better?

[Judi Lynn]

3. Colombia Says Rebels to Hand 3 More Hostages to Chávez

Source: NY Times/Reuters

Colombia Says Rebels to Hand 3 More Hostages to Chávez
Published: February 4, 2008

BOGOTÁ, Colombia (Reuters) — Colombia’s government cleared the way on Sunday for guerrillas to hand over three more hostages to President Hugo Chávez of Venezuela, even as the two neighboring countries quarreled over his role in freeing rebel captives.

The rebel group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, said this weekend that it planned to release three former Colombian lawmakers to Mr. Chávez or his envoy soon because of their poor health after six years of captivity in rebel jungle camps.

President Álvaro Uribe of Colombia and Mr. Chávez have been locked in a diplomatic dispute that threatens their $6 billion a year in cross-border trade.

“We are willing to give all the necessary facilities so our countrymen can recover their freedom,” Justice Minister Carlos Holguín told local radio. “For us, the release of the hostages is above any other consideration.”

News of a possible release stirred family hopes for other hostages, including the French-Colombian politician Ingrid Betancourt, captured in 2002, and three American contractors snatched after their aircraft crashed in the jungle in 2003.


Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/04/world/americas/04hostage.html?_r=1&ref=world&oref=slogin

[Peace Patriot]

4. Peace in Colombia! Bring our "war on drugs" tax dollars, and our war on FARC

tax dollars, and our war on poor peasant farmers, union leaders, political leftists, human rights workers and journalists tax dollars, and our Rumfeldian war to grab Andes oil and rightwing coup plotting tax dollars HOME...billions and billions of grossly misspent dollars, bring them home, and use them for universal health care here!

That's what's at issue here--our money--and our self-respect as a people, in view of our government's disgraceful behavior in the world and in South America. Bring our money home! We need it!

Chavez wants to negotiate peace in Colombia. The Bush Junta wants endless militarization and war, and Rumsfeld's got it all planned out.

"The Smart Way to Beat Tyrants Like Chávez," by Donald Rumsfeld, 12/1/07
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/30/AR2007113001800.html

But if Chavez can keep FARC talking, and releasing hostages, and can pull Uribe away from Rumsfeld's vampire talons, peace may well be possible, and Oil War II: South America may be foiled...

...and universal health care made possible, and a lot of other things, in the U.S.A.

[Judi Lynn]

6. You may find this statement from the Christian Peacemakers, rejecting participation in the anti-FARC

march scheduled for today to be unexpected, and very enlightening!

The statement reads as follows:

A FALSE DILEMMA:

To march or not to march in the February 4 protest against the FARC

We, the members of the Human Rights Workers Forum of Barrancabermeja
and the Middle Magdalena (Espacio), whom have suffered with the armed
social conflict, are deeply concerned by the winds of intolerance, the
promotion of hatred and the spurring of polarization in civil society,
that throughout history has left the victims naked and unprotected in
the face of the armed actors of the Colombian conflict.
...
Given this, in response to the call to participate in the march on
February 4, the social and human rights organizations signed below
have decided NOT TO PARTICIPATE in the march, in order to draw
attention to the false dilemma presented to the Colombian people by
the Government.

The women and men of Barrancabermeja, along with the social and
political organizations of Espacio, have rejected the methods of
terror, the war and its degraded condition which the legal and illegal
armed actors have brought about. We cry out for a peace with social
justice. To march against the FARC and the kidnapping, as the
promoters of the march propose, will not lead to the recognition and
overcoming of the conflict; that is where the false dilemma lies.

They suggest that if we march we are in favor of peace, and if we do
not we are in favor of war. This simplistic dilemma, perpetuated by
the mass media, leads to reductionism and the homogenization of
political discourse about the social and armed conflict. It
legitimizes the annihilation of social actors who define themselves
outside of this perspective. We believe that within our national
context, it is important not to fall into the trap of this false
dilemma, because to do so means closing off the path to what the
Colombian people really need: "A HUMANITARIAN AGREEMENT, NOW"
...
It is imperative that the Colombian government acknowledges the social
and armed conflict of more than forty years, which has its origin in,
among other things, deep inequalities and in political, social and
economic exclusion. The government must accept that in those causes
reside the keys for overcoming the conflict.

