HUGE HOSTAGE SCANDAL!

juancegomez says on Dec 31, 2007, 13:12:

It would be huge if true.

Uribe said that this is only a hypothesis, and among other things that DNA test would be needed.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 13:15:

Right now it's just a hypothesis, but really Juance, with the eyes of the world watching and knowing how shrewd Uribe is do you really think he'd go out on a limb like that?

I mean he would have to be incredibly stupid to call a press conference and just submit a suspicion. This is something very delicate. I think they know a lot more then they're presently revealing. Did you notice how smug and confident Santos was looking?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Dec 31, 2007, 13:19:

If you ask me, either he's actually got something really concrete, or he's rushing things for reasons that are mere speculation.

I don't know which one to believe right now, we'll have to see...

A quick summary of the following article, including some of the other things said in the press conference:

Uribe is saying that, in response to a request from Venezuela, he is going to order the creation of a "corridor" where military operations would be suspended, including the area where the hostages would be right now and where they would be freed.

He also says that there is a hypothesis, according to which the son of Clara Rojas, Emmanuel, may not be in FARC's hands but in a Bienestar Familiar facility in Bogotá. Separately, he also mentioned that DNA tests (using the grandmother) could be done in order to confirm or dismiss this.

*****************************
Actualidad /
El presidente Uribe ofrece corredor sin operaciones militares y plantea que Emmanuel no está con las Farc
Fuente: Caracol 12/31/2007 - 15:54:00

El presidente colombiano, Alvaro Uribe, dijo que ante una propuesta del canciller de Venezuela, Nicolás Maduro, ordenaría la suspensión de la iniciativa militar en una franja que comprende el sitio donde están los secuestrados y el lugar de la liberación.

El primer mandatario reveló también una hipótesis que está manejando el gobierno colombiano, según la cual las Farc no han entregado a los secuestrados porque no tienen a Emmanuel, quien supuestamente estaría en un centro del Bienestar Familiar en Bogotá.

Uribe estuvo reunido por varias horas con los comisionados internacionales, que serían testigos de la entrega, a quienes les explicó la voluntad del gobierno colombiano para que se dé la entrega de los secuestrados, y se explicó la hipótesis que sería el principal impedimento para la anunciada liberación.


http://www.caracol.com.co/noticias/526896.asp

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 13:21:

For those who don't have access to caracol. Here's a link to the story.
http://www.eltiempo.com/politica/2007-12-31/ARTICULO-WEB-NOTA_INTERIOR...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 13:24:

Juance, I agree that we can't confirm anything yet. But if it were a lie Uribe would never recover from that. My point is that there's a lot more that has'nt been revealed yet.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Dec 31, 2007, 13:25:

Of course, either way.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

dwr says on Dec 31, 2007, 13:26:

I would bet a hundred spot that Uribe's info is correct. I would bet another that farc will not release anybody.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tomtom33 says on Dec 31, 2007, 13:31:

Here's hoping that they trade Oliver Stone for some hostages.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

fecherklyn says on Dec 31, 2007, 13:41:

As has already been said......many things still need to be clarified/confirmed.

What is abundantly clear is that SOMEBODY has absolutely no regard for the hostages and their families. Whether "somebody" is eventually revealed as Uribe & Co or FARC/Chavez & Co, I hope the recriminations from the world will be swift in arriving.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 13:45:

Whoever this little boy is he's been the victim of child abuse. Sad.

http://www.elespectador.com/elespectador/Secciones/Detalles.aspx?idNot...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

webmanco says on Dec 31, 2007, 13:51:

Since when is its supposely Emmanuel at ICBF "Instituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familiar"

2005

Cuando fue entregado a Bienestar Familiar, el pequeño tenía ocho meses de edad y presentaba un notorio retraso en su desarrollo, así como una profunda tristeza, mencionó la funcionaria que lo recibió de alguien que dijo que los padres del menor habían sido asesinados.

No kid should be without a father and mother.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Cerealkiller says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:06:

Its very a very sad possibility. From what I read though, it is just a hypothesis and nothing has been confirmed. I don't think that if untrue it would hurt Uribe's popularity -or lack thereof- domestically or abroad. The man has recovered from numerous scandals this year, hypothesizing on the FARC's lack of commitment is not going to make a difference.

Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives -John Stuart Mill

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:09:

Fecherklyn: That somebody, I'm afraid, is pretty much everybody. Neither FARC nor anyone else (Uribe, or Chavez, maybe the Red Cross) are in this situation out of the kindness of their hearts. To be honest, I don't even think that Colombian society in general care that much about the fate of these people; we are so polarized that the main concern is who is going to look like a fool, Uribe, Chavez, FARC, or everyone. I'm afraid this conflict has dried up our hearts.

As for Uribe been wrong, he has been wrong before so many times with no consequences, that even if he is completely wrong about the whole "kid in ICBF hypothesis," that wouldn't hurt him a bit. Recall how he accused the peace community of San Jose de Apartado of being linked to FARC (which was proven false), how he accused FARC of their massacre (false too), how he said that the military had nothing to do with that (false again: A brigade, I believe 17, was actively involved in the massacre), how he accused Rafael Pardo, a presidential candidate, of being in cahoots with FARC (false), or Carlos Gaviria, another candidate, of having the highest pension from ISS (false)... I could go on and on, and in none of this cases proving him wrong had any significant consequence. If he is wrong about this too--and he may be right, though--it'd be just one more item on his pile.

Webmanco: Love your T-shirt. You know I really do.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:12:

I think it would hurt him enormously and he knows it. I honestly don't believe he'd make those revelations public unless he already had something concrete.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:16:

Chavez just declared amnesty or a presidential pardon to all those who participated in the 2002 attemptd coup.
What a coincidence. Just shortly after Uribe reveals some pretty damning information that could very well knock down the tents of this whole farc/Chavez circus.

http://globovision.com/channel.php?cha=1

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:21:

Sr Tertius : True enough, but since he did say it was a hypothesis, not a fact, at least that allows him a viable way out in the case it turns out to be either a mistaken assumption or, hopefully not, an outright lie.

Now, domestically speaking, he's indeed quite resistant to the fallout from his lies, inaccuracies, exaggerations, threats or mistakes, as you've just said, but they are often relatively minor (or treated and presented as such by the media and/or the general public itself).

Something big enough, something that would truly shame him has yet to surface, at least for now, and who knows if his armor would be resistant enough in such an scenario.

Internationally, however, I don't believe his damage control would have the same efficiency. Not that the international community cares too much about Colombia either, but hey...we can already see some of the effects.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

webmanco says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:24:

Colombian society in general care that much about the fate of these people.

I do care about the fate of everybody, but not for those seeking "protagonismo"

The T-shirt was done in honor of a NY raised "Third Work Mind", soon retiring in Curramba.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:33:

I believe everybody participating in this cruel game of chess in which the lives of two innocent women and a small child do not matter; they are just pawns to be moved one step ahead, two sideways, three steps back, is looking worse and worse all the time. The FARC are looking bad, Uribe is looking really bad and Chavez and Piedad are not looking any better either.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:41:

Desi, why do you say that Uribe is looking really bad? I agree that it's become a game of chess with little regard to the hostages and their families. But Uribe has pretty much given in to most of farcs and Chavez demands (other than resigning).
After 5 days of letting them run the show and no results, plus Kirchner threatening to leave don't you think the president of the country where all this is taking place had to come forward and speak to the press?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:42:

Catherine: Of course it's no coincidence, but I don't quite get your indignation. Do you think that Uribe's discovery (if it is true) that this kid was in ICBF was just coincidental to everything that is happening in Villavo? I highly doubt it.

Yes, this is all a circus. Yes, everyone is protecting their own interest in this deal. Yes, everyone is an evil Machiavellian bullshitter, everyone is a media whore (Uribe none the least), etc, etc, etc. Well, that's the lot of politicians we chose, and that's what we have to work with. Eye on the price: Liberation of those held by FARC, first this group, then hopefully everyone else. If this has to be done through these clowns we have as leaders, so be it.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:44:

Yes, it's probably like a game of chess to a large extent alright, but one that is being played behind closed doors, not publicly.

We don't know which pieces are in fact being moved by each player, only those that are announced publicly (which may be wrong/false/incomplete). We also don't know the exact strategies at work, only the ones each party claims to be implementing. Other than that, we're only guessing based on past experiences and our personal interpretations.

