How do you guys interpret this?

juancegomez says on Dec 26, 2007, 17:38:

My position: It's hypocrisy.

Btw, FARC's official communiques tend to go up on their own website as well, not just on ANNCOL. They are all in the same political and ideological corner though, evidently.

So...unlike, say, someone like Jose Obdulio Gaviria (especially if you've heard him on the radio), I've long since decided that checking out ANNCOL on a regular basis is not worth my time or mental effort.

If I want to read FARC's thoughts, I'll read their website. No need for ANNCOL, 99% of the time.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

vladimiro says on Dec 26, 2007, 19:28:

You have to assume that those who enter politics in Colombia, like those that enter the country's flourishing Narcotics industry, know what they are getting in to. Its not for the faint of heart.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 26, 2007, 19:38:

Vladimiro, I still don't understand what's your opinion of the cartoon. I mean, how do you interpret the message of the caricature? If you don't really have an opinion on it per se that's fine too.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Gator says on Dec 26, 2007, 20:01:

"I will see us in New Colombia."

a. She will be held until FARC wins? (In your dreams)
b. When you get out of here there will be a new order in Colombia?
c. If you want a prince you have to kiss a lot of frogs!
e. She is thinking, "They don't hardly make 'em like him any more - but just to be on the safe
side, he should be castrated anyway."

"Credidi pretio parvo emere et magno vendere tibi in animo fuisse!" .

0 funny, 0 helpful.

miamimike says on Dec 26, 2007, 20:05:

Sounds like The 2004 SwiftBoat Organization is getting cranked up in Colombia,,,LOL

Avatar Legend: Bush "If any of you Reporters are wondering, it was a Size 10"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

vladimiro says on Dec 26, 2007, 20:17:

My wild guess is that "La Nueva Colombia" was a political slogan of hers during her presidential campaign and that she had claimed to be able to bring about a political compromise with the FARC and end the civil war if elected President( wasn't she kidnapped during publicity stunt to visit the FARC?).

If so, the cartoon could be pointing out the ironic way in which she is being used to force a political compromise with the FARC and opening the doors of legit power to them. She claimed she'd bring about a Nueva Colombia, and ironically she is doing just that.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Papi de Alejo says on Dec 26, 2007, 20:41:

Maybe I'm way off-base here, but it seems to me that he is saying to her "We will see each other in the New Colombia." He is saying good-bye to her and he is indicating his certainty that there will be a New Colombia and that he will see her again at that time.

PdA

PdA

0 funny, 0 helpful.

webmanco says on Dec 27, 2007, 05:13:

Were not the Paramilitares trying to create a new Colombia?

It seems a few in Colombia want a change.


Actualmente la Corte Suprema de Justicia, investiga a "xx" congresistas, mientras que la Fiscalía hace lo mismo con 2 gobernadores, 3 alcaldes, varios concejales y funcionarios públicos, quienes, según declaraciones del senador Miguel de la Espriella, firmante del documento, se reunieron el 23 de julio de 2001 en la población de Santa Fe Rialito (departamento de Córdoba) con Salvatore Mancuso y los principales jefes paramilitares del país, y firmaron un acuerdo secreto para construir “una nueva Colombia�, teniendo como base el proyecto ideológico y político de las autodefensas.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

rocinante says on Dec 27, 2007, 06:25:

Chavez? I thought the cartoon was depicting Bogey and Bergman in a "Casablanca" parody using Colombia instead of Paris.

The entire issue if "La Semana" this week is dedicated to this. Although much is about Ingrid, there are articles this week regarding the OTHER secuestrados. What about them? I have little sympathy for Bettencourt and the bargaining chip she represents and for the last many years so has the Colombian government.

On a more serious and less personal note, I agree 1000% with Vladamir's interpretation to the cartoon.

"World economic indicators point to a democrat winning 2008. It will surely be Obama. Not that the US president actually runs the US." Feb 5, 2008

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on Dec 27, 2007, 06:37:

The ANNCOL people are not Swedish, Gringo. The site is run from Denmark, not Sweden and the people who run it are Colombian. So, what was your point?

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on Dec 27, 2007, 08:57:

They moved, because Sweden banned ANNCOL after Santos' visit in 2002.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

dwr says on Dec 27, 2007, 08:59:

Do I sense the coming of the next Eillen?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on Dec 27, 2007, 09:50:

There was a thread here about the Danish t-shirt people and ANNCOL was discussed there. Let me see if I can find the link.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on Dec 27, 2007, 09:53:

http://poorbuthappy.com/colombia/post/ban-anncol/

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Lcacique says on Dec 27, 2007, 13:53:

"the other point would be how dare you people allow this crap to come out of your country?"

gringo, please correct me if I am wrong, but I thought freedom of speech was an essential feature of democracy. I mean, what would John say about countries that did not allow the opposition to voice their opinions? I am confused...You, with your profile pic proudly displaying the "American" flag, calling for censorship. As a gringo myself, should I continue to tell foreigners that we, as "American citizens," do not support the repression of speech? Is this yet another one of those instances where "we" say one thing publicly, yet practice something completely different privately?

As for the cartoon, the most disturbing thing about it is that it implies that Celine Dion is somehow involved with the FARC. Clearly, she has not been kidnapped...it'd be all over the press. Marulanda and Celine appear to be rather chummy and I'd conclude that she has replaced cocaine as the principal source of funds for the FARC. This is a logical move on her part...her singing career will not last forever, why not jump into politics? Colombia has a strong/proven revolutionary army already in existence that she can take advantage of to topple the government. Given her immense wealth, I'd say she will be dictator in no time.

Hoy se nota en la floresta un ambiente de alegría. ¡Y el rumor de ranchería es mas dulce y sabe a fiesta!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on Dec 27, 2007, 14:09:

I thought it was Ingrid Betancourt in the cartoon. Does Celine look like Ingrid?

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 27, 2007, 15:07:

Would this mean that if FARC takes over they will invite Celine Dion for Marulanda's inauguration...?? those godless bastards!!

