About Fumigations in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta

Paquita says on May 22, 2005, 07:59:

About Fumigations in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta I justed wanted to talk about the Sierra because it is a place I really know.
The fumigations also, unfortunately.
Of course, I have compassion for all the people suffering from that horrible Drugware wherever they are.
I am also really worried about the consequences on biodiversity.
We don'have to forget that we are part of the Nature, if we destroy it, we will destroy ourselves.
If you are really interested in the Drugwar read:
www.tni.org/archives/jelsma/viciouscircle-e.htm

platano says on May 22, 2005, 09:42:

Paquita,

Thank you once again for bringing to light this atrocity (I use the word "atrocity" consciously) being committed against Los Kogui. You are illuminating a culture that has not been discussed on PBH. At least a search done for "kogi OR kogui" only turned up three hits on PBH that have even mentioned Kogi in passing (Elmo, dwmte, platano)

It is difficult for us (the perpetrators) to face what we are doing. It is easier to take the tact that we are overly-romanticizing indigenous people, or to deny indigenous people exist (insisting they are just Colombians), or to label reports about their persecution as "yellow journalism," or to claim people who raise the issues and point out USA involvement are just "USA-haters". All these tacts I have seen on PBH in the last two weeks. The intent seems to be to mitigate facing the act of genocide that is being perpetrated against indigenous people.

You are the first and bravest person to state the facts clearly and call a spade a spade: CHEMICAL AND BIOLOGICAL WARFARE is being waged against indigenous tribes in 2005 through a combined effort of USA funds, equipment, chemical and biological poisons, training, and official Colombian collaboration to carry out the deed.

At root I suspect the reason this is happening is ignorance. Not ignorance of what will happen to the indigenous peoples, rather an ignorance of the importance of the indigenous peoples to Colombia. What I perceive is a complete lack of appreciation for (or interest in) the spiritual value of indigenous culture to the future of Colombia.

Coal, oil, business, warfare, those topics are recognized on PBH as important (though perhaps secondary in importance to beer, beaches, and babes). And if the process of nation-building and waging war happens to extinguish native peoples, well.... we'll say it is unfortunate, or call it "collateral damage" and continue our march to make the earth an unsustainable habitat -- without giving a second thought to the wisdom we have extinguished in the process. The sad fact is we are either ignorant of Kogui wisdom or we deny it exists. Either way they die.

I have a large photo of a Mamo on my living room wall. Every day I am inspired by the depth of reflection, the spiritual wisdom, and the dignity of Being represented by Los Kogui.

Plátano, el banano verde
Oxigeno Verde ¡Libertad por Ingrid y los demás!

plátano

juancegomez says on May 22, 2005, 11:39:

A complex subject oversimplified once again... I completely reject fumigations, both as a general policy and as a applied to natural parks (however, one must then propose and defend an alternative that works, not just stay in the criticizing fase; "quejarse es fácil, lo difícil es contribuir a la solución")...

...But I also completely regret the unsupported and totally partisan statement that an intentionally planned genocide is taking place here.

It is stupid to pretend that the indigenous are not being affected, of course they are, but many, many unmentioned factors are also involved in the situation.

It's not as simple as stating that "the evil U.S. and Colombian governments are fumigating all of the indigenous because they want to kill all of them with chemical agents and erradicate their culture...they must be defended from these evil acts!" and saying nothing else.

I respect indigenous cultures, I respect indigenous autonomy, I really do, and I criticize several activities that are affecting them negatively, but I openly reject the implication that the indigenous have suddenly become supernatural shamanistics angels totally incapable of committing mistakes and bad acts, perpetually in a state of innocence and grace, mere victims of satanic and evil powers around them.

Yes, I reject all of that, just as I reject the implication that the U.S. and Colombian governments are evil killers that only want to destroy the indigenous through chemical warfare and laugh while they are doing it.

For the sake of reason, please wake up.

One can reject what's going on and criticize all those policies from a more rational perspective, without being so one-sided and unilateral. If a cause is worth defending, then try to do so in a way that people will take the cause seriously!

The completely romantic image of a struggle between pure "good and evil", while well-intended in as much as it tries to defend an indigenous culture that *truly* deserves attention, is not realistic at all.

Good and evil exist in this world, yes, but with many degrees of gray between both extremes, and the indigenous cannot escape such a situation, they are not immune.

When I (and, I imagine, the others as well) say that indigenous are just like other Colombians, I am not saying that they don't have a right to establish their own identity, or to protest fumigations; that's a complete misinterpretation and distortion of what I meant, as I'm just arguing that they are just as human and just as fallible as the rest of the people that live in this piece of land known as Colombia.

They do exist, they do have their own customs, their own cultural inheritance, which deserves to be defended in a rational and more realistic manner, but they are not benevolent aliens that were suddenly transplanted here from the middle of nowhere, without any links to the rest of the country and completely impervious to its effects and consequences (except in a passive manner).

