Facebook anti-March 6th group: slanderous?

bamacellist says on Mar 5, 2008, 08:14:

I agree. It is ridiculous and sad that people respond this way. It happened with the February march, although not to nearly the same extent and is happening now. It a sad thing that people can't see things simply for what they are or accept that other people prioritize these issues differently. But noone needs to choose one of these issues to the exclusion of the other, nor should they! Especially stupid are the people who say "I refuse to discuss your issue until you've discussed mine" which happens all the time when it comes to the Farc and the paras and neo-paras. It all needs to be discussed and addressed, eventually.

"The future is much like the present, only longer."

0 funny, 0 helpful.

vicshere says on Mar 5, 2008, 08:26:

siv give us the link so we can give facebook a complaint

listo

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Alma del Norte says on Mar 5, 2008, 08:53:

Sorry to but in:

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=10389606573

La vida es una rutina

0 funny, 0 helpful.

romy says on Mar 5, 2008, 09:20:

what do you expect when you have individual marches for each group?
It should have been one march against all violence from the begining... but the masterminds behind the F4 weren't interested in that.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

cali373 says on Mar 5, 2008, 09:46:

Yes I saw that too and saw that some of my ignorant Colombia friends joined the group. When I asked one of them why they joined they told me because they are anti-FARC. I explained the truth behind the March and that She should probably do some research instead of listening to the Colombian media all the time. Its too bad she is usually a smart girl.

Smile if you are a thinker!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

cali373 says on Mar 5, 2008, 09:47:

NEW YORK
Contacto: 718-672-0319
Responsable: Comité Against Violence in Colombia
Evento: Concentración ante la Mision Permanente de Colombia en las Naciones Unidas, 140 E 57th Street,
Lexington Ave.
Hora: 4:00 PM

Smile if you are a thinker!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

bamacellist says on Mar 5, 2008, 10:16:

romy, I disagree with that as well. It is also important to be able to separate the issues and address them distinctly and the February march was organized at a critical time in the evolution of the public face of the Farc. The insistence that it must have or even should have been directed at any other source of violence or social ill is a symptom of the problem of "I won't discuss your issue until you discuss mine". Rejecting the aims or the scope of that march because it was specific is illegitimate. It's should be ok to say "look, this is what we're going to talk about now..." Why should anyone interpret that to mean "this is all we're ever going to talk about" ???

"The future is much like the present, only longer."

0 funny, 0 helpful.

huskie says on Mar 5, 2008, 10:36:

•Respaldamos a las Fuerzas Militares y a la Policía.

• Confiamos en las instituciones y en el Estado colombiano.

• Rechazamos el “paramilitarismo� y los crímenes cometidos por estos grupos armados ilegales contra la población civil indefensa.

• Repudiamos los crímenes cometidos contra los colombianos por las guerrillas del ELN y de las FARC, así como por el narcotráfico y por cualquier organización al margen de la Ley.

• Rechazamos a quienes deshonraron las instituciones apoyando a los grupos armados ilegales, incluyendo a las AUC y al narcotráfico. Como funcionarios están más obligados que cualquiera a hacer respetar el Estado de Derecho y a proteger a los ciudadanos.

• Condenamos la vinculación a los grupos de autodefensas y al narcotráfico de cualquier representante de la clase empresarial, de la fuerza pública y en general de cualquier estamento de la sociedad colombiana.

• En Colombia no se han cometido Crímenes de Estado ya que no existe una política tendiente a la violación de los Derechos Humanos.

• Reconocemos que ha habido agentes del Estado que han cometido atropellos, pero son ellos quienes a título personal han infringido las normas y sobre ellos debe caer de manera individual todo el peso de la Ley.

• Nos solidarizamos con todas las víctimas del conflicto; sus victimarios merecen el rechazo contundente de todos los ciudadanos de bien y de la comunidad internacional.

• Exigimos la restitución y reparación integral de los derechos de las víctimas de todas las formas de violencia.

• Los invitamos a la reflexión y a la participación activa, comprometidos con la búsqueda de la convivencia a partir del respeto y el reconocimiento a la dignidad del otro.