More seriously, I'm with Lcacique: I don't understand these "crimes of opinion," which would be expected in theocracies like Iran, but that are also part of the legislation of countries like France and Germany, where it is a punishable crime to deny the Holocaust. I have to give it to the US, that with all this terrorism BS, it hasn't fallen for the temptation of curtailing freedom of speech. AFAIK, in the US and also in Colombia, unless your speech clearly induces criminal behavior, you are free to say the most outrageous and stupid things that can cross your mind. For example: http://www.elespectador.com/elespectador/Secciones/Detalles.aspx?idNot...

Desi, do Scandinavians also throw you to jail for denying the Holocaust or for singing happy songs praising Hitler?

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on Dec 27, 2007, 15:09:

"Oh sorry yea you all look the same to me. Don't use gringo with that tone with me missy! jaja"(gringoinbogota)
Oh I was using "gringo" as your first name....I hope it's ok with you. Mr. Inbogotá.
Or. as a term of endearment ;)

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Dec 27, 2007, 15:17:

Ironically, I also agree with Vlad's interpretation.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on Dec 27, 2007, 15:26:

Sr. Tertius, yes, they might. Not for denying the holocaust or singing stupid songs but for "inciting to hatred aginst ethnic/racial/religious minorities". So, it's not ok to appear on tv, for example and give racist speeches or to do a sieg heil greeting. I don't know if there are anybody sitting inprison for that but I believe it's not unsusual with fines.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 27, 2007, 15:44:

I presume that, pretty much anywhere, if you incite violence towards a ethnic/racial/religious minority or majority to go to jail (or pay a fine) anyway. But the cases I've heard of in France and Germany, and maybe Spain too, is of people simply saying that the Holocaust was made up. Here's an example: http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v19/v19n2p58_Swiss.html

I don't know the details of these cases, but it seems to me that some of these people are not inciting violence, they are simply voicing their skepticism, as outrageous as it is. By the same token, I don't think that the people denying or minimizing the massacres of the paracos are inciting violence. Until idiocy becomes a crime, they are not criminals. So I don't understand under what rationale the Anncol guys got kicked out of a country.

BTW, talking about media, has anyone looked at the reports of TeleSur? I must admit, the ones I've seen on Colombia are pretty even-handed and well produced; certainly better than the crap shown in Colombian private channels.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Lcacique says on Dec 27, 2007, 15:57:

Crap! My mistake Desi...I think it is Ingrid. In that case, I find it disturbing that the FARC would release such a poorly drawn cartoon!

Hoy se nota en la floresta un ambiente de alegría. ¡Y el rumor de ranchería es mas dulce y sabe a fiesta!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) (Trustee board) says on Dec 27, 2007, 15:59:

I'm not really familiar with this topic and I don't believe the Anncol guys were kicked out of Sweden; I think they were just prohibited to use a local server and that was after Santos visited Sweden and made fuss. Anyway, we have a conservative government right now and even if the Swedes respect the freedom of expression I think it's easier to convince the right wing here about what this FARC really is all about. The Scandinavian left would still like to believe that these people have a political agenda.

I visited the Anncol site today and I share your opinion of them; they do not incite to violence. In Swedish legislation (Doctor Who if you're reading this please correct me if I'm wrong) the term is "incite hatred" and it might be a more diffuse term and perhaps leave more room for interpretation.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 27, 2007, 17:58:

A little known fact is that the U.S. used Zyklon B in 'gas chambers' along the Tex-Mex border.

http://www.counterpunch.org/cockburn06232007.html

Lets not forget Japanese concentration camps in the Western U.S.:

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.colorado.gov/dpa/doi...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Dec 27, 2007, 18:25:

The "inciting a riot" thing reminds me of a funny story from my ill-spent youth. Sorry for the mini-hijack, but I'd forgotten about this escapade until now....and it's pretty funny, how stupid I was.

As I was leaving my favorite bar one night, chemically impaired in more than one way, a big, stupid NC cop decided to give me a lecture. I listened to it, then got in my friends car with him. As we were driving off, I leaned out the window and told this ignorant SOB to blow me.

Well- genius that I was, after a smoking a joint or two- I went right back to the same bar. Same cop. Pissed. Took me to jail for "inciting a riot" - was apparently all he could come up with, since telling a cop to blow me apparently was perfectly legal.

Fast forward to court. Southern Baptist gent sitting on the bench. The cop, under questioning from the DA, recounts the story - including the "blow me". (what I really said was a more graphic description- same suggestion, btw). When my attorney proceeds on cross-examination, she reads the "Inciting a riot" statute to the cop, with emphasis on the "inciting" part - that in order for me to be guilty, my words had to have caused others to take action.

The she says "Officer X- exactly what reaction did the defendant's words cause to happen? It seems to me his words were only directed at you. Unless you left some important details out, there was no inciting taking place, absent you doing as he suggested. So, I ask again - did you, or did you not, do as the defendant suggested? If not- no crime was committed."

The courtroom erupted in laughter. Remember, this is early 70's North Carolina. Probably was the first time a cop had been asked, under oath, if he gave a guy a blowjob that asked for one. Even the judge had difficulty keeping a straight face. At hearing "case dismissed" - the cop made some comment about a kangaroo court- which the judge heard- and promptly put the cop in jail for contempt.

Later that night, back at the same watering hole, my money was useless.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 27, 2007, 19:29:

Gringoloid, what does that have to do with the question I posted here???? Please stay on topic.

I don't know anything about whether or not the USA ever used "Zyklon B in 'gas chambers' along the Tex-Mex border." But if there's any truth to that or anyway to back that story I strongly encourage you to find a more credible source than Counterpunch, which is notorious for muckraking yellow journalism.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Dec 28, 2007, 02:04:

"Gringoloid, what does that have to do with the question I posted here???? Please stay on topic."


hmmmm...you're a moderator now, catherine? I missed that announcement.,...

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 28, 2007, 03:57:

I did'nt realize one had to be a moderator to point out the obvious.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Dec 28, 2007, 06:24:

Catherine, you have to forgive Gringoloid, for the last few months he has been on the run from the black helicopters of the Trilateral Commission.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 28, 2007, 07:09:

billyb, don't get me started on the trilateral commission. btw, they don't use helicoptors to deal with their opponents.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 28, 2007, 07:17:

catherine, who and by what authority says counterpunch is 'muckraking yellow journalism'? please cite sources of unethical journalism and libelous statements by counterpunch.

this shouldn't be too hard, you said it was obvious.