Paquita says on May 22, 2005, 12:55:

About fumigations in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta First, I never said that Kogis are angels, it would be absolutly stupid.
If the Dyncorp's planes have sophisticated instruments to localise the coca crops as they say, how is it possible that they could not detect a Kogi village and his inhabitants? They are flying too high but not that high.
Yes, we can criticize because we eradicated by hand all the coca crops in La Luna and around not to face those fumigations. The farmers around helped us.
As I wrote, La Luna is an "Indeginous Reserve", a protected aera.
Why did they destroy that wonderful place?
We are a very small NGO and I think we made a great job.
And you, what have you done????

juancegomez says on May 22, 2005, 15:37:

Paquita First off, try to realize that it was an analogy and also a metaphor, intending to highlight the logical inconsistencies in some of the implications that can be derived from your text and platano's. I wasn't quoting you or anyone else directly.

Second, even sophisticated instruments have not prevented the U.S. from bombing weddings in Iraq, most likely unintentionally as far as is known, so why should you expect better from Dyncorp et al.? Even technology isn't perfect, and you have to factor in not just height but also environmental factors, vegetation, presence of clouds/mist, etc. And of course, the fact that these companies contracted by the U.S./Colombia are overly focused on eradicating coca, first and foremost, making the rest of the concerns secondary, because they were not hired to do other things. That's not my point of view, that's theirs.

Third, I am not denying anyone the right to criticize. It's great to know that such a manual eradication project was successful, but then one logical conclusion is that such efforts should be publicized and defended just as much as fumigations are protested. One sees too much emphasis on the protest itself, valid as it is, and rather less than desired on alternative means and projects.

A vigorous protest should be accompanied by a vigorous presentation of an alternative proposal, or else many people will only focus on the extravagant language that they detect in the protest, and probably they'll not take the rest of the situation seriously enough. That's why environmental groups, while recognized as well meaning and usually applauded for their intentions, are usually ignored by the vast majority of the population in the world in every country.

Fourth, I am not criticizing your work per se, as it is good in itself and totally commendable. My complaint, if you want to call it that, is not against those good activities and good intentions, but rather against the form in which they are expressed and communicated.

Fifth, regretfully, I have done nothing of the sort because I am not in a real life position to do so, being too busy with university studies and practices, or else I'll be totally incapable of working and sustaining myself once I graduate. Hence the most that I can do right now is to talk to people both online and offline and hope to sway their opinions, and maybe eventually vote for a candidate that makes a serious alternative proposal.

That is not much, admittedly, but that's all I can do at the moment. If I ever have the opportunity to do something else, I'll certainly do so. Not everyone can be a hero or an activist, or else society would fall apart.

Mr. Hollywood says on May 22, 2005, 15:54:

A few questions and observations Paquita, I too, think the work done by your NGO sounds really interesting and commendable. I also oppose the use of aerial spraying against coca as ineffiecent, wasteful and misdirected, so please take the following criticism of your post in that context.

I'm going to ask a few questions, in no particular order: When the plane sprayed on July 17, 2004, did your NGO or the Kogi file a complaint with the Colombian government? If so, would you mind posting it or pointing to it somewhere online? What was the government response and were damages paid?

I know this sounds weird and possibly paranoid, but how do you know the plane was from Dyncorp? If I were a narco group hoping to damage the political capital of the (already unpopular) spraying program, I can think of no better way than cropdusting an indigenous village knowing the spray program would be blamed. I'm sure there are plenty of other spray planes in Colombia, given all the agriculture.

If the plane was from Dyncorp (as in you positively identified it by tail/wing numbers), how do you know they did it on purpose? You make allegations of "genocide" and comparisons to the holocaust. So you're clearly saying someone MEANT to harm these people and that it's not just an accidental oversight. Just as an aside, I've never seen a single bit of rhetoric that was improved by glib comparisons to genocide, Nazism, or the holocaust.

What's up with all this "Agent Green" stuff? It's well documented that the Colombian aerial spraying program uses glysophate, AKA round up. The US actually encouraged the Colombian government to use strongers stuff and the Uribe Adminstration said no way. Also, your description of the damages done doesn't seem consistent with glysophate which certainly doesn't kill large trees especially after a single fly by.

platano says on May 22, 2005, 19:10:

The Holocaust has not stopped, that is the problem... The Holocaust against the indigenous peoples is continuing today. That is the point. I can understand how governments will deny it is happening, but scholars have estimated the holocaust of indigenous peoples to be from 15 to 20 million and it continues... consider this quote from Dr. David E. Stannard, author of the book, American Holocaust: The Conquest of the New World:

"Moreover, the important question for the future in this case is not “can it happen again?� Rather, it is “can it be stopped?� For the genocide in the Americas, and in other places where the world’s indigenous peoples survive, has never really ceased. As recently as 1986, the Commission on Human Rights of the Organization of American States observed that 40,000 people had simply “disappeared� in Guatemala during the preceding fifteen years. Another 100,000 had been openly murdered. That is the equivalent, in the United States, of more than 4,000,000 people slaughtered or removed under official government decree--a figure that is almost six times the number of American battle deaths in the Civil War, World War One, World War Two, the Korean War, and the Vietnam War combined."