However, the Government insists on imposing a warrior orientation on
the State, which they call "Democratic Security". The February 4
march, rather than serving as a contribution to peace, harmony and the
unity of the country, becomes a threatening referendum, seeking an
unlimited mandate for military escapades. This march is a smoke screen
that attempts to hide the responsibility of the Colombian State,
corporate executives, cattle ranchers, politicians and others, who
have supported paramilitarism. Under the sway of para-politics,
Colombia has seen forced disappearances, displacements, threats, the
murders of opponents to the government, the hand over of Colombian
interests to the multinationals and the loss of the hard-won popular
guarantees of rights. In sum, this consolidation of inequalities has
resulted in misery, hunger, unemployment and the economic and
political dependency of our country on the North American empire.
...
Finally, we believe that if the Colombian people must march for
something today it is for a HUMANITARIAN AGREEMENT and the POLITICAL
EXIT to the CONFLICT, for the defense of the people's economic and
social rights, and for the vindication of the national sovereignty
with respect to the land and the people.

Human Rights Workers Forum of Barrancabermeja and the Middle Magdalena
(Espacio de trabajadores y trabajadoras de Derechos Humanos de
Barrancabermeja y el Magdalena Medio)
Barrancabermeja, the Middle Magdalena
February 1st, 2008

http://www.ekklesia.co.uk/node/6678

[Bacchus39]

7. and you may find the turn out in Bogota, Cali, and other cities enlightening

n/t

[Judi Lynn]

8. Links on material on the government-organized march re: FARCS....

COLOMBIA: Gov’t Throws Support Behind Anti-Guerrilla March
By Constanza Vieira

BOGOTA, Feb 4 (IPS) - Colombian ambassador to China Guillermo Vélez had hoped to be the first to lead a march against the FARC rebels called for noon Monday in Colombia, which was still Sunday in Beijing.

Vélez fired off a volley of emails to his contacts in China to invite them to the local protest against the FARC (Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, the country’s main leftwing insurgent group), which is holding a number of hostages with the aim of swapping them for imprisoned insurgents.

But Brazil beat him. Because Monday is a Carnival holiday there, the protest in that country was moved ahead to Friday, Feb. 1.

According to the Colombian Foreign Ministry, expatriate Colombians took to the streets that day in Brazil along with diplomats from Mexico, Panama, Serbia, Spain and the European Commission, and the military attachés from Chile, Ecuador, France and the United States.

More:
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=41058

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Anti-Rebel March Splits Colombia
By TOBY MUSE – 10 hours ago

BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — The idea was born less than a month ago on the social networking Web site Facebook: marches in cities across Colombia and around the world to denounce the country's main leftist rebel army.

Nearly 100,000 people in 165 cities across the world have said on the site they will participate in Monday's march under the banner, "No more kidnappings! No more lies! No more deaths! No more FARC!"

"We hope the whole country will come out to join us," said Cristina Lucena, a 24-year-old political science student from Bogota and one of the protest's six main organizers.

But instead of uniting citizens against the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, which the government accuses of holding more than 700 hostages, the mobilization has exposed deep divisions in the country over how to end the decades-long conflict that preceded the nation's cocaine wars.

For weeks, invites to the march flew through cyberspace, mainly among the typically young — and relatively wealthy — who crowd Facebook in a country where only about one in four can afford to use the Internet regularly.

Colombia's media caught wind quickly and many moved to endorse it in grand style. Street vendors made T-shirts with the march's motto and hawked them on Bogota's streets.

But as momentum grew — with rallies planned from London to New York, Paris to Tokyo — so did criticism of the march's narrow focus.

More:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jaQzRaBaqJHe32txpk0LvbtZEIWwD8UJCQI80

[Bacchus39]

9. it was a grass roots organized march, even your link says so!!!

once again, not reading your own posts.

[Judi Lynn]

10. You bet! Schools are letting the kids out to go to the march, Uribe's gov't encourages

employers to let workers have the day off to attend.

Hey, I think I'll take the day off, myself, and take a nice invigorating health walk, too. Might even get to be on right-wing tv which will be there to use it as a propaganda op, unlike the COMPLETE NEWS BLACKOUT we get on "leftist" marches.