If you had read the article you would find it is actually a book review of:

Ringside Seat to a Revolution: An Underground Cultural History of El Paso and Juarez, 1893-1923

Please cite the factual inaccuracies in this book.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

rocinante says on Dec 28, 2007, 07:18:

OK Desi. I got my laugh for the day. Thank you sooooo MUCH!

"Mr. Inbogotá"

A riot. From now on I will address him as such.

I actually did laugh out loud but refuse to do a smily face or type LOL or ROTL thingies.

"World economic indicators point to a democrat winning 2008. It will surely be Obama. Not that the US president actually runs the US." Feb 5, 2008

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 28, 2007, 07:32:

catherine, also it is not uncommon for threads to take all kinds of tangents; and I wasn't the one that brought Zyklon B into the conversation.

Even thought this is a site on Colombia, Mexican immigration into the states is a very hot topic here; I don't think a week goes by without someone here bringing it up.

If you have a problem with facts i've presented here than please refute with FACTS; I'm quite knowledable about the use of hydrocyanic acid and its uses in the early 1900's.

However, I 'm sure you can only do ad hominem attacks.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Dec 28, 2007, 11:24:

I'm not against the publishing of this cartoon or calling for anyone to ban it, mind you, but I still think it's a sign of hypocrisy.

vladimiro: Actually, the term "Nueva Colombia" (almost never "nueva Colombia") is a well known part of FARC's propaganda / political platform. It's even in ANNCOL's name.

I don't remember its being used in Ingrid's political campaign, however, and I do recall that in past declarations "Raúl Reyes" and other guerrillas haven't exactly been positive about her, as a politician or as a human being.

Sr Tertius : I think teleSur's quality is uneven. Sometimes it's just fine, but at other times their reports are very sloppy....at least those posted on their webpage, because I haven't checked out their actual TV channel lately.

In addition to actual errors and omissions (including some that are just dumb or lazy, like dates and names), for a start, there are little things which make one wonder, like their consistently preferring to call those who have been kidnapped by FARC in Colombia "retenidos" rather than "secuestrados" (and no, not just when talking about the soldiers or what have you).

However, I do think it's good that they give dissenting voices in Colombia a chance to express themselves more openly and at length, even if the quality of the final result varies. But I wonder if they'd give a similar amount of space to, say, a rightwing opposition, when the time comes, or if they'll become just as "officialist" as they are when reporting on the governments that have financed them.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 28, 2007, 12:42:

chorizo.......as Elvis Presley once said, "I'm an entertainer". The same applies to me.

Besides, change is good.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 28, 2007, 12:52:

I read you loud and clear chorizo..........my friends are now in Cali and I've never been there. They returned from Los Angeles just for the holidays.

New Years in Cali sounds like a lot of fun and I'm sad I'm not there. manT is also there along with a lot of pbh members that i would like to meet.

Lets hope that the new year treats us all well!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 28, 2007, 13:14:

Juance: I must admit that what I've seen of TeleSur is quite selective. Sometimes, when I google a topic I'm interested in (usually about Colombia), a report from TeleSur comes up in YouTube (I've only seen their website a couple of times). And I've been quite impressed that they give everyone a voice--even to goverment officials that have multiple media outlets available to them. Sure, compared to the ass-licking private channels, these guys seem pretty subversive, but that speaks more about the Colombian channels than about TeleSur. If there's sloppiness in their reports, I haven't seen it.

I did notice, though, their use of the term "retenidos" rather than "secuestrados" or "rehenes". That's a difficult editorial choice, I guess. El Tiempo, for instance, refers to military personnel and US contractors held by FARC as "secuestrados". That's blatantly inaccurate. Regardless of what one may think about their situation, these guys were not kidnapped in any sense of the word, anymore than Simon Trinidad was "kidnapped" by the Colombian or US government. But I'd say that civilians held by FARC were clearly kidnapped, in fact, they were kidnapped for extortive purposes most of the time. Should the media use different language to refer to each situation? I'd prefer to use a more general term, like "retained". Unfortunately, that's a term so entrenched in FARC and ANNCOL's twisted rethoric, that it is natural to develop a sort of "allergy" to the word.

I'm the first one here to insist that language is far less important than action. But in this case, I think language is very important, because civilians held by FARC deserve a different treatment than military personnel in similar situation. A prisoner swap can be made between guerrilla and military, but the only ethical choice for FARC is to unilaterally set all civilians free.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Dec 28, 2007, 14:34:

SrTertius: I'm also pretty selective when I browse teleSur's website, usually looking for written information about Colombia and generally little to nothing else.

I've only seen a few of their video clips and news segments, so I'm not really in a position to confidently evaluate those. But if I had to say something, those few seem to be OK as far as I can tell, and it does seem they try to interview all the different parties, which is fair enough. Can't say much more at the moment.

By the way, the sloppiness I've seen in their texts isn't exactly omnipresent and everlasting, by any means. In fact, it's been a while since I've noticed anything too major, but maybe I just tend to remember it that much more, whenever it does happen. Still, it's admittedly a relatively new media outlet and, again, one financed by specific governments.

Finally, I guess that when we consider the overall picture, it's still good to have more perspectives and opinions available, beyond what the mainstream media usually allows. As you've mentioned, there are plenty of other deficiencies and biases in many of Colombia's own major media outlets, evidently. In the end, I think we should all be free to access as many different media outlets as possible and, of course, to criticize said outlets and their products.

Also, yes, I also think that military personnel captured during combat or generally in the line of duty shouldn't be considered to be kidnapped (unless, for example, they were wearing off-duty civilian clothes while they were on a bus, inside their own houses or something of that nature). But I still wouldn't use the term "retenidos" as the generic way to describe everyone who is currently in FARC's hands. I guess there's indeed an "allergy" of some sort involved...

I share your conclusion, but it seems that FARC just wants to treat them all as "prisoners of war", equivalent to all FARC personnel in jail, when many of them are civilians and not military actors. Too bad that ethics doesn't really seem to factor too much in this conflict these days...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 28, 2007, 14:50:

"it seems that FARC just wants to treat them all as "prisoners of war", equivalent to all FARC personnel in jail, when many of them are civilians and not military actors."