Someone here, more than one party even, is either consciously lying, withholding information or simply making mistakes...I personally still hope that the outcome is positive for the three hostages, eventually, but Chavez's initial optimistic predictions seem to be quite off the mark.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:47:

Of course Uribe had to know about this and I believe he often lets Chavez treat him as a pendejo only to force his hand.

I would love to see all the hostages safely released, but I've said it before on this site: we'll be lucky if farc releases 2 out of more than 600.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

webmanco says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:49:

It looks more like a game of Teto, no one wants to "agacharse"

Colombia and Venezuela, las ovejas negras de Sur América
Llamando la atención del mundo




By Catherine B

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:51:

Sr Tertius, my indignation is that this poor woman (the grandmother) has been repeatedly promised she would have her daughter and grandson by xmas then by new years. She was even made to fly to Caracas (77 years old and with a walker) and all this time farc and possibly Chavez knew where this kid was.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Dec 31, 2007, 14:52:

Catherine; two things that are making Uribe look bad: first this boy that was left at 8 months of age at ICBF in San José de Guaviare, while there are testimonies of escaped guerrillas and desertors about Emmanuel being raised up by the guerrilla soldiers who play with him and make him toy horses of wood. It looks like Uribe was clutching to a straw to draw the attention away from Chavez and Oliver Stone and Piedad and all these other people; of course the possibility remains that the witnesses were talking about some other kid or just lying.

The second thing is that I believe Uribe should have stayed in Bogotá. He has no role to play at the liberation of the hostages and yet he would gain enormous prestige if this be the beginning of a ´true humanitarian exchange. If Uribe got these people, all of them, home safely he'd be everybody's hero. By interfering in the operation he's possibly shutting down the operation and the FARC will not let anybody free.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

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

Desi: I would have preferred his staying too, but I don't really think his brief presence in Villavicencio alone is going to prevent FARC from freeing people in the middle of the jungle or in a remote area, in or near Meta, Guaviare, Caquetá or some other department.

If he's responsible for interfering with the operation in some other manner (or for not actively making sure it's not interfered with), so be it, let that piece of flak fall down on him, but the visit alone doesn't change anything as far as I can tell. I don't think it shuts down the operation.

His words, on the other hand, could help make things worse (intentionally or otherwise), but he could have said the same things from Bogotá, for all we know.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

fecherklyn says on Dec 31, 2007, 15:17:

I think the difference this time is this scenario is being acted out under the public spotlights. Of course the main actors have been playing chess for some time now....but enter the "human interest" plot (homeless children, aged grandmothers hoping for family reunification, etc) and you suddenly have a new audience.

SnT, when you say Colombian society, in general, do not care about the fate of these people, I think, and hope, you are wrong. You are wrong, at least if I go by the people who I know and who have discovered a new "interest" in this tragical saga. For the 1st time in a longtime I feel the general public, Colombian and International, have focused on what is happening.

Unfortunately, their interest now aroused is centred on what appears to be a monstrous charade on the part of most of the actors. Lets see if anyone gets any curtain calls?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 31, 2007, 16:56:

Well, fecherklyn, I hope too that I am wrong. But for some people the fact that Oliver Stone didn't get his documentary, or that this looks bad on Chavez and FARC, outweighs the pain that the families of the kidnapped are experiencing.

That says a lot to me.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Dec 31, 2007, 17:03:

Just curious.

Has FARC ever done what they said they would do, when they said they would do it, with regard to the release of their high profile kidnap victims?

If they don't have a track record of keeping their promises in this regard- why would anyone, including the victims' families, be upset with any except FARC?

Again, I have no idea. I'm just trying to understand why anyone except those thugs would be held accountable.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Medellin Traveler says on Dec 31, 2007, 17:28:

I feel for the poor family members that have had so suffer yet again by these charades, especially around the freakin' holidays when everyone should be home with family, friends and loved ones.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 31, 2007, 17:47:

slguy: FARC released several soldiers during the Caguan years. Aside from that, I think there is very little precedent of negotiations with them for hostage releases. An analyst recently pointed out the change in strategy in FARC during the Uribe years, from a territorial war to a hostage war; Uribe's security policy worked pretty well to contain the former (there was a strategy), but it's not doing so well with the latter (there is clearly NO strategy). All sides are learning how to "fight" in this scenario as they go, and absent any channels of communication, it shouldn't surprise us that they seem so clumsy in trying to break a deal. Unfortunately, that makes it even harder for those directly involved, the families and the kidnapped.