[Bacchus39]

11. of course they are encouraging it, why wouldn't they?

nevertheless, it started as an idea INDEDPENDENT of the government. unlike marches in say Venezuela or Cuba.

hey here is an idea Judi, just cover your eyes and you won't see anything. I know you are good at that.

[Peace Patriot]

13. "...an unlimited mandate for military escapades." Yup.

"However, the Government insists on imposing a warrior orientation on
the State, which they call "Democratic Security". The February 4
march, rather than serving as a contribution to peace, harmony and the
unity of the country, becomes a threatening referendum, seeking an
unlimited mandate for military escapades."
--Human Rights Workers Forum of Barrancabermeja and the Middle Magdalena

That's what the war on FARC, and on the unarmed poor, and on the little coca leaf growers is all about--"...an unlimited mandate for military escapades"--which means unlimited war profiteering from the already bankrupt U.S. taxpayers. That's why Rumsfeld has involved himself. He is the political front man for the war profiteers like his close bud Cheney is front man for Exxon-Mobile, Occidental Petroleum, etc. Together they work this scam of militarizing social problems (illicit drug traffic, poverty) and exacerbating what would have been solvable, local problems, mainly in countries with big oil reserves, where good government must be prevented or undermined and toppled.

And now that Chavez has got FARC talking and releasing hostages, they are stunned and angry--all their schemes and dirty tricks to prevent that have failed. And they're no doubt pouring USAID/NED and covert money into these Colombian protests to, a) keep hostage releases negotiated by Chavez out of the headlines, and b) lay more ground work for Oil War II: South America.

We've seen the USAID/NED "protests" in Venezuela. They fund the tiny rich fascist elite, and "train" it to do outreach to student groups (often from Catholic universities, where the fascist prelates of Venezuela have sway), and stoke up and expand every grievance of the moneyed class, and often fund the signs, the T-shirts, the buses, the pamphlets, the ads, the PR firms, and the after-protest parties, as a destabilization tactic. The rich really don't need that kind of help, but, with it, they can make any demo look bigger. Without it, they deflate to their real numbers--about 20% of the population of Venezuela. Chavez has a 70% approval rating. Figure 10% of the remaining 30% are "decline to state" types--or non-political. That leaves the true rightwing strength--20%--but with USAID-NED and CIA help, and lots of our money, it can made to look more significant.

I'm sure something similar is happening with these Colombian protests. And I'm sure, too, that if you asked the vast poor MAJORITY whose violence they feared more, they would not say FARC's. They would say the Colombian security forces and closely associated rightwing paramilitaries who are, in fact, inflicting MOST of the violence, often on non-combatants, and often with heinous brutality such as chainsawing union leaders and throwing their body parts into mass graves. Their purpose is NOT to stop FARC. They like FARC. It's their money-train. Their purpose is to terrify the poor majority regarding political and labor organizing.

I applaud these human rights groups for seeing through the Rumsfeldian bullshit, and refusing to participate. The Colombian fascists don't want peace, any more than the Venezuela fascists do. They want brutal power over others in order to rob them. As always, I don't doubt the sincerity of SOME rightwing protesters. But they are fools to think that the organizers and funders of these demonstrations have peace as their goal. And I do doubt and question the sincerity of many of the protesters--and those who organize and fund them--and I have good reason to do so.

[Bacchus39]

15. you should organize an anti-para, anti-Uribe, and anti-Rumsfeld rally

in Colombia to counter the anti-FARC and friends rally.

[Judi Lynn]

16. Most people know the "paras" are death squads, nothing other.

Many of us are aware that Uribe has been tied to these death squads over and over and over again.

His ties to drug lord Pablo Escobar are noted in U.S. Defense Department records from 1991 which have been declassified.

As for Rumsfeld, pfffffft. He lies about everything, would do anything, and kill everyone in his road through his soldiers, of course. He's utterly worthless as a man.

[Bacchus39]

17. well, there's some more reasons for you to organize a march

go for it!!!

[Judi Lynn]

19. Yeah, the government had the teachers let the students out of school so they could go.

How many students do you think would have chosen to sit in their desks when they had the chance at freedom?

The government also has encouraged employers, as admitted in the right-wing controlled media, to let their employees attend. Likewise, how many employees are going to haunt their desks when they could also be out walking, talking to friends, breathing clean air?