Indeed, and that's when the government could step up and say "no sir! We'll swap prisoner's of war and talk all you want about it, but civilians must be set free NOW!" Problem is, the Colombian government doesn't make the distinction between civilian and military either. For Uribe, they're all kidnapped. And there's no war. I think that attitude makes things far more difficult than, say, acknowledging reality.

"Too bad that ethics doesn't really seem to factor too much in this conflict these days..."

Yeah... it feels sort of polyanish to speak of ethics in this context. But I still think that that is what civil society should demand from both sides of the conflict. Again, the problem is, if FARC is not recognized as a political organization (as criminal as it may be), there is no sense in demanding anything from them. If there is no conflict, then the only possible course of action is to get rid of the "disease." If that's going to be the attitude, then the government should desist from asking the disease from making people sick. That's just not sound medicine. (Okay, I'm on a limb with my analogy, so I stop here).

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

fecherklyn says on Dec 28, 2007, 18:02:

Juancegomez & SnTertius,

Thank you for some of the most intelligent debate in your last posts that I have ever seen on PBH. Would that some members of the Govt, FARC, NGO's also read these thoughts...they have something to learn

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 28, 2007, 18:28:

Thanks for the compliments, fecherklyn.

I wrote once to Uribe and he never got back to me. From his actions, I don't think even one of his secretaries looked at my letter.

As for FARC... well, they share one thing in with the most militant furibistas: They are impervious to reason. They figured out a long time ago what's right and what's wrong, and everyone else is just on their way.

And as for the NGOs, the most important ones involved in human rights and the conflict in Colombia know perfectly well everything that I am saying. My thoughts aren't original at all, in that sense.

I think it was Foucault who suggested a different, more political, interpretation of the Oedipus complex: That the only ones that don't know what's going on are those in power (Oedipus), and those who know well what's happening (Tiresias) are powerless and vilified. As Garcia Marquez once suggested, Thebes could be a little town in Colombia.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Dec 28, 2007, 22:33:

I agree, excellent posting.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Robert Jorge says on Dec 29, 2007, 02:10:

Gringoloid ... I don't know CathyB from Adam. But she did not attack you. Copy and paste an example if I am wrong. I am not calling you names, but it is getting funny how these big macho men start crying "attack, attack" when their opinions are challenged.

Gringo, I should start citing AR15.com and other sites as fact. That would be no different than your cited information. (probably more accurate and unbiased - but that is another topic) You are the guy I got into a dispute over the World Trade Center being a conspiracy topic - correct?

Anyway, peace brother. I hope someday to have a beer or two with you in Colombia, and we can try and persuade each other who is "right". But don't be a nena. Cathy didn't attack you.

He who farts in church, sits in his own pew.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 29, 2007, 08:24:

"catherine, who and by what authority says counterpunch is 'muckraking yellow journalism'? please cite sources of unethical journalism and libelous statements by counterpunch."

Counterpunch proudly states “Ours is muckraking with a radical attitude."

Yellow journalism. Noun. Journalism that exploits, distorts, or exaggerates the news to create sensations and attract readers.

Counterpunch is owned and coedited by Alexander Cockburn, an old school Marxist who prefers the creature comforts of capitalism in sunny California than living in his rainy, gloomy native Britain.

Mr. Cockburn is virulently anti-Israel and has been denounced as an anti-semite by such media as New Republic, Seattle Times, and Eric Alterman of MSNBC (as well as fellow writer at the NATION magazine) amongst others.
And while Cockburn is very careful not to deny the Holocaust, both he and Counterpunch have regularly supported and published several Holocaust deniers.

But yet he’s an apologist for Stalin’s genocide of his own people.
NATION, March 6, 1989

In 1984, Mr. Cockburn was fired from the Village Voice for hiding a $10,000 “grant" he had received from an anti-Israel organization.
Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones, January 18, 1984

In August of 2006 Counterpunch published an interview with Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah which was later proven to be a hoax. http://www.counterpunch.org/nasrallah08172006.html
http://www.thecatsdream.com/blog/2006_08_01_archive.htm.

Counterpunch does’nt seem to have a problem employing certain discredited writers such as Ward Churchill, and Kurt Nimmo.

And while Mr. Cockburn consistently attacks U.S. intervention in the Middle East which includes of course the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan after 9/11, he did’nt seem to have a problem with the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 as he infamously wrote “If ever a country deserved rape it's Afghanistan. Nothing but mountains filled with barbarous ethnics with views as medieval as their muskets, and unspeakably cruel too."
The Village Voice, January 21, 1980.

There’s several articles and stories on Cockburn. You’ll just have to Google it yourself: I’m not doing your homework for you, but here’s some links, besides the ones already provided.

http://www.oilempire.us/counterpunch.html

http://www.wsws.org/news/1998/sep1998/cbrn-s02.shtml

http://mediacrity.blogspot.com/2005/06/poverty-on-moonbat-row-sniff-sn...

"this shouldn't be too hard, you said it was obvious."

I said it was obvious that the links between Anglo-American eugenics and nazi Germany had no connection to the topic being discussed. Go back and read what I wrote.

"If you had read the article you would find it is actually a book review of:
Ringside Seat to a Revolution: An Underground Cultural History of El Paso and Juarez, 1893-1923
Please cite the factual inaccuracies in this book."

I never said the book was inaccurate. I encouraged you to find a more reputable source than Counterpunch. Again, go back to my original comment.

"catherine, also it is not uncommon for threads to take all kinds of tangents; and I wasn't the one that brought Zyklon B into the conversation."

Tangent? What tangent? You did’nt even attempt to comment on the topic before wondering off and digressing. No, you just dropped links to a completely unrelated subject.

" If you have a problem with facts i've presented here than please refute with FACTS; I'm quite knowledable about the use of hydrocyanic acid and its uses in the early 1900's."

I guess I’ll have to repeat myself since you did’nt read correctly the first time: I don't know anything about whether or not the USA ever used "Zyklon B in 'gas chambers' along the Tex-Mex border." But if there's any truth to that or anyway to back that story I strongly encourage you to find a more credible source than Counterpunch, which is notorious for muckraking yellow journalism. Please explain wherein my comment I called you a liar???

