Colombia's ex-president slams government for hostage comments

DodgerDogs says on Feb 23, 2008, 10:19:

Truth be known , Uribe has really never cared about the hostages. The world will one day see
that he is Para Political to the core.

Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.Martin Luther King:

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Simon says on Feb 23, 2008, 10:43:

Spare us the FARC rhetoric, DodgerDogs!

HERE'S SIMON!!!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Feb 23, 2008, 10:47:

I think you may be right about that, DD. It's not rethorics, just an observation, simon. It definitely looks like that. The hostages' lives and fortunes have never been of any greater concern of his.

"I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them."-President George W. Bush

0 funny, 0 helpful.

robi666 says on Feb 23, 2008, 10:52:

Santos never looses a chance to show us that he is a genius...

"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.

Sr Tertius says on Feb 23, 2008, 10:54:

"Defence Minister Juan Manuel Santos said that he knew where the four captives would be released"

I still have to hear what purpose it served to make this public.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

robi666 says on Feb 23, 2008, 10:57:

What do you want to hear SrT? You would not understand. He follows his logic on a different plan. He is a genius.

"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.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Feb 23, 2008, 11:04:

All this while the elderlly ex-senador Gechem is fighting for his life onhis way to liberty...his heart is failing and the FARCs are trying to get the medicine he needs from the campesinos...his time is running out and this genius is running his mouth (oblivious to the fact that he is only making everything more complicated) where does Uribe find these prideful fools?

"I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them."-President George W. Bush

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jh816 says on Feb 23, 2008, 11:05:

Whether it was foolish to release the intel or not, what right does Samper have to criticize the government on relations with the FARC or against the narcos? Some job he did when he had Bogota.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Simon says on Feb 23, 2008, 11:05:

Let me remind you Desi, that it was the FARC, not Uribe, who kidnapped them to begin with. And just because Uribe is not willing to cede one milimeter of land to the narcoterrorists doesn't mean that he doesn't care about the hostages.

HERE'S SIMON!!!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Feb 23, 2008, 11:29:

Simon, you didn't think I knew that? How is that helping Mr. Gechem reach a hospital in Colombia in time to save his life knowing whos to blame? I say help to get these people out of the jungle first.

"I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them."-President George W. Bush

0 funny, 0 helpful.

sloopskipper says on Feb 23, 2008, 11:31:

Wasn't the father of Uribe killed by the FARC?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Simon says on Feb 23, 2008, 11:43:

Well Desi, the FARC have the power to release this gentleman whenever they want, so why don't they?


Yes, Sloopskipper, Uribe's father was killed by those murderous thugs.

HERE'S SIMON!!!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Medellin Traveler says on Feb 23, 2008, 12:09:

It could be said that Uribe is friends with many murderous thugs, who adore him for allowing them to operate without fear of prosecution.

Here's an interesting article related to the last FARC hostage release, and it makes Uribe out to be a liar, mentiroso...

Latin America News Review

January 14, 2008

A friend has just informed me of a very interesting article in the Argentine daily Pagina 12 about the first failed Colombian hostage release. One of the released hostages, Consuelo Gonzalez, says that the reason she and Clara Rojas were not released before the New Year, as arranged, was that they were under heavy attack, including bombardment, from the Colombian armed forces. This is also what the FARC, Colombian Senator Piedad de Cordoba, and Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez claimed at the time.

Below is a translated key passage from Página 12:

The words of the ex-congresswoman [Consuelo Gonzalez] supported the version of events offered by the guerrillas and Piedad de Cordoba about the failed rescue operation on New Year's eve. "On December 21, we began to walk toward the location where they were going to free us and we walked almost 20 days. In that time, we were forced to run several times because the military operations were very close," she said. González also lamented that on the day that Alvaro Uribe set as a deadline for the release, the Colombian armed forces launched the worst attack on the zone where they were located. "On the 31st, we realized that there was going to be a very big mobilization and, in the moment that we were ready to be released, there was a huge bombardment and we had to rapidly relocate to another place."

more, in espanol http://www.pagina12.com.ar/diario/elpais/1-97379-2008-01-12.html

"Huevos Rancheros en Medellin, No Quiero Taco Bell." - www.medellintraveler.com

0 funny, 0 helpful.

manINred says on Feb 23, 2008, 12:10:

Simon, don't worry. Colombians seem to think Uribe is the right choice for them, by an overwhelming electoral majority, regardless of whether the PBH contingent (most of whom don't even have any say in the matter) don't.

I trust the Colombians.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Gator says on Feb 23, 2008, 12:28:

DoggrDog, Support yoiur statement: "Uribe has really never cared about the hostages."

Desi, simple solution-release him: "All this while the elderlly ex-senador Gechem is fighting for his life onhis way to liberty...his heart is failing and the FARCs are trying to get the medicine he needs from the campesinos..."

ManlNred, that's our observation, also.

From what we saw Samper was certainly not a beacon of hope or political acumen during his time as president.

"Brevior Sltare Cum Deformibus Mulieribus Est Vita!" .