There is the overriding judgement that anyone who DOESN'T attend the march must support the "enemy," and thereby must be an ENEMY OF THE STATE, and more urgently, AN ENEMY (AND TARGET) OF THE DEATH SQUADS.

[Bacchus39]

20. pure conjecture and speculation, and lies!!!

you forgot to cite Prensa Latina for that, or are YOU responsible for that lie?? you have zero evidence of that because you know nothing about Colombia. Hell, I had to teach you how to spell it.

its not like Castro's Cuba where refusal to participate is looked upon with suspicion.

however, since you seem to believe the ENORMOUS protest was simply a result of a free day, why not organize an anti-para, anti-Uribe, pro-Chavez march and see what type of response you get.

Looking forward to seeing President Obama in Colombia soon. I bet you won't see him in Cuba or Venezuela anytime soon.

sorry for you, Chavez and Castro can't be president of the US.

[Judi Lynn]

21. Yikes! Don't need more marches. We're busy! You've started gibbering.

Calm down, take a nap, and come back refreshed.

[Judi Lynn]

5. Colombian rebels vow new hostage release on eve of demos

Colombian rebels vow new hostage release on eve of demos
14 hours ago

BOGOTA (AFP) — Colombia's FARC rebels pledged Sunday, on the eve of worldwide protests against the Marxist guerrilla group, to release three hostages in poor health after seven years of captivity in the jungle.

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) offered to release the three lawmakers with the help of leftist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and a Colombian opposition senator.

"We ask President Hugo Chavez and Senator Piedad Cordoba that they personally, or through representatives, receive in Colombian territory the lawmakers Gloria Polanco, Luis Eladio Perez and Orlando Beltran," said a guerrilla statement published by Anncol, a news agency close to the rebels.

The FARC said they were releasing the three hostages, who were kidnapped in 2001, "unilaterally because of the state of their health."

For its part the government of Venezuela said Sunday that it would immediately take steps to ensure the safe and sure handover of the three hostages.

More:
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hPPTnXZ_0jiqukjNcTz6qgF4JRcA

[Judi Lynn]

12. Chavez says Colombia hostage mission to start soon

Chavez says Colombia hostage mission to start soon
Mon Feb 4, 2008 6:46pm EST

CARACAS, Feb 4 (Reuters) - Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez said on Monday his government has started preparing for an operation to rescue three hostages held by Colombian rebels, raising hopes others held in jungle camps could be released.

The Marxist FARC rebels said over the weekend they would free three Colombian politicians suffering health problems to Chavez or his delegate after the Venezuelan leader brokered the release of two hostages last month.

Colombian President Alvaro Uribe has approved the rescue mission despite a diplomatic dispute with Chavez, who describes the United States as an "empire" and accuses White House ally Uribe of plotting a U.S.-sponsored attack on Venezuela.

"We are happy to hear this announcement by the FARC and we have already started making contacts and movements," Chavez said during a televised speech without offering a time-frame for when the operation would begin.

Monday's announcement comes only weeks after a successful Venezuelan mission to pick up the two kidnapped women, who the FARC released in a rare breakthrough over hostages held as part of Latin America's oldest insurgency.

More:
http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSN04604699

[Peace Patriot]

14. Hope Rumsfeld keeps his bloody fingers out of it, and they get released! nt

[Judi Lynn]

18. What are the chances? You recall recently released (no small matter!) hostage Consuelo Gonzalez

said the FARC and the two hostages walked and walked and walked, having been given the "promise" that Uribe would give them safe passage to the spot where they could be released, while his soldiers launched bombardments at them.

At some point they knew they couldn't make it, and had to return.

THAT'S how much they can be trusted.

I think many of us suspected this would be the case, especially recalling how wildly Uribe refused to allow a safe zone for months and months prior to this agreed meeting.

Sounds as if he completely expected to kill them. If the hostages were killed, he could simply claim, as they did in the early attack on FARCs, that it was all their fault. Who's going to do anything about it? That's the way perverted power works.

By the way, you recall how much noise they all made over the FIRST hostages they killed, claiming the FARC "done it." You recall the FARC gave them the dead bodies of the hostages to examine and WE NEVER HEARD ANOTHER WORD ABOUT IT, EVER.

They had the proof to show the world how the FARC killed the hostages, and they couldn't! So they dropped the subject. Just like right-winger posters on a Democrats only message board.