"However, I 'm sure you can only do ad hominem attacks."

Please, you’re not even sure about what I comment or post.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 29, 2007, 08:34:

Chorizo wrote "catherine ,no good asking gringoloid to stay on topic,thats like asking a colombian not to steal your phone off the table ,you know for sure its going to wonder off ,so does our friend ,but then his posts make better reading than yours,"

Are you implying that Colombians are thieves??? I don't know what what Colombians you've associated with, but I've been quite fortunate that MOST of the Colombians that I have met throughout my life are pretty decent and honest people.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 29, 2007, 09:54:

Crime exists in most countries. Do you seriously believe that the major cities in the USA or Europe are mugger-free?
I've had friends mugged and had their cars stolen in the States as well as in Europe.
Just because Colombia has a significant crime problem, does not mean that most Colombians are criminals.
Your analogy "thats like asking a colombian not to steal your phone off the table" is just plain offensive.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 29, 2007, 10:03:

"it can not be offensive if it fact". So are you claiming as fact Colombia has more thieves than any other country?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 29, 2007, 10:04:

To answer your question whenever I'm in a public place I don't leave my property unattended in ANY country.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

manINred says on Dec 29, 2007, 11:14:

Well whatever interpretation that one might derive from such a caricature, it is certainly achieving its objective!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 18:28:

RobertJorge.....come on man, when did I ever say that cath b attacked me?

This is what i said:

If you have a problem with facts i've presented here than please refute with FACTS; I'm quite knowledable about the use of hydrocyanic acid and its uses in the early 1900's.

However, I 'm sure you can only do ad hominem attacks.

"I'm sure you can only do" is the future.

I'm saying that she will not discuss facts but just deliver ad hominem, and the posts that follow will show that.

I've spent quite sometime here on ar15.com, viewing about 50 pages out of probably thousands with the links. I don't see how this relates to me or anything I've ever said here. i also see very little political material here or in the links; 99% of it appears to be a website for firearms aficionados. I'm baffled.

I love debating the issues of 911; your last evidence was the 'Purdue study' appointed and financed by George Bush. And the funny thing about that was that it was just a simulated computer program that was completely made up. I can't imagine anyone posting that comment and having read and evaluated that study. You got anything else?

Something out a few weeks ago on 911 is fomer Italian President, Franceso Cossiga has revealed what he knows about 911. it's exactly what I've been saying all along. This has to be the highest ranking official to come over to our side.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/december2007/120407_common_knowle...


Yes, it's just another persons opinion, but Cossiga was the first to reveal the existence Operation Gladio, which was decades of NATO terrorism and assassination.

Operation Gladio would take at least a year of study to understand. And yet for decades people like yourself thought my theories were nonsense.

I'll have the last laugh on 911 too.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gladio

alright, when we meet you're going to be buying the beer!!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 18:37:

cathy b, I have no great love for alexander cockburn; his view of 911 and the JFK assassination are 180 degrees different from mine. For issues that are important to me, I don't know of a more despicable person. I have invited him to debate me many times over the years. He twists the issues of 911 and JFK for his own agenda.

The reason I used that link is that it is the first one that came up and I wanted a brief review and summary of the book. i could have used amazon.com for a review of the book.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 18:46:

cathy b says:

Counterpunch proudly states “Ours is muckraking with a radical attitude."

Gringoreplies***In this example, you've taken their advertisement, which is really being used as a metaphor, and used a few words out of a whole sentence. There is nothing wrong with muckraking; Drudge Report has called itself that.

read your statement, 'muckraking yellow journalism'

yellow journalism in my defintion is libel although others may say it stops just short.

http://www.counterpunch.org/aboutus.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muckraker

So in this context, this is an ad hominen attack

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 18:55:

cathy b says:

Mr. Cockburn is virulently anti-Israel and has been denounced as an anti-semite by such media as New Republic, Seattle Times, and Eric Alterman of MSNBC (as well as fellow writer at the NATION magazine) amongst others.
And while Cockburn is very careful not to deny the Holocaust, both he and Counterpunch have regularly supported and published several Holocaust deniers.


**So what? he is a radical journalist; what do you expect? I disagree with him on many issues but some still think he has a right to voice his opinions under the first amendment. I happen to feel all free speech is hate speech in some way.

You still present no facts in contradicting any of his statements on the issues you raise, so again pure ad hominem.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:04:

cathy b says:

But yet he’s an apologist for Stalin’s genocide of his own people.
NATION, March 6, 1989

****That's a real fortune cookie history thought if ever I've seen one here at PBH. The Stalinism/Leninism conflict would take up zillions of these web pages.

Cockburns father was a Stalinist so therefore he supported Stalin against Trotsky. I have other theories on this issue and can't go into them here but Trotsky was no better than Stalin. It was a civil war in a way and your statement is almost child like in its substance.

An attempt at ad hominem.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:10:

Whatever Gringoloid. I clearly answered all your questions and provided links. If you still feel you're being attacked, I can't help you. It's the nature of conspiracy buffs to be at least slightly paranoid, but that's your right.
Likewise, Mr. Cockburn has the right to be as anti-semitic and say whatever he likes and you're free to believe or disbelieve whatever you like.

However, I prefer to get my "investigative reports" from journalists who can rein in their personal prejudices as well report the news without their judgement being entirely clouded by their own political agendas. So Counterpunch will not be on my reading list anytime soon.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:12:

cathy b says:

In 1984, Mr. Cockburn was fired from the Village Voice for hiding a $10,000 “grant" he had received from an anti-Israel organization.
Wall Street Journal, Dow Jones, January 18, 1984


***At this point you're beginning to bore me cathy b. If you had done your homework, which you say you don't like to do for people and i assume you don't like to do for yourself, you would find that this is a totally false statement.

MORE AD HOMINEM.

(robertjorge, do i need to cut and past this to you?)

Please read the the statement above from the self proclaimed "I don't do your homework for you" cathy b, and then read the facts below. I take this as an ad hominem attack against cockburn which is all I said in the beginning.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D07E0D71F39F937A35754C...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:18:

cathy b says:

Counterpunch does’nt seem to have a problem employing certain discredited writers such as Ward Churchill, and Kurt Nimmo.