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jh816 says on Feb 23, 2008, 15:14:

How many months did Uribe suspend military operations when the Farc said they were going to release the THREE hostages? Yeah, he probably did start operations back up on the last day. He set a deadline, by that time the FARC had provided nothing, so he started the alternative coarse of action. This is a terrorist, drug-dealing organization! The government has been more than cooperative, but have received nothing but lies and red herrings.

How many weeks has it been since they said they would release Gechem? So just release him. Drop him off in a small town and let them contact the government. Or do they want to arrange a dropoff with their partner in crime Chavez, to receive another mysterious package???

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jh816 says on Feb 23, 2008, 15:16:

Whether Uribe cares for the hostages or not, can he (or the government) show too much sentiment or give up too much in bargaining in front of the FARC. If he publicly cries over the hostages or gives too much, how many senators do you think will be kidnapped next week?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Simon says on Feb 23, 2008, 15:47:

"Or do they want to arrange a dropoff with their partner in crime Chavez, to receive another mysterious package???"


Good point , jh816!

HERE'S SIMON!!!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Alma del Norte says on Feb 23, 2008, 18:59:

"Wasn't the father of Uribe killed by the FARC?"

Yes, as was the father of their neighbours, the Castaño Brothers.

La vida es una rutina

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Feb 23, 2008, 19:56:

Sorry, but it's a COMPLIMENT to be criticized by Samper.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

fecherklyn says on Feb 24, 2008, 16:13:

Getting back to the main point...."What was the purpose of Santos patting himself on the back for knowing where the hostages were?".

I confess to the same reaction when I heard this news..."What on earth is he doing...trying to sabotage the operation?". My reaction was apparently felt by many others....not that it has provoked any reply. The lack of response/reaction by the govt is worrying. Was this action sanctioned, or even driven by policy?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Feb 25, 2008, 12:58:

One doesn't need to be a "paraco" in order to care little or nothing about the hostages, so that reasoning falls a bit short...regardless of the truth of each specific part of it.

Desi: I don't know how the government really thinks, collectively or individually. I'm not a mindreader.

But, using other statements as well, they claim to have revealed this information in order to pressure the guerrillas to free Mr. Gechem ASAP, instead of making him go all the way to the alleged "rescue" point, precisely because of his health.

------------------------------------------------
"El senador Gechem se encuentra infortunadamente en grave estado de salud, lo que hace presumir que no podría recorrer esa distancia para reunirse con los demás secuestrados", dijo el ministro colombiano.

"Como ha sido política del Gobierno, hemos hecho todo lo que está a nuestro alcance para facilitar estas liberaciones unilaterales e incondicionales, y en este caso hacemos un llamado para que se acelere el proceso de liberación por el estado de salud del senador Gechem", añadió.

http://www.telesurtv.net/secciones/noticias/nota/24680/min-defensa-col...
---------------

This may be supremely counter-productive, intentionally or otherwise. The guerrillas may prefer to let him die rather than to look like they're responding to government pressure. I don't know.

The government may prefer, if they believe the guerrillas are going to delay his release fairly or otherwise, to make the first move and convince its followers that it's doing something, instead of being caught by surprise and blamed when there is nothing to be done. But again, that's just one impression.

In that sense, one could speculate that both parties seem to care more about politics than about humanitarian reasons and Gechem's life.

Medellin Traveler:

"It could be said that Uribe is friends with many murderous thugs, who adore him for allowing them to operate without fear of prosecution. "

The fact that several of them are actually either under investigation or behind bars, while some of the worst forms of violence have actually gone down (massacres, in particular), tends to complicate that picture a fair bit, I'd say.

"Here's an interesting article related to the last FARC hostage release, and it makes Uribe out to be a liar, mentiroso..."

To a certain extent, generally speaking, I could agree...but the timeline, or chronology if you prefer, should also be considered, as well as the actual locations involved in this case.

The official Venezuelan announcement of what would come to be called "Operation Emmanuel" was only made on December 26 or so. That's actually important.

Before that point, there was really no reason for the government or military to suspend military operations anywhere, unless specifically told to do so, because Chávez hadn't made his plan public, including the relevant regions and locations.

After that point, however, things would be different, and I would agree that Uribe could have lied, given the testimony (although that newspaper you link to puts too many words into her mouth...claiming that military operations were "never" suspended and that the guerrillas are right just because she did, in fact, experience some of them).

But your translation has one curious interpretation...

"El 31 captamos que iba a haber una movilización muy grande y en el momento en que estábamos por salir..."

VS.

"On the 31st, we realized that there was going to be a very big mobilization and, in the moment that we were ready to be released..."

Note the difference as far as that last part is concerned.

"Estabamos por salir" doesn't equal "ready to be released". They were ready to "go out", yes...but the most direct reading indicates that they were going to move, not that they were going to be freed at that precise moment. That's an additional interpretation, and the fact that they are speaking about a "movilization" in that same phrase indicates that they're talking about movement, first and foremost.

If you want to add to that, it's your choice...but that's not the only interpretation, or even the most obvious one.

0 funny, 0 helpful.