Contact Info Email: contacto at martaluciaramirez.com
Website: www.martaluciaramirez.com
Office: Senadora Marta Lucía Ramírez
Street: Cra 7 No 8 - 68
City/Town: Bogotá, Colombia


Cheers

"Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds-"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

cali373 says on Mar 5, 2008, 10:41:

jack_jason??? Can you please somehow explain how you got that message from "I will not march on the 6th, "I will not march alongside Chavez, Piedad Cordoba or Raul Reyes"

Especially from an organization that existed before this whole debacle with chavez, Cordoba and that does not even mention support of Chavez?

Smile if you are a thinker!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

romy says on Mar 5, 2008, 11:12:

bamacellist, the problem is that these marches aren't about the issues. They are all about bringing attention to Colombia. Now the world thinks Colombia's only problem is the FARC, and any means to take them down appears to be not only justifiable but 'The Solution' to all of Colombia's problems. And even Uribe was able to use this march as a catapult to launch his campaign for a 3rd term.
There's no such thing as separating issues and addressing them distinctly when you are talking about a complex situation with so many interests at stake. Specially in a topic where every side will try to take adavantage of any little leeway that comes their way.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

bamacellist says on Mar 5, 2008, 12:03:

The whole world does not know the whole truth about anything, but I doubt very much there are too many people who think the Farc is the only problem of social order troubling Colombia. Most everyone's have heard about drug trafficking, for example.

The February march was absolutely about creating attention, but bringing attention to an issue. To the issue of how Colombians really feel about the Farc and how it "represents" their desires and future. This was in the context of Chavez's efforts to some create sympathy for their goals in the eyes of people who may be otherwise not very well informed. This march is also about issues. It is about how Colombians view the violence inflicted on them in general but also more particularly the paras and the neo-paras, and the cooperation they have received from politicians, police, and military personnel, be it officially, semi-officially or as individual abusers of office. It is also about furthering the momentum towards eliminating this threat to society; impressing on those who have the job of governing that this must be kept a priority because so long as these problems exist, the progress against the Farc and its ilk, impressive as it's been, is undermined and devalued.

These are issues.

Not only is it possible to separate the issues but it is necessary. That they have overlap and interaction at many levels makes prioritization a problem and makes developing effective solutions complicated, but it has to be done. It's the only way to identify how the various problems interact and how to prioritize and address them. The solutions must address the interactions in a positive way, which is sometimes a trick to predict and impossible if you haven't analyzed them individually.

That many interests are at stake is very true at different levels, as well. Often this leads to paralysis because people aren't willing to be honest about their interest or feel because they have an interest they must own the problem and therfore the solution and refuse (back to this) to allow consideration of any other issue. I am absolutely certain that if we had to deal with this here in the US, the politics of who gets to own the problem would prevent anything from ever getting done. I marvel that Uribe has managed to make some progress on several fronts while maintaining his priority, which in my opinion has been the correct priority. Sure, there is much to be done, some things which have been put so far to the back burner that some people feel their issues are forgotten, and some issues which seem to defy their solutions on the one hand even as there are ways to view them as progressing on the other. Government is much easier for those of us who have the privilege to comment on it without the job of having to do it.

"The future is much like the present, only longer."

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kat1 (Moderator) says on Mar 5, 2008, 12:37:

The funny thing is that on the 4 of FEB MARCH NOBODY HAS MIXED FEELING everybody was marching under one sentiment and was get rid off of Farc, on this march everybody is confused I just talked to some friends in Colombia and I told them if they were going to March and they say no.. they don't know for who they are marching....

0 funny, 0 helpful.

manINred says on Mar 5, 2008, 13:03:

Realistically these people are not 'anti-victim' they are 'anti-chavez'. I think to assume otherwise is presumptuous.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Mar 5, 2008, 13:27:

Suffice to say that the "UN MILLON DE VOCES CONTRA LAS FARC" group has 326,975 members, and none of the groups directly slandering or demonizing the March 6th mobilization has even half that number, as far as I know.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

cali373 says on Mar 5, 2008, 13:30:

The 4 of Feb March was organized by Uribe´s government which has strong propaganda and enjoys complete support of the media, since it is those owners that Uribe´s policies support.