The comparison is not glib; it is all too accurate. It continues today in Colombia with so many tribes in via of extinction through forced displacement, bombardment, mass arrests, and "accidents". I get the impression Paquita would be questioned no matter what: even if there were sworn depositions of purposeful intent to eliminate the indigenous population. How do we know the depositions are not faked? Were the statements made voluntarily? Was the sample representative? What methodology was used? What about the placement of that preposition in line 54, could it be interpreted differently? More and more questions would be raised. Patience and reason would continue to be counseled. And in the meantime people will continue to be murdered. Meanwhile, the deaths continue to accumulate, 15 million+ dead and counting. The Holocaust continues.

plátano

Mr. Hollywood says on May 22, 2005, 19:49:

You may not think so, but it's glib First of all, you can't compare the situation in Colombia to Guatemala. That's a totally false historical analogy. The guatemalan army indiscriminately killed indigenous because the guerilla movement there was primarily indigenous. So the scumbags in the Guatemalan army just thought they'd eliminate them all... That's not the case at all in Colombia. The FARC, ELN and AUC are primarily latino in makeup.

Also, back to my larger point about comparing things to the Holocaust, remember that the Holocaust was a overt public policy on the part of the 3rd reich. It wasn't a subtext or a secret, racial superiority (and inferiority of others) was the foundation of Hitler's politics and the big selling point to the Germans.

While there there is a tragic loss of indigenous culture in the world, as well as some really nasty cases of aggression against them (often by speculating oil companies or ranchers looking to slash and burn in the Amazon), I can't think of a single country where elimination of native peoples is a broadly held public position.

platano says on May 22, 2005, 22:19:

OK, the words genocide and holocaust are not applicable.... but curiously the net effect is the decimation of and resulting extinction of indigenous peoples. A few indigenous people might die (we don't know how many), but let's preserve the words and not dilute their meanings.

Genocide Convention 1948

The definitional article included in the 1948 convention stipulates:

Article II

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

(a) Killing members of the group;

(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;

(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;

(d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;

(e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

plátano

Anggrek Hitam says on May 22, 2005, 22:41:

Its really time to kick the USA out.
No more stupid ideas from there. The USA has NO idea whats going on or how to do it better.
They destroy the entire nature.
I prefer a whole mountain of Coca plants instead of destroying plants and endangering animals' and people's health.
I know, as long as it is the farmers and Indigenas who become sick and not US Americans.
I can only repeat: USA clean your own house before you start cleaning other peoples houses. Combating addiction starts at home.

Paquita says on May 22, 2005, 23:10:

About fumigations in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta If you look to my photogallery, you will see the difference between La Luna before and after the fumigations.
In the movie, the images are much more spectacular. If I say I couldn't believe it, it's true.
There is an aerial fumigation base near the airport of Santa Marta, the planes are really easy to recognize.
If you don't have enough time to read the pdf version of the article "Vicious Circle" look at the pictures and you'll understand.
www.tni.org/archives/jelsma/viciouscircle-e.htm
In the US, when they had a few cases of Anthrax, it was called a biologic attack done by terrorists...
If Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, WWF, CIP, UNESCO, Red Cross, etc... are complaining, it's because this problem is really important. You should read their articles and letters on Internet.

Anggrek Hitam says on May 22, 2005, 23:26:

Its sad, if anyone says something against the USA's bullying tactics then its unfounded.
Actually the USA should respect the Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, WWF, CIP, UNESCO, Red Cross, etc.. findings comments and demands.
If Human rights watch criticises China then The USA is the first to agree and tries to enforce their demands.
If Human rights watch critices the USA, then it is none of their business.

I found that in this forum many are too much USA minded, USA always the good knight.
These people lie to themselves. Too much bad is coming out of the USA to be a USA supporter.
At the end its all self interest. The USA does not care about the others. The USA only cares about itself its economy and its ideology.
The attack on Colombias nature MUST be stopped and if it means breaking ties with the USA.
I prefer having the FARC and ELN roaming Colombia than having the USA destroying Colombias nature.

Lionheart says on May 23, 2005, 01:46:

Anggrek Hitam I am not deleting this post, because it contains your opinion in a way PBH can accept. I actually agree with your final statement:

"I prefer having the FARC and ELN roaming Colombia than having the USA destroying Colombias nature."

No matter what we humans do, we have no right to destroy nature for egoistic needs of humanity.

BUT, Anggrek Hitam, please stick to the rules of this forum and remember this forum is about Colombia and Colombians. You can rant and rave about the USA in many other forums.

juancegomez says on May 23, 2005, 01:49:

"If Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, WWF, CIP, UNESCO, Red Cross, etc... are complaining, it's because this problem is really important. You should read their articles and letters on Internet."

Of course the problem of the harm done to the environment is really important, but, after a quick look, most of those websites try to refer to the problem in less fundamentalist terms.

So they tend to agree with my position (in general): be critical, if and when necessary, even accuse the two governments of neglect and indifference, but don't go overboard and start screaming "genocide" and "biochemical warfare" all the time, using other "colorful" words, and instead try to support or promote alternative solutions in a more or less reasonable manner.

Is that unfair? I don't think so. Does that ignore that the problem exists? Not at all. Does it change the terms employed in the discussion? Yes, definitely. But in order to make them more effective and more reasonable.