My personal thoughts: Uribe needs to step back, meet with the families, tell them that the government is going to think over a plan, to be patient in the meanwhile. Retreat with key people over a weekend and draw a clear strategy, with partial goals, tactics, contingencies, etc. It should establish principles for the participation of third parties, and specify what will be revealed to the public for accountability purposes, and what will remain secret for tactical purposes. Announce the strategy. Implement it. Take responsibility.

Just my two cents.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 17:52:

I like your two cents.
My question is though has Uribe not met with these families and explained the situation to them? I mean as a family member no explanation is really going to make any sense. Understandably, they're thinking with their hearts. I don't blame or criticize the family. Any of us would react the same way.

It's only when you're not emotionally involved that you think objectively. It's just a tough situation all around.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Dec 31, 2007, 17:55:

slguy, we have had first hand experience with what the FARC's word means (absoulutely nothing). Two cousins that were kidnapped, were killed after several months of negotiations and an obscene ransome being paid. And these were two seperate situations. I know for a fact that the FARC lies when it comes to hostages.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Dec 31, 2007, 17:58:

"slguy: FARC released several soldiers during the Caguan years. Aside from that, I think there is very little precedent of negotiations with them for hostage releases."

Well, that's something, anyway. I guess the answer to my question, then is no - those animals have never released a high profile victim, especially not when promised.

At the risk of sounding cold...of course the victims and their families are suffering mightily, and my heart goes out to ALL of them...but why bother even trying to negotiate anything with these animals? Absent any history of credible behavior on FARC's part, isn't the whole scenario just a high profile circle jerk?

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

john_stark says on Dec 31, 2007, 18:01:

I'd nuke the whole lot of them, FARC, hostages, Venezuelans, NGOs, all of them.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

john_stark says on Dec 31, 2007, 18:05:

Nuke them too.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Dec 31, 2007, 18:07:

Did I hurt your feelings Salchicha? LOL.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Medellin Traveler says on Dec 31, 2007, 18:29:

john_stark,

What about Oliver? HOLLYWOOD needs him!

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

john_stark says on Dec 31, 2007, 18:34:

I'd give him the honor of riding that puppy like Slim Pickens in Dr. Strangelove.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 31, 2007, 18:34:

Catherine: There's a larger diplomatic component to all of this, and unless Uribe gets the families on his side, any strategy he draws may fall short in legitimacy. A year or so ago he could've ignore them, but now he can't. And the families have shown little sympathy toward the government. I can't blame them: Some government officials, like the Minister of Interior, has treated them literally like shit.

slguy: Your argument seems somewhat twisted to me. Because there is no precedent there cannot be any negotiation? I'm not claiming that FARC are the reincarnation of Mother Theresa, but there are precedents of successful negotiations with them--just not exactly under the current circumstances. I haven't been optimistic about any of this, not only because of the bad faith of FARC, but because of the bad faith of ALL sides and, more importantly, because of the absence of communication between the government and FARC. Carlos Lozano, the director of the Communist paper Voz and who had served as intermediary (among other people, like Conservative Alvaro Leyva) between Col government and FARC, pointed at the poor strategy of getting rid of all intermediaries under the assumption that FARC would be defeated militarily in a couple of years. Now Uribe seems to be backtracking, trying to put his own people in that role, and FARC is not taking it. In a completely gratuitous way, Uribe made enemies with everyone with whom FARC would talk (the aforementioned plus Camilo Gomez, Pastrana's High Commissioner). The only person left who was willing to serve that role was Piedad Cordoba, but that fuse was burned. After that, I doubt that other potential people , like PDA's Daniel Garcia-Pena (who is quietly helping the ELN process), are willing to ruin their political career to be part of some freak show like the one in Villavo.

Sorry for the long post. I didn't want to go celebrate the new year without leaving my third cent on the table.