***discredited by who? MSNBC, the new republic? I use NBC which is a Bush apologist organization as a contrarian indicator; whatever they say, I try and determine the spin.

I don't know anything about kurt nimmo, but i do know a little about ward churchill; so what is your problem cathy b, anybody that does not agree with the neocon media that you cheerlead for is wrong?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:20:

cathy b says:

There’s several articles and stories on Cockburn. You’ll just have to Google it yourself: I’m not doing your homework for you,


***trust me, the day the great pyramid is turned into a Howard Johnsons is the day i would have you doing my homework for me.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:21:

Thanks for the link Gringo but it still does'nt change the fact that he was paid to write a propagandist book....that's not real journalism: that's propaganda. Maybe he learned it from his dad Claud Cockburn? And the Village Voice did agree that "grant created a conflict of interest". How many people have been "asked" to "resign" from their jobs when a company wants to get rid of them? As a conspiracy enthusiast you should know the answer to that.
Keep digging Mr. Ad Hominem. I provided more links.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:23:

let me finish and then i'll respond

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:30:

cathy cites some damning evidence. The last link is hilarious; if you do nothing else, look at this one:

http://www.oilempire.us/counterpunch.html

http://www.wsws.org/news/1998/sep1998/cbrn-s02.shtml

http://mediacrity.blogspot.com/2005/06/poverty-on-moonbat-row-sniff-sn....

One of these, as stated before, i would have to agree with; cockburn ridicules 911 research and only has ad hominem for us. I don't understand why, I think he would be on our side.

But the last link is a blog of an unknown person who obviously is a little disappointed with cockburn as all of us sometimes are and states that cockburn does not make much money.

well cathy b, that is just real damning evidence. An argument stands or falls on its merits, not on how much the author earns.

In fact, I don't know much about Stalinism but I would think making bucks would not be one of their priorities.

Pure ad hominem

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:41:

You're so off the mark Gringo, it's actually funny. I never read neo con crap as I consider it as reliable as counterpunch.

Ward Churchill HAS been discredited.

http://www.aimovement.org/moipr/churchill05.html

http://www.native-net.org/archive/nl/9404/0064.html

http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2007/jul/25/churchill-dismissed-contro...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:48:

what cathy b thinks she wrote:

I said it was obvious that the links between Anglo-American eugenics and nazi Germany had no connection to the topic being discussed. Go back and read what I wrote.

***did she really write that?

what cathy b actually wrote but now what she thinks she wrote: (yes, cathty b i went back and read what you wrote):

'I did'nt realize one had to be a moderator to point out the obvious.'

***what loid thinks she wrote about what cathy b thinks she wrote about:

It's up to the moderators of this website to decide the appropriateness of someones comment here on pbh.

cathy b, you can look at the title of your OP; (How do youguys interpret this?) Alright, so I gave you my interpretation to your question; if you don't like my response, and the mods leave my comment, then I guess that is your problem.

I don't nee you to tell me how to answer your question.

In fact, I don't need you to tell me how to comment in any way on this forum.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:50:

What's that Mr. Rockefeller? You want Gringoloid to know that the Bilderbergers and the Opus Dei will be contacting him shortly? Ok, I'll pass on the information, sir.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:53:

cathy b hallucinates:

Please explain wherein my comment I called you a liar???

****gringo----would you please explain where that i accused you of "calling me a liar???"

RobertJorge: where did i say that she called me a liar??????????????????????????

shall I cut and paste this to you?

Pure ad hominem

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 19:59:

cathy b finally says:

"However, I 'm sure you can only do ad hominem attacks."

Please, you’re not even sure about what I comment or post.

******this is the first accurate statement from cathy b in her personal attack against me and ad hominem with cockburn. Yes cathy b, I'm certainly, without a doubt 'not sure' as you put it, about what you comment on or post.

the monkey prevents me from telling you what i really am sure about.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 20:19:

and another thing that you don't understand cathy b is that chorizo used the 'steal the telephone' statement as a metaphor.

the management of this website lives far, far, away from Colombia. they do not own businesses here; they do not do business here on a daily basis. They are gripped as you are by the religion of political correctness and will not permit an honest discussion of the character level of the everyday colombian.

Rather than discuss a few atypical examples, I would rather discuss the impact of a population as a whole. it's not permitted.

No one is saying that all colombians are dishonest. Some people win the lottery, most people do not; so generally speaking i can make a prediction that most of us will not win the lottery. And that is what we're using here, general rules.

As a gringo business man here in Bogota, I am shocked at the dishonesty that I deal with everyday in Colombia, in basically every transaction.

GIB, Lowell, chorizo, and myself are the only ones here that know what colombia is like; we live the crookedness everyday, all day long.

You don't say where you live; but please keep your political correctness to wherever that may be.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 29, 2007, 20:21:

Gringoloid says "I don't nee you to tell me how to answer your question.

In fact, I don't need you to tell me how to comment in any way on this forum."

You're right Gringo, you just need to readjust your meds and go take a nap.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

goin_south says on Dec 29, 2007, 20:28:

(gringoloid... I don't mean to interrupt, but.... you being gringo, and live in Bogota, si? Maybe you can run over to that other 'tread'.... Show of hands for those in Colombia. Bathroom etiquette....and help get the 'poll' started.)

Why Not Colombia?..........Stay Tuned, for more.... utterly worthless, self-indulgent gobbets of nonsense.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 20:32:

cathy b thinks she responds: (but doesn't)

Thanks for the link Gringo but it still does'nt change the fact that he was paid to write a propagandist book....that's not real journalism: that's propaganda. Maybe he learned it from his dad Claud Cockburn? And the Village Voice did agree that "grant created a conflict of interest". How many people have been "asked" to "resign" from their jobs when a company wants to get rid of them? As a conspiracy enthusiast you should know the answer to that.
Keep digging Mr. Ad Hominem. I provided more links.

****LOL, you say that he was "paid to write a propagandist book". The book was never written, so how can say or cite examples of propaganda? Do you even know what propaganda is, Miss Can't Get her Facts Straight?