Look: You will not stop fumigations by extremist protests that focus on only the "protest" side of the equation, but actually by doing serious and realistic persuation in the U.S Congress (or the Colombian Congress, though it's relatively secondary to the issue itself, as much as one wouldn't like that to be the case) with real scientific data, hopefully presented in the least partisan manner as possible.

"The attack on Colombias nature MUST be stopped and if it means breaking ties with the USA.
I prefer having the FARC and ELN roaming Colombia than having the USA destroying Colombias nature."

Curiously, I don't see you or the other people who are "greenies" (shorthand for environmentalists) defend Colombia's nature from a lot of other grave attacks:

a)oil spills caused by guerrilla attacks

b)slash and burn agriculture practiced by coca growers

c)illegal logging of the standard kind

d)improper storage of toxic materials not related to fumigations

etc.

There are lots of other factors that inflict just as much damage to the environment, if not more, and they are completely underepresented and undereported, because "the evil fumigations" always occupies the front page. As if they were even the only problems present....

And in any case, IMHO fumigations could be stopped AND replaced with something more useful without necessarily implying a massive FARC/ELN/AUC buildup at all. That's a false dilemma.

Mr. Hollywood says on May 23, 2005, 06:06:

One more thing I'm saying this as a friend, so it's worth thinking about. If your goal is to actually make a change and to protect these fantastic indigenous cultures, then you should really lay off the genocide comparisons and the overly-dramatic accusations (ie. equating what happened at La Luna to someone deliberately MURDERING people with letters full of anthrax) and stick to the factual.

You're never going to convice the Colombian government and/or the US Congress to stop the sprayings with emotional arguments, especially emotional arguments based on factually inaccurate assumptions.

Stick to the facts. Attack the program based on its ineffectiveness, it's extreme cost, and the fact that it alienates the very same rural people that the Colombian Government and US need to win over if they're to defeat the illegal groups.

Anggrek Hitam says on May 23, 2005, 07:32:

I dont think its so much a genocide comparison but rather the:
"who cares, Its not our country, so we dont give a s|-|!t" attitude the US has against Colombia and especially Colombia's nature.
BTW: I am against all kinds of hooliganism against nature.
For the Coca plants, there is an environmental friendy way to plant these.
Next year when I am back in Colombia then I will show the people how to do that.

Paquita says on May 23, 2005, 11:26:

JUANCEGOMEZ Agent Green is a mixture of Round Up Ultra, POEA, Cosmo Flux 411F and fusarium oxysporum EN-4.
I’ve asked to a Dr in Molecular Biology if I could use the words chemical and biological, the answer was yes. Even Dr David Sands agrees that we can name it a biological weapon…
I like Colombia very much, I was traveling there since 1975. Of course I am aware off the different problems on environment but not enough to write about them.
As I said, we are a very small NGO, our goal is to help the Kogis, they are, among many others, suffering a lot from the consequences of the fumigations.
We can’t face everything. I know that I am not going to stop the sprayings but maybe some people are going to open their eyes.
The Government of the Netherlands proposed a good program for crop substitution and social development, they might give up.
We did eradication by hand, the result is that La Luna was illegally fumigated and devastated.
Do you really think that all the people fighting against fumigations are just “GREENIES�?
This is a stupid assumption.

juancegomez says on May 23, 2005, 11:45:

"I’ve asked to a Dr in Molecular Biology if I could use the words chemical and biological, the answer was yes. Even Dr David Sands agrees that we can name it a biological weapon…"

Then it's technically correct. The problem, however, is that to the standard layman and politician, naming such components as a "biological weapon" is actually a sign of radicalism with a clear political intention, not perceived as the result of scientific seriousness, and hence the term produces a negative impact.

"As I said, we are a very small NGO, our goal is to help the Kogis, they are, among many others, suffering a lot from the consequences of the fumigations."

And in general I agree with your intentions and your actions, and even with most of your criticism. I just have a big problem with the vocabulary employed, with makes your case lose seriousness because it makes others believe that "oh, it's those tree huggers again with their usual exaggerated slogans...".

"We can’t face everything. I know that I am not going to stop the sprayings but maybe some people are going to open their eyes."

And of course, I recognize that, all humans have limitations.

Hopefully, however, the people that open their eyes do so in a manner that is not counterproductive to the purpose, which *is* to eventually reduce and stop fumigations.

"The Government of the Netherlands proposed a good program for crop substitution and social development, they might give up."

Yeah...but if they give up it would potentially make the situation worse...that's a high risk that might end up being counterproductive for all involved. Still, I do hope that such a statement may cause the government to reconsider, if it's communicated in the proper manner...but I'm not placing any bets.

"We did eradication by hand, the result is that La Luna was illegally fumigated and devastated."

Hence, by far, there's all the more reason to publicize the fact that there was a manual eradication process and to defend it even against illegal fumigation.

Notice that I'm not saying that only *you* and your NGO should do this by yourselves, of course. In fact, if you want to win more approval and help for your cause from mainstream individuals, toning down some of the language (while mainting the rest of the criticism intact) will actually be a positive thing, don't you think?

"Do you really think that all the people fighting against fumigations are just “GREENIES�?"