As I've said before: If Uribe wants to go military on FARC to free their hostages, he'll have my complete support, but he'll have to assume the political responsibility for his choice. If it's not that, and if it's not talking with FARC, I'd like to hear what's the third option.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Dec 31, 2007, 18:38:

Sr Tertius, thanks for the info. That is something many people fail to understand: If the government wages a full scale war on farc you know there will be many if not all hostages killed in the crossfire. That's not something any responsible government wants on their hands. Uribe really is in a catch-22.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Dec 31, 2007, 18:43:

Sr. T , I don't think Uribe is unwilling to talk to the FARC, he is just unwilling to prostrate himself to their demands and give up sovereign territory like Pastrana did.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Dec 31, 2007, 18:47:

I certainly don't envy Uribe's position. I acknowledge that he has made some very good strategic decisions to contain FARC's territorial expansion that started in the early 2000's, but in the current situation he has made a lot of mistakes. Involving Chavez was probably the biggest one, but there were more.

I think he needs to think this whole thing over and take the reins of this situation.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Dec 31, 2007, 20:09:

I am not saying never to talk to them. But Puhlease! Chavez, Piedad, Oilver F'in Stone? Complete and utter waste of time, from the get go. And raising the victim's families' hopes, with no realistic expectation of success.

As far as I can ascertain, the only advantage to FARC to this release is that it provides Comrad Chaves some good press when he needs it badly. Is that reason enough for them to start turning over their human shields? I have my doubts.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

goin_south says on Dec 31, 2007, 20:34:

delighted to read all of this thread...
and all of your well-thought-out riggamaro... a todos..
It's always easy to call those in authority Clowns, and be an armchair QB on pbh.
Ipdiver was right. He said three days ago: It'll Never Happen.
Respects to billyb; he don't jus talk. He knows from experience, the truth.

“ I would rather be a conservative nut job rather than a liberal with no nuts and no job.” But, really what I am is a colombiana's sex slave; she took me by force, and I submitted ;-)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

tomtom33 says on Jan 1, 2008, 00:28:

Here is a strategy for you: There will never be any negotiation for any hostages under any circumstances punto.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

goin_south says on Jan 1, 2008, 00:31:

eh, tomtom.. and that is why j_s has a point:
nuke em all. otherwise... agony por siempre.

“ I would rather be a conservative nut job rather than a liberal with no nuts and no job.” But, really what I am is a colombiana's sex slave; she took me by force, and I submitted ;-)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jan 1, 2008, 07:45:

"I don't think Uribe is unwilling to talk to the FARC"

I'm not saying he is unwilling, in fact he is trying with his commissioner. I think he is incapable.

Did anyone see his ranting in Apiay? I couldn't finish. It was embarrassing.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Medellin Traveler says on Jan 1, 2008, 08:34:

What a joke!

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jan 1, 2008, 09:45:

I'd have to agree with SrTertius...Uribe has no clear strategy as far as negotiating in general goes, and instead seems to keep improvising on a regular basis. This seems to apply to almost all negotiation processes under this administration, including that with the AUC paramilitaries, to a large extent.

Honestly, he and his people do seem practically incapable of adopting a clear and consistent methodology...because even if they did NOT want any exchange negotiations at all, there would be far better ways to handle the issue (no Chávez, for example).

I'm still not ruling out that a "miracle" may occur, but I hope that a new administration at least brings new ideas to the table.

Btw, there has been one previous prisoner exchange agreement, precisely during the Caguán years, in which FARC released around 200-250 low ranking soldiers and police (keeping most of the officers, though this wasn't initially clear) and the Colombian government released about a dozen FARC guerrillas (after they signed a statement saying they wouldn't return to criminal activities, but that didn't really work), arguing that it was a "humanitarian" move due to health reasons.

Before that happened, as far as I can recall, the term "humanitarian" wasn't really closely associated with the entire exchange issue. Admittedly, none of the hostages were "high profile", and FARC separately refused to unilaterally release just one particular officer when his dying son wanted to see him (both later died, tragically), but it's a precedent, nevertheless. Negotiations can work, if both parties are willing to compromise, even if not everything turns out "just as planned".

0 funny, 0 helpful.

SamGompers says on Jan 1, 2008, 10:05:

anybody got any updates on the situation?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

webmanco says on Jan 1, 2008, 10:09:

Could it be that the goverment knew long time ago that a baby who could be "Emmanuel" was at the ICBF, and were just waiting for someone "from FARC" to pick the kid up. If that were the case I feel for the granmother. and the kids relatives

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 1, 2008, 10:16:

Well "suspicious" activity started to take place on December 28 when someone claiming to be the kid's dad went to this orphanage looking for him after leaving him there 2 years ago and at the time claiming to be his great uncle.