The organizers of this event is a small group that opposes crimes of the government and Paramilitaries. Being that Uribe´s government is in bed with paramilitarism, the Media is not going have support of this justified March and instead will put a negative spin on it, like it has. They also did a good job of making people believe that somehow the FARC, and Chavez was behind this.

Smile if you are a thinker!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Mar 5, 2008, 13:45:

I have no mixed feelings...I'd march alongside the Devil himself in support of the victims of the paramilitary thugs in Colombia.

"When shall we three meet again? In thunder, lightning, or in rain?"(First Witch in Macbeth)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

bamacellist says on Mar 5, 2008, 13:46:

tsk tsk, j_j ;)

"The future is much like the present, only longer."

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Mar 6, 2008, 06:25:

No,I didn't march then and I won't march today. I would have marched on the 4th if I had been able to; today's march in Stockholm does not seem to be happening..it wasn't confirmed as of this morning and the person who should've organized it (a good friend of mine) stepped down due to all the intrigues and conflicting messages.

I support both marches. It's not WITH whom, it's FOR whom. Or AGAINST whom. Against the FARC, against the PARAS, for the victims. It makes no difference who else is marching.

"When shall we three meet again? In thunder, lightning, or in rain?"(First Witch in Macbeth)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Mar 6, 2008, 06:30:

BTW, Cali, both El Tiempo and Semana are virulently anti Uribe. Do the the research first, or at least read them before commenting..

0 funny, 0 helpful.

romy says on Mar 6, 2008, 09:57:

how about you prove your points with evidence billyb, about el tiempo in particular.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Mar 6, 2008, 10:38:

Just read their editorials, duh. Or do you need me to post links to 6 years worth of editorials for you?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

MitchAlvarez says on Mar 6, 2008, 10:39:

"Ingrid callate la jeta!! Stay in France"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Mar 6, 2008, 10:40:

Although this week, due to the current situation, you might have heard of it, they might be a little circumspect.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoGringo says on Mar 6, 2008, 10:42:

This reminds me of my Paisa aunt from Poblado telling my mom that the March 6 march was bad and that we shouldn't participate or support it. Of course it doesn't surprise me, since many of the country club friends and the Poblado neighbors are the same rich Paisas behind the creation of the modern paras to begin with. Not that my family is in anyway involved, but the general mentality in those social circles is to turn a blind eye to the paras.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

romy says on Mar 6, 2008, 11:21:

billyb just one and point out where they are being 'virulently anti-uribe', not just stating the facts

0 funny, 0 helpful.

ColombianoGringo says on Mar 6, 2008, 11:31:

Well, I don't know that this proves Billy's point, but El Tiempo has an editorial today in support of the march.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Mar 6, 2008, 12:51:

Romy, do you own research if you don't believe me, since I really don't care enough if you don't be bothered with it.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

romy says on Mar 6, 2008, 12:53:

You disqualify someone else's comments yet you don't have the self-respect to make yours count

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Mar 6, 2008, 12:54:

Just don't care if you believe me, or not, sorry.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Mar 6, 2008, 13:26:

Billy, I read El Tiempo on line every day and I don't think it's "virulently anti-Uribe" either. Some of the journalists who write in it are not exactly Uribe's lapdogs either, but the overall impression you get is that the newspaper supports the President, Perhaps it's another El Tiempo you read.

"When shall we three meet again? In thunder, lightning, or in rain?"(First Witch in Macbeth)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Mar 6, 2008, 13:27:

cali373: Evidently, the march against paras and state crimes didn't have as much media support by any stretch of the imagination, to say the least, but it did have more than a bit if you cared to notice, and it's a gross distortion to say that it was merely the government who "organized" the previous protest, though it did lend its support and that made a certain difference...which isn't a reason for ignoring the actual organizers.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Mar 6, 2008, 13:39:

Of course it will defend the president when it comes to outsiders, but its editorial stance is anti-Uribe. Although, to be fair, it is not as bad as Semana.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Mar 6, 2008, 13:40:

Juance, what was the participation at the march like?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Mar 6, 2008, 19:59:

In terms of numbers? Big, but probably not nearly as much as the previous mobilization.

In general? I've commented on it by making a topic.

0 funny, 0 helpful.