***Cockburn was asked to come back after you imply that the Voice wanted to 'get rid of him"

****You're not even a challenge Miss Propaganda

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 20:54:

cathy b says:

You're so off the mark Gringo, it's actually funny. I never read neo con crap as I consider it as reliable as counterpunch.


**coming from you, Miss Propaganda, I take that as a compliment. I want to be as far off the mark from you as possible. And it's not funny, it's sad; I defended a point better than you in the 11th grade. but if you're well below the 11th grade, alls forgiven.

***you want to see something really funny? You say you never read 'neocon crap' and yet you posted above as evidence, The New Republic, Nation, Wall Street Journal. Sure you don't read any of that crap, my dear???

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 29, 2007, 21:06:

"***you want to see something really funny? You say you never read 'neocon crap' and yet you posted above as evidence, The New Republic, Nation, Wall Street Journal. Sure you don't read any of that crap, my dear???"

Wow, not only are you nuts, but woefully ignorant as well. Both The New Republic and the Nation are liberal!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 29, 2007, 21:14:

more from cathy b: (more what, you ask?)

Ward Churchill HAS been discredited.

http://www.aimovement.org/moipr/churchill05.html

http://www.native-net.org/archive/nl/9404/0064.html

http://www.dailycamera.com/news/2007/jul/25/churchill-dismissed-contro....

Ward Churchill is a radical. When you are a radical you have a lot of enemies. No one in a high position with a broad audience can dispute the official version of 911. Just ask rosie o'donnell.

that is what a conspiracy theorist is; a person who does not accept the official govt version of an event. i don't accept the Bush/Pakistani govt version of the murder of Benazir Bhutto.

What do you think King George V had to say about George Washington?

Ward Churchill had strong support from his students and fellow faculty at CU. He was hunted down by the media, not any govt law enforcement agency.

Your first link is from AIM; Churchill in radical fashion took over the Denver chapter along with Russell Means and withdrew from the main AIM headquarters. What do you expect when someone secedes from the union?

The other link was from some fight during one of these meetings. The same thing used to go on in my condominium association meetings. so there was a big fight; the police came and he was not arrested.

How do you interpret that as discredited?

he was crucified by the media who do not want 911 discussion, plain and simple.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Robert Jorge says on Dec 30, 2007, 22:24:

I thought Churchill was busted for plagiarism and outed as not being native American after claiming to be?

The Purdue study was legit. GW funded? Purdue is a state university. So is Berkley. Uh, so what? I wouldn't call state uny's conservative ... generally quite the opposite.

He who farts in church, sits in his own pew.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 30, 2007, 22:47:

Churchill was busted for some paper he wrote on 911. No one in a position of power can have a view of 911 different from the governments.

My point was not that he is some kind of friend of mine because he is not. And i don't agree with his paper that he wrote on 911. the man is a radical and really, what does anyone expect from a radical? My point was only that cath b can only do adhominem attacks and not discuss facts. and that is what she did.

the Purdue study was legitimate in terms of what? it was just a computer program. Anybody can make up a computer program to prove anything they want. garbage in....garbage out.

there were two computer programs made for the jfk plot. both opposed to each other.

the point is you have to look at where someone gets there funding when they make a study. i can't do it now, but i'll get that study tomorrow because i forgot most of it.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Dec 31, 2007, 08:57:

Ignoring most of the non-Colombian (or only very marginally so) aspects of the current topic-jacking...

chorizo: "cartherine ,tell me why every where you go some one has to watch your car,tell me why not one colombia women will ever put her bag on the floor,tell my all the colombian women put their jewely away and put it on when they get to the place they are going,tell me why every one is saying dont use atm ,tell me why no one will open their door here before seeing who is there,tell me why you dont stop on red lights at night,then put your phone on the table then come back and tell me how long it was there before it went for a walk,i really do think enough said ,but then i could easier reach a 100."

You actually have something of a point there, somewhere, but you'd be surprise at the amount of exceptions to some of those generalizations of yours, to say the least. That is, if you'd be willing to listen to anyone else.

gringoloid:

"GIB, Lowell, chorizo, and myself are the only ones here that know what colombia is like; "

Talk about tooting one's own horn and throwing everyone else off a cliff.

"we live the crookedness everyday, all day long."

Ergo, all or most Colombians are crooks, everyday, all day long? Wonderful logic.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 31, 2007, 09:43:

"GIB, Lowell, chorizo, and myself are the only ones here that know what colombia is like; "

Wow, what a statement. I'm glad I missed it.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 10:33:

Juanceg......you're taking my comments out of context. It's all there, up above.

cath b attacked chorizo because of a metaphor he used using the tactic of political correctness.

you have a debate with me if you use political correctness, which is a form of censorship, to nullify my points.

Sorry, don't like political correctness.

The reason i used those guys is that they are not afraid to tell the truth. There are many others here, but they keep it to themselves.

And so do I, the management has their rules and it is of political correctness. For telling the truth, I would have my account deleted. It's Peters site and he can run it any way he wants.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 10:43:

About an hour before I wrote that post I was at Goodyear getting a new set of tires in Bogota.

Made the deal, and then after the tires were off, the man says it is going to be a whole lot more.

Me, who was expecting this, attempted to give him and two other employees a "Pirelli-285/75 R17 Enema".

The Political Incorrectness of it all! Gringo feels he is going to get ripped off beforehand.

The bill turned out to be $250 mil less than the original quote.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 10:43:

I seem to be "attacking" so many people here simply by exercising my right to free speech, I'd like to know when I'm getting my generals stripes. I think I've earned them.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 10:51:

Right now, I'm not in a very good mood when it comes to character content of anybody, no matter what nationality in colombia.

I did a restaurant deal in Santa Marta from July to November and it was the worst business experience of my life.

i lost a lot of fokkin money on this place, and I'm still trying to straighten things out.

For two months, I've been sitting here stunned over what happened.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 31, 2007, 10:54:

"Sorry, don't like political correctness."

I apologize for butting in a discussion where I'm not invited, but thought of pointing out something I recently discovered. That nobody likes PC, until it hits them. Everyone is naturally annoyed by how everyone else is so offended by what seems like trivialities... until they find a "triviality" that offends them.