The news I'm hearing from family in Colombia is that once this individual was advised that the child had been placed in foster care in Bogota, there began a search in Bogota.

With everything going on in the last week you know Colombian intelligence had to be working overtime. I suspect (pure speculation on my part) that phone calls from farc operatives regarding the child were intercepted by Colombian intelligence.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 1, 2008, 10:19:

Oh another thing. The International Red Cross confirmed yesterday that the Colombian government had already advised them of their suspicions regarding Emmanuel on December 29, but for reasons of state confidentiality and security for the child they withheld the information until Uribe released it yesterday.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 1, 2008, 10:41:

You know if the whole thing with the hostages and their relatives we'nt so incredibly sad and tragic I could laugh more heartily at all the protagagonists.

After Chavez called Uribe just about every name in the book for the past month and less than 24 hours ago referred to him as a liar and "dinamitando" the hostage release he's now calling Uribe "compadre" and "hagamos las pazes".

Read the following. http://caracol.com.co/noticias/527067.asp

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jan 1, 2008, 10:45:

Can the DNA test done on one grandparent determine if the child really is Emmanuel?

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 1, 2008, 10:47:

I think so. From what I've read the mitochondrial DNA(inherited from our mothers) does'nt change. So Emmanuel should have the same mitochondrial DNA as his maternal grandmother.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

timeforachangeofid says on Jan 1, 2008, 10:58:

I could laugh more heartily at all the protagagonists

Really. Uribe too. You usually sound like his pr person

Common sense is the collection of prejudices acquired by age eighteen. Albert Einstein

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jan 1, 2008, 10:59:

Ok. I was just wondering how reliable the those tests are, when not done on parents themselves.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 1, 2008, 11:03:

"I could laugh more heartily at all the protagagonists

Really. Uribe too. You usually sound like his pr person"

He has'nt provided cause for amusement yet. When he does I'll laugh at him too. Pity Chavez missed his true calling. SNL, MAD tv. Any of them would love to have him.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

webmanco says on Jan 1, 2008, 11:08:

Regardless of Chavez protagonimst or good or bad, I do see El Tiempo cartoons to be of bad taste, mocking Chavez.

Juegue al trompo interactivo

Relaciones con Chávez, ratas corruptas, y tome la justicia en sus manos.

http://www.eltiempo.com/media/produccion/trompoInteractivo/

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 1, 2008, 11:23:

Goodness, you should see the cartoons, interactive games, etc from other countries as well...especially the Venezuelan opposition press.

Honestly, I don't feel sorry for Chavez. Bullies eventually get bullied themselves.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

goin_south says on Jan 1, 2008, 14:13:

I'm jus guessin... that is Simon Bolivar... 'glaring at Chavez' from the background photo... jaj... seems appropriate to me.

“ I would rather be a conservative nut job rather than a liberal with no nuts and no job.” But, really what I am is a colombiana's sex slave; she took me by force, and I submitted ;-)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Jan 1, 2008, 14:32:

yep. that would be Bolivar.

I've been thru his childhood home in caracas. he didn't suffer as a child.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jan 1, 2008, 14:37:

Oh, so it's not true that "Bolivar nació en Caracas en un potrero lleno de vacas...."

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

bill230 says on Jan 1, 2008, 15:43:

What a stange story, and tragic, of course.

Catherine: what do you mean this is a huge international scandal?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 1, 2008, 16:02:

bill230, certainly not as huge an international story as Benazir Bhutto's assasination or the dozens of deaths in Kenya, but if you know the background of this story and have been following it you'll understand why it's a scandal.

Clara Rojas' mother and brother already submitted dna samples to genetics experts from Bogota who arrived in Caracas today. We should know the results within 24 to 48 hours.

Her brother stated among other things that they're not leaving Caracas until Clara is released.
She's been in captivity for about 6 years and about twice farc has reneged so what makes the family think farc is going to release her anytime soon? They say Chavez asked them to stay and promised them they would soon have Clara.