Again, I am not using the word as a form of insult or ridicule (tree hugger would be more insulting, I'd think), but rather as a relatively harmless shorthand alternative that saves typing space.

Do you know another shorthand term that's less bothersome for you? "Naturalists"?

Tinto (Moderator) says on May 23, 2005, 12:07:

labels, schmabels Cute little lady bugs are also "biological weapons" when they are used in organic agriculture rather than chemical pesticides. ;-)

Mr. Hollywood says on May 23, 2005, 13:11:

Ahem ""We did eradication by hand, the result is that La Luna was illegally fumigated and devastated."

No, you did eradication by hand and DESPITE THAT, La Luna was illegal fumigated. Your hand eradication didn't CAUSE IT.

You never answered the question if the Kogis or your NGO filed a complaint against the sprayers. I know for a fact that the government pays significant damages if a person can show that they were wrongfully sprayed. I hope, if the facts are as you represent them, that the Kogis received some sort of compensation.

Anggrek Hitam says on May 23, 2005, 20:43:

Yea do that, let them first spray, and later file a complaint when your health deteriorates from the chemicals and your children are crippled.

Afetr spraying its too late.
The spraying has to be stopped BEFORE it begins.

Thats everyones tactics. First cause the damage and until the international courts/community start running everything is too late.
It was like that during the Vietnam war where the USA lied about the reasons and it is so in Sudan where the Government buys time so that the Janjaweed can chase out the farmers. Later: whats done is done.
The dead cant care any more and those rogue governments like the USA and Sudan and....got what they want.

Paquita says on May 24, 2005, 00:49:

Mr HOLLYWOOD Thank you for correcting my English. You are right, but I hope that everybody understood.
I did not answer your question because what we do internal in our NGO is confidential.
Very few get compensations but we can still dream.

Mr. Hollywood says on May 24, 2005, 07:00:

Mea culpa Paquita, I didn't mean to be a grammar bitch. I honestly thought that was how you meant your sentence. Much of your writing about this incident seems to take the POV "we did something good and then, as part of a malicious campaign, the government did something horrible to us." So I assumed you were implying cause and effect. My mistake.

I'd actually love to read more about the work your NGO did with the Kogi. It sounds like a really neat project. I've been to that area and agree that it's one of the most amazing spots on earth. What a tragedy that it's subject to so much trouble.

Paquita says on May 24, 2005, 09:21:

Mr HOLLYWOOD My English is not that good, I tought it was nice to correct me. Don't apologize, please do it again.
Here is an extract of a report by UNITED NATIONS.
I couldn't send the whole report, it has more than 20 pages.

UNITED NATIONS
Economic and Social Council
Distr. GENERAL E/CN.4/2005/88/Add.2 10 November 2004

COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Sixty-first session Item 15 of the provisional agenda

INDIGENOUS ISSUES
Human rights and indigenous issues
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, Mr. Rodolfo Stavenhagen Addendum MISSION TO COLOMBIA*

Page 10

On the western slopes of the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, an area visited by the Special Rapporteur, the Kankuamo people (3,000 families, 13,000 people and 12 communities), who live inside the “black line� which marks the traditional boundary of their territory, are now in the process of reclaiming their indigenous identity. Their lands have been recognized, but no reserve has yet been established. Guerrilla groups started arriving in the 1980s and AUC set up a base there in the 1990s, with the result that the number of kidnappings and murders escalated to a level far above the rural and regional average, particularly from 1998 onwards. It was then that the massacres of indigenous people, the mass displacements, the blockades and the forced confinement of communities to their villages began. More than 300 families are reportedly still displaced as a result of attacks and threats of various kinds. The accounts given to the Special Rapporteur testified to the continued ethnic cleansing, genocide and ethnocide of the Kankuamo people despite the protective and precautionary measures requested by the Ombudsman and the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and several urgent appeals by a number of special mechanisms of the Commission on Human Rights.

Page 14

Indigenous organizations described to the Special Rapporteur the adverse effects of indiscriminate spraying, including environmental damage to the topsoil, fauna, flora and water, the destruction of subsistence crops and direct damage to human health, including birth defects. The Special Rapporteur was also told that there are technical and scientific studies to substantiate these assertions. The indigenous peoples see the aerial spraying of coca plantations as yet another violation of their human rights and, save for a few occasions when they have given their consent, actively oppose the practice; this position again brands them as guerrilla sympathizers, as happened after the rights marches organized by certain indigenous communities to protest against the spraying. The Office of the Ombudsman has received 318 complaints concerning spraying operations in three municipalities in Putumayo in July 2002 and their effect on 6,070 families and 5,034 hectares of land.

Hunter says on May 25, 2005, 17:21:

One thing which seems to conflict with many news articles that say the pesticides don't work very well, doesn't seem to be true to me, from what happened.