I'm not too crazy about precision in statements: We can take the argument of imprecision to the point that we make something impossible to communicate. And I'm not too crazy about generalities either. It's obvious that it is far easier to get your stuff stolen in Bogotá than in many other places, but it is also obvious that not all Bogotanos are crooks. If you can say what you mean clearly, and without offending other people, I think that's good. Call it PC or whatever: Offending for the sake of offending seems juvenile and of poor taste to me.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 10:56:

I made the mistake of just limiting that list; of course there are others; and juance, your probably very knowledgable about business.

doug the elder wrote a good post about a piece of furniture he didn't get and how he had to solve it. of course he knows the deal.

morphus wrote a good travel post this morning.

JohnStark who is mostly kidding around with us, writes about the cold realitites of business sometime.

Yes, they speak in general terms and it certainly does not apply to everyone, but generally speaking, what chorizo and others say is very near the truth.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 10:59:

I've done some serious business with 4 obscure people on this site, all colombian, who treated me better than I would be treated by a boy scout troop in the U.S.

They are professional, did more work than they were paid to do, and were looking out for me. I'll post their names with their permission.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 11:13:

But I'm afraid that if I don't know you then you don't get paid until the work is done.

You're my vendor? Then I don't sign until everything you say you do is delivered.

You're my banker? (I opened an account with Colmena in early november with a deposit and for the last 6 weeks, no one seems to know what happened to my account or the money in it.) Yes, I'm going to be a little loud and rude with you from here on out.

you're my employee? (I have to be political correct or leave the site!) I don't _____ you any further than I can throw a piano. You are ____________ to the bone. No, I'm not ________ any money.

if someone wants to take the time and work for me and be trustworthy then I will return and write what wonderful people I have as employees.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Dec 31, 2007, 12:28:

gringoloid : "Juanceg......you're taking my comments out of context. It's all there, up above."

To a certain extent, yes....but even in context, that conclusion, PC or no PC, has enough holes.

If you say "these are my experiences and this is what I think about doing business in Colombia", then fine.

But if you say "these are my experiences and that is the only truth, because nobody else other than me and two other guys know and admit what Colombia is like, so all Colombians are X, Y, Z"...then, PC or no PC, people with different experiences can definitely say, using whatever words you may prefer, that "no, it's not always like that or not at all, that's not the only truth, other people also know what Colombia is like". That's no "censorship" or what have you.

Other than that, while I do seem to care more about precision than SrTertius (a lot of the time, at least), I can agree with his general conclusion:

"If you can say what you mean clearly, and without offending other people, I think that's good. Call it PC or whatever: Offending for the sake of offending seems juvenile and of poor taste to me."

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:25:

Juance, you should feel honored that Gringoloid deems that you, as a Colombian living in Colombia, might have SOME knowledge of of your own country, not as much him or some of the foreigners he mentiond, but still high praise indeed. Too funny.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:50:

i don't mean to be offensive to colombians, only offensive to political correctness.

my soon to be wife is colombian.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:58:

I hate PC as much as anybody and one of Colombia's biggest virtues is that it is one of the least PC places on earth.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 15:17:

quote:
Juance, you should feel honored that Gringoloid deems that you, as a Colombian living in Colombia, might have SOME knowledge of of your own country, not as much him or some of the foreigners he mentiond, but still high praise indeed. Too funny.

I never commented on the colombian intelligence level of Juance; I have no idea who he is, but I said he is probably a great businessman. Please cut and paste where I said that, billy. I'm going to keep asking for that until you retract that insult that you are attributing to me above.

Chorizo said you have to be vigilant in your business activities with colombians, using a metaphor.cath b, juance, sr tertus, chime in with the usual pc chit that is designed to censor and prevent discussion, "well, they're not all bad are they?

I've already addressed this; we're using general rules of conversation here. Rather than atypical examples, someone dealing in reality would use the group as a whole.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 15:25:

I don't see colombian businessmen and women buying into your pc chit.

In addition to the ones already mentioned: why does the cashier at the checkout counter almost always hold my 20 or 50 mil bill up in the light before they accept it? (Gringos aren't all bad are they?)

Why are bogotanos so worried about parking their cars out on the street all night?

Why do a lot of stores like farmacias have their merchanidise behind the counter? (Customers aren't all bad are they?)

Why did a property management company in Medellin ask me for 12 grand, in cash, up front to cover a years rent in advance? Must have had some reason for that.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 15:32:

Chorizos point still stands.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 15:35:

cath b says:
I seem to be "attacking" so many people here simply by exercising my right to free speech, I'd like to know when I'm getting my generals stripes. I think I've earned them.

You may be exercising your right of free speech, but your speech is imposing PCism which is denying chorizo to make a general point.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 15:39:

cath, juan, bill, sr,---

when you guys own a farmacia here, or some other kind of business, and you leave all your merchandise out in the aisle, don't check for counterfeit money, park your car on the street at night, do absentee managment because the employees can run the place for you, come back and let me know-----i would love to film this.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

john_stark says on Dec 31, 2007, 16:07:

My wife assumes that everyone she is dealing with is a crook out to rob her until they prove otherwise. That attitude seems to serve her well.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 16:13:

Dear Chorizo....

happy new year to you too! I realize that this has been the most trying year in your life and you're eagerly looking to start the new year.

Few can go through the trials and tribulations you have gone through these past months and still come out with a postive, helpful attitude towards others.

I'm not a religious man and neither are you, but if there was a heaven, I'm sure there is a spot reserved for all the good, kindness, and genorosity you have done in Colombia.

Again, I'm truly sorry for the events in your life this past year but i know you have the strength to overcome.

Be good, brother...SC

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 16:19:

"You may be exercising your right of free speech, but your speech is imposing PCism which is denying chorizo to make a general point."

"Imposing"??? "denying"???? Who got deleted? Who's been stopped from making any comments? As far as I can see Chorizo and his comments are still around.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

gringoloid (Trustee board) says on Dec 31, 2007, 16:29:

yes they're still around. I'm talking about the point, as well as the pc tactic that you used with him.

PCism is meant to stifle reality and discussion. chorizo said you have to watch your desk so so