I have a theory...again pure speculation on my part. It has been rumored for some time now by both ex- farc guerillas as well as Cuban government officials who've defected of the very close ties between Chavez and farc and the aid that Chavez provides to farc.
Chavez has to be fuming with farc right now and I would'nt be surprised if he demands farc to release Clara Rojas or else. If I were a gambling woman (which I'm not) I'd bet that once the DNA proves Emmanuel has been in Bogota all this time Clara Rojas will be released either this week or next.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 1, 2008, 16:46:

The International Red Cross is still in Villavicencio and will remain there a few more days. There are still a couple of Venezuelan helicopters stationed there. Who knows? Maybe the 2 women will be released, but without all the fanfare.

http://www.atravesdevenezuela.com/html/modules.php?name=News&file=arti...

http://www.atravesdevenezuela.com/html/modules.php?name=News&file=arti...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 1, 2008, 17:53:

The genetics team has returned to Bogota and now they're saying the results should be in within 10 to 15 days. Why so long??? Does anybody here know anything about dna tests?
http://www.caracol.com.co/noticias/527150.asp

0 funny, 0 helpful.

CatGirl says on Jan 1, 2008, 18:00:

There are a few types....depending on what you are looking for. Not sure what they ordered, but I would think they would cover all bases. For all to be complete I have seen 14 -21 days typical time. Depends on the lab and resources they use. Genetics is the up and coming specialty - many times the tests and results relys on the current standard practices - "evidenced based medicine" - this in itself can be similar to a political debate.

Love and Time: the only two things that cannot be bought, but only spent

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 1, 2008, 18:23:

Thanks CatGirl. I guess that makes sense the 10-15 days.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

CatGirl says on Jan 1, 2008, 18:44:

Yep...some practionners can argue. Some tests are too sensitive and some too broad or general. Many times there are additional tests to ensure the other tests were accurate jaja(complicated). If they want to ensure compete accuracy, they will do all of them. This can take time.

Love and Time: the only two things that cannot be bought, but only spent

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 1, 2008, 19:42:

Jose Gomez, the man who claimed to be the child's great uncle and later his father when he tried to retrieve him from bienestar familiar confessed to authorities today that he is not related to the boy.
According to unnamed security sources he also admitted that he does not know who the child is only that he was given to him by farc. Jose Gomez has allegedly also requested the government protection.
http://www.eltiempo.com/politica/2008-01-02/ARTICULO-WEB-NOTA_INTERIOR...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Jan 1, 2008, 20:27:

The Bolivar childhood home I visited was a very nice, typically-styled spanish colonial home. They even pointed out the trees in the courtyard, under which the future liberator studied.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

bill230 says on Jan 2, 2008, 05:56:

Catherine: Usually, scandal means disgrace to someone or some organization. It seems strange to call Farc's behaviour scandalous, so I assumed you meant someone else.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Jan 2, 2008, 06:14:

Failure to free hostages a fresh defeat for Chávez
By Alexei Barrionuevo Published: January 2, 2008

RIO DE JANEIRO: Last week, the Venezuelan president, Hugo Chávez, seemed on the verge of one of his biggest triumphs to date.

Now, amid renewed acrimony with the Colombian leader, Alvaro Uribe, he is staring at his second major political defeat in little more than a month.

Using his credibility as a former rebel leader, Chávez orchestrated a plan to release three hostages being held for years in the jungle by a Colombian guerrilla group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia, known as the FARC.

Bristling with confidence, he assembled his allies in Latin America, including a former Argentine president, Nestor Kirchner, to witness a breakthrough in the decades-old conflict between the Colombian government and the FARC. The movie director Oliver Stone was part of a multinational group of observers that included diplomats from seven countries.

Then on Monday, Chávez's showman moment seemed to turn from history-making success into his latest failure.

the FARC refused for four days to give the exact location of the hostages to Venezuelan helicopter pilots. Chávez read a letter from the rebel group late Monday that said the promised security conditions had not been met.

"This is an important defeat for Hugo Chávez's regional agenda to promote his Bolivian revolution and utilize his contacts with armed groups to win political influence," said Román Ortiz, the director of security for the Ideas for Peace Foundation, a Bogotá research institute focused on Colombia's armed conflict.

A successful mission would have been likely to embarrass Uribe, a conservative who has made little progress in negotiating the release of any of the several hundred hostages held in jungle camps, some for nearly a decade. Uribe has been skeptical of Chávez's attempts to spread his socialist ideology across the continent.