Hunter

davidfounds says on Jun 1, 2005, 14:10:

composition of Agent Green I have been doing a little research on the anti drug spraying and I want to clarity something. From everything I find online the only information I can find about agent green (fusarium oxysporum EN-4) is that the certian people in the us gov wanted to use it. I could not find any information about it actually being used in Colombia. I found tons of info about the spraying with Glyphosate (roundup) mixed with some Cosmo Flux 411F (surfactant). If someone knows of fusarium oxysporum actually being sprayed I would be interested in where you found your information. I also found no information about PEOA (which is another surfactant) being sprayed. Someone higer up in this thread refered to agent green as an mixture of (fusarium oxysporum EN-4, Glyphosate, Cosmo Flux 411F and PEOA) I couldent varify this in any way.
To clarify some symantics agent green aprently refers to (fusarium oxysporum EN-4) which is a human modified fungus. What is actually being used in Colombia presently is a mixture of water, Glyphosate (roundup), and Cosmo Flux 411F (a surfactant used to break the surface tension of the water so the glyphosate can maxamize plant damage (this is laundry detergent works to remove dirt on your clothing)). Anyway, I am fully against the spraying. I just wanted to see if anyone had some input on this. Dave

Anggrek Hitam says on Jun 2, 2005, 05:03:

What kind of chemical is being used is purely political. Noone really cares about nature as long as it can be politically justified.
Some years back they wanted to use that agent green already.
Luckily that could be stopped.
Just imagine if a fungus natural to Hawaii would be introduced in Colombia? What if it starts to attack also other types of plants like coffee.
To introduce willingly an alien organism into a new environment is reckless endangerment of the ecological system there.

Paquita says on Jun 3, 2005, 06:55:

What kind of chemical...Davidfounds If you are really interested in Agent Green have a look at the pdf. version of:
www.tni.org/archives/jelsma/viciouscircle-e.htm
There are a lot of pages but it is interesting.
Also, Biological Weapons in the Drug War:
www.sunshine-project.org
Fusarium Oxysporum is biological.

rjstuff says on Jun 3, 2005, 20:27:

Do others outside of Colombia know about this? I live in the states and most news is garbage here (in the states) - I had never heard of this spraying and the damage to the Kogi Indians. Most Americans are extremely ill-informed about world events and how others see us, unless we travel or somehow come in contact with others. I am ignorant - I had never known of the Kogi Indians (I am not very knowledgeable just like millions of other Americans.) I find this both fascinating and extremely alarming but it fits the pattern of the current and many previous US administrations to cause harm (knowingly or unknowingly) and to value others (specially non-whites) as less than humans. I wonder how these events can be brought to the notice of others in the world, who may be able to help the Kogis. I am more concerned about their welfare than any political regime or their supporters or detractors. I wish you the best and will try and follow this post when I can.
What ... and how the Kogis are dealing with this catastrophe? What can we do to help their cause?

Anggrek Hitam says on Jun 4, 2005, 20:43:

rjstuff, what you say is true, in the USA new are often filtered and manipulated. Even USA's human rights despising actions at Guantanamo Bay only come to light in the USA as soon as someone makes noise.
If you want radio news or TV news, then better look for BBC, they at least try to be less bias and dont hide so much.
Or, well, the internet.

BTW Kogi is spelled KOGUI.

Paquita says on Jun 5, 2005, 11:08:

Do others outside of Colombia Very few people know the truth about what‘s going on in Colombia.
Between 1999 and 2004, 600.000 hectares where fumigated (more than half size of the state of Rhode Island), 8.500 hectares where eradicated.
In 2004 Dyncorp fumigate more than ever for no result.
The obstinacy of US Government is terrific for Indigenous people and for the biodiversity of Colombia.
All the Indians in the Sierra have the same problems: killings, kidnappings, fumigations, illness and displacement.
The Sierra North’s slope is invaded by very active AUC (paramilitaries), no ceasefire.
The Caribbean coast is a strategic place to grow coca and ship it.
On the Southern slope of the mountain, there are the FARC. From above, the Indians are fumigated.
They are shut up in a terrible trap.
A part of he Kogis escaped from the Spanish invasion, this time it is far more dangerous.
The Kogis never wanted to enter into the money system, they can’t just go and buy food.
Their territory is shrinking, when their crops are dead or contaminated, they are obliged to move to other lands where there is not enough to eat for everybody.
They don’t understand why we are acting like barbarians.
They are lost.
If you want to know more about this useless so-called drugwar, make a Google search: ciponline.org “Plan Colombia and Beyond�. You’ll learn a lot.
To help them, a simple way, forward this story as much as you can.
Thank you.

juancegomez says on Jun 5, 2005, 21:23:

Between 1999 and 2004, 600.000 hectares where fumigated (more than half size of the state of Rhode Island), 8.500 hectares where eradicated.

Actually, even the "Plan Colombia and Beyond" blog, or more appropiately the CIP (Center for International Policy) Colombia Program admits that it's a bit more complicated than that, by the mere fact that it publishes a yearly table with the complete numbers.

Yes, that's technically correct, but more hectares than that were eradicated each year because cultivation has fluctuated up and down, it's not static.

Of cours, in general and from what I can see, CIP agrees with the sense of your criticism, though perhaps your style might be questioned.

In any case, those interested should read this more carefully:

http://www.ciponline.org/colombia/blog/archives/000082.htm

http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/news/press05/032505.html

"The Sierra North’s slope is invaded by very active AUC (paramilitaries), no ceasefire."

As you later mentioned, there are also guerrillas in nearby locations and they have also invaded surrounding areas, and while it's evident that the AUC is not respecting the ceasefire strictly at all and that's definitely something to be taken lightly, there has been a measurable reduction of fire in practice.

"A part of he Kogis escaped from the Spanish invasion, this time it is far more dangerous."

I'd say that's a big exaggeration...of course they are in danger, but to make such a comparison is actually too farfetched. Apples to oranges. The danger will not disappear by making a more realistic assessment of its nature, but your cause will be much more understandable and defendable.

"To help them, a simple way, forward this story as much as you can.
Thank you."

I'd suggest that, while that should definitely be done, try to do so with more documentation and trying to read more about the entire situation, from more than one source or one point of view.
---------------------------

I still think the Colombian government ought to scale back the aerial eradication program greatly and just pay people (including the indigenous) for their manual eradication efforts. It's strange that the presidents of Bolivia and Peru - even with their occasional ousters and single digit popularity ratings - seem to have more backbone than their Colombian counterparts.

A)They aren't as vulnerable to U.S. lobbies and pressure because they aren't fighting a war, and hence can afford to be more independent. Basically, we are obliged to do most of what the U.S. wants us to do (within the limits of legislation and judicial veridicts), drug-wise.

B)The indigenous in those countries are much more prevalent within the population as separate social and demographic groups (here most are mestizo, white or mulatto, in that order), and thus have a much bigger share of the coca/drug plantations under their control. Thus there's an extended cultural tradition around the use of traditional drugs, which only exists in Colombia in very limited locations (traditional coca use is not nearly as withspread here, extremely far from it).

Under such a scenario, a nationwide manual eradication effort here, while certainly preferrable IMHO and what I myself continue to support as an alternative, would have little to do with the significantly indigenous background that we find in peaceful (though politically unstable) Bolivia and Peru (something which makes manual eradication much easier to do because it would be done by a coherent social and ethnic group instead of by displaced and heterogenous farmers of all sort of colors). Instead, it would continue to be part of the overall conflict and its own logic.

Paquita says on Jun 6, 2005, 08:40:

ANSWERS TO JUANCEGOMEZ LAST COMMENT Impossible to compare what is written on ciponline’website and the whitehousedrugpolicy’s website.

For example, on this last one you can read that the US Government gave assistance to 2.000.000 displaced people… Can you believe that?
This site is just the American Government point of vue.

RESULT n°6 :Provide humanitarian assistance to those segments of the population which have been victimized by violence, with special emphasis on the displaced population and the most vulnerable groups.
•
Over 2,000,000 internally displaced persons (IDPs) have been assisted; the number of IDPs requesting assistance has dropped in the past year.
The U.S.-Colombia Initiative-ONDCP FACT SHEET

As I told you a few times, I am talking about the situation in the Sierra. There are more and more killings and kidnappings of Indigenous people and others. Seven Koguis where kidnapped last week, among them, an important leader Pedro Zarabata Pinto. I receive some news from the Sierra at least twice a week.

It is far more dangerous because Spaniards didn’t send gas from the sky, they didn’t contaminate the soils and the waters and they didn’t destroy the biodiversity .

If you read my previous comments, you will discover that I gave already 9 different sources. If you need more:

-Latin American Working Group-Washington
-UNITED NATIONS
Economic and Social Council
Distr. GENERAL E/CN.4/2005/88/Add.2 10 November 2004
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS Sixty-first session Item 15 of the provisional agenda
INDIGENOUS ISSUES
Human rights and indigenous issues
Report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights and fundamental freedoms of indigenous people, Mr. Rodolfo Stavenhagen Addendum MISSION TO COLOMBIA*
(24 pages).

If you don’t trust the most importants International ONG, I GIVE UP.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
• POEA (surfactante) que produce daño gastrointestinal, alteraciones del Sistema Nervioso Central (SNC), problemas respiratorios, destrucción de los glóbulos rojos, daños al hígado y riñones, corrosivo de ojos y fuertemente irritante de piel. Además es cancerígeno y puede aumentar entre 7 y 22 veces la toxicidad oral aguda del Roundup en humanos respecto a la toxicidad del glifosato en ratas.

• Cosmo Flux 411F (surfactante), sin que se hayan hecho estudios sobre sus posibles efectos, ha sido aprobado su uso en Colombia. No forma parte de la formulación comercial, pero se le añade para aumentar el nivel de acción del herbicida. Se ha demostrado que aumenta en 4 veces el efecto del Roundup al incrementar el poder de penetración del glifosate.
ACCION ECOLOGICA-ECUADOR (2001)

You can use the two spellings, KOGIS or KOGUIS.

juancegomez says on Jun 6, 2005, 09:59:

Impossible to compare what is written on ciponline’website and the whitehousedrugpolicy’s website.

Not necessarily, because that's precisely the source of CIP's drug data. That's where I got the link from.

For example, on this last one you can read that the US Government gave assistance to 2.000.000 displaced people… Can you believe that?
This site is just the American Government point of vue.

Perhaps not directly, however, it could technically be true that aid was provided to the "Red de Solidaridad" and other instutions that do give some help to a fairly large number of displaced people (insufficient, but better than absolutely nothing), amounting to 2 million people over the years.

It is far more dangerous because Spaniards didn’t send gas from the sky, they didn’t contaminate the soils and the waters and they didn’t destroy the biodiversity ."

Point one is fair enough, but it's ridiculous to suggest that the Spaniards didn't contaminate/damage soils nor destroyed/damaged the biodiversity at all.

Are you sure? Have you really read about the environmental and ecological impact of the conquest and colonization of the Americas in any detail? I invite you to do some researching about the matter, if you wish to do so.

"If you read my previous comments, you will discover that I gave already 9 different sources. If you need more"

Of course. But it seems that several of them are either sharing the same point of view, or are just supporting different parts of your data but not necessarily being taken as a whole. Hence it's a limited sample, not just quantitatively but qualitatively.

In other words, there's no real possibility for deep analysis and information contrasting if you don't try to gain access to a wider pool of knowledge and positions about the matter, not just those that happen to agree with all/part of what you've said.

I definitely consider the information that you are posting to be useful and of necessary reading, but it's not enough.

If it were just a matter of numbers, I could simply quote 10 or 20 sources that are all pro-US, or even 10 or 20 that are all anti-US, but that's not the point.

"If you don’t trust the most importants International ONG, I GIVE UP."

It's not a matter of trust nor of appealing to authority (which is a fallacy, either way).

It's a matter of methodology.

Lionheart says on Jun 8, 2005, 00:00:

environmental and ecological impacts I dimly recall reading about what damage done was larger by colonisation - the brute force or the long-term effects - not just in the Americas, but everywhere. The summary showed that far more damage resulted from illnesses and contamination by the invaders than the actual killings, aside from complete genocide. Many illnesses brought from Europe or other nations of power were unknown to the indegenous and had no natural remedies. Complete tribes/peoples were wiped out by illnesses. Other biological catastrophies resulted from animals, insects and plants with no natural enemies in the new worlds. I remember big problems in Australia for example.

Oh, and the indegenous did their share themselves, like on the Easter Islands. After using up their natural resources they had to resort to brutal warfare resulting in just a few leftover helpless descendents. To me it is a human trait, no exceptions, we come, we see, we destroy.

Paquita says on Jun 8, 2005, 13:56:

environmental and ecological impacts Of course Lionheart you are right about colonisation, I was just talking about the situation today in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta.
Kogis, Arhuacos, Arsarios and Kankuamos never had poison falling on their heads, they have no more place to escape, if they intensify those fumigations the whole Sierra will be completely destroyed.

Lionheart says on Jun 9, 2005, 00:43:

you are correct Paquita but like history shows us, it repeats itself, over and over again. I bow to you for your efforts, we can only pray the vicious cycle of power can be broken. People in power have never really cared about the people with no power, as we clearly see again. What is also depressing is the debate what is being dropped on their heads. It might just as well be confetti saying drugs are evil. As long as the cause for the need of drugs isn't eradicated others will be eradicated as the next best excuse.

Tinto (Moderator) says on Jun 9, 2005, 06:42:

This article is about using moths (caterpillars) and fungus as a means of eradicating coca plants. After a quick scan of the article, though, it appears the scientists are worried about the unintended (unpredictable) consequences.



www.usatoday.com/news/world/2005-06-09-cocaine-caterpillars_x.htm

Paquita says on Jun 9, 2005, 12:57:

Carterpillars... I read the article on carterpillars in the New York Times.
They might love yucca or malanga also...
It is like the little bugs and the fungus, nobody knows.

Anggrek Hitam says on Jun 9, 2005, 19:36:

"Submitted by Tinto on Thu, 06/09/2005 - 13:42.
and fungus as a means of eradicating coca plants. .... the scientists are worried about the unintended (unpredictable) consequences."

Exactly, unpredictable. People have done that so often in the past, they introduced so often organisms, animals, plants into new environments, environments they were not native to, and these 'new' species caused a lot of havoc.

My gretest worries are that reckless politicians make such decisions without knowing the background and only having their own good in mind, not caring about the others.

Just heard the latest about Bush? He thinks that man made green house gases do not contribute to global warming. Just like Mugabe who also has a lot of interesting unworldly ideas. How can we ever trust these guys?

Lionheart says on Jun 11, 2005, 02:14:

research is needed, but can be the solution Check this link for some interesting facts:
PestTracker

Bugs etc. used to control pests (animals or plants) are called Biological Control Agents (007 of biological warfare)

I remember successful experiments to eliminate the red fire ant in the southern USA:

Phorid Flies Being Used To Control Fire Ants In Alabama
5/28/2003

A natural enemy of the fire ant in South America is now being released in Alabama. The phorid fly lays an egg near the thorax of the ant. The egg turns into a larvae which eventually decapitates the ant.

The flies have been studied in research labs at Mississippi State
University. Researchers found they appear to only attack the fire ant. It does not bother humans, animals or plants.

Another interesting fact, the fly only kills a small percentage fire ants. The others are actually terrorized by the fly and stay inside the mound, where they starve to death.

Source: WHNT.com
Wednesday, May 28, 2003