At the same time, the operation would have helped Chávez bounce back from a narrow defeat in a referendum last month on a proposal that would have tightened his grip on power.

For several days, at least, Chávez and Argentina's president, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, also managed to divert attention from the brewing scandal involving a suitcase filled with $800,000 in cash that is believed to be a secret Venezuelan donation to her election campaign.

Kirchner sent her husband to Colombia, and several other countries joined in a scramble to claim credit for helping to break the impasse in the only armed conflict in the Western Hemisphere.

But the FARC, which appeared to want to help Chávez while showing up Uribe, did not cooperate.

"Clearly, Chávez did provide the best chance for making some progress, but it wasn't enough," said Michael Shifter, a vice president at the Inter-American Dialogue, a policy group in Washington. "In the end, the distrust that the FARC felt for the Colombian government trumped any good feelings they felt for Chávez."

Uribe accused the FARC of lying about its reasons for scuttling the promised handovers, even suggesting that the rebels did not have one of the three hostages, a 3-year-old boy named Emmanuel who was born in captivity to a rebel soldier and Clara Rojas, another of the hostages.

Rojas and Consuelo González were to have been delivered with the boy to the Venezuelans.

Now the failed mission has exposed Chávez to criticism of misplaced priorities. As he worked to mediate the release of hostages in Colombia, at home in Venezuela kidnappings were spiraling.

Some estimates show that Venezuela has more abductions per capita than Colombia now but that the Venezuelan government has done little to tackle the problem.

Jenny Carolina Gonzalez contributed reporting from Bogotá.

Terms of Use

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Jan 2, 2008, 06:21:

Chavez's New Diplomatic Defeat
Tuesday, Jan. 01, 2008 By TIM PADGETT Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez speaks during a news conference in Caracas, where he told the media the detailed plan of releasing three Colombian hostages.
It is the one night when families make certain they're together. In Venezuela's most beloved poem, The Grapes of Time, by Andres Eloy Blanco, an expatriate in Madrid weepily laments that he's not toasting midnight back in Caracas with his mother. That made it all the more emotional last week when Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, in his new role as mediator between the Colombian government and Colombia's fierce Marxist guerrillas, raised hopes that three of the rebels' hundreds of civilian hostages would be reunited with their families on New Year's Eve.


But what Chavez discovered as he rang in 2008 last night is that the grapes of time sour pretty quickly in violence-torn Colombia. The hostage release collapsed as 2007 ticked away. Many had hoped it would not only revive peace talks to end Colombia's bloody, four-decade-old civil war, but also be a precursor to freeing three Americans held by the guerrillas. The debacle has now left Chavez looking humiliated, Colombian President Alvaro Uribe looking churlish and the leftist rebels, the Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces — known by their Spanish acronym, the FARC — looking more than ever like the deceitful thugs their critics insist they've become over the years.

Worse, it left the Colombian peace process looking as tangled as the jungle where waiting Venezuelan helicopters were supposed to retrieve the hostages. Nearby in Villavicencio, Colombia, south of Bogota, observers from France, Switzerland and six Latin American countries, as well as celebrity onlookers like American film director Oliver Stone, packed their bags and left shaking their heads. As he departed, Stone, who has a penchant for things guerrilla, said, "Shame on Colombia," referring to what was widely seen as meddling by President Uribe that may have helped sink the release operation.

There's enough blame to go around. In principle, the FARC agreed earlier this month to release former Colombian Congresswoman Consuelo Gonzalez and politician Clara Rojas, who were kidnapped six years ago. The third hostage was Rojas' 3-year-old son, Emmanuel, whose father is said to be one of the FARC captors. They were to be freed days before New Year's Eve. But when nothing happened last weekend, and when the FARC kept failing to provide Venezuelan officials with geographical coordinates for the release site, doubts began to rise.

And so did reminders that principle is hardly a reliable currency in FARCland. The left-wing Chavez learned an important lesson about the 20,000-strong rebel army: it could care les about its public relations image because it is powerful and rich enough not to have to care. Maybe it could have been counted on to keep its word a generation ago, when combating Colombia's epic social inequalities was still its primary objective. But today the FARC, which controls a mammoth swath of southern Colombia, is widely considered to be a ruthless mafia that earns as much as $1 billion a year via ransom kidnapping and protecting the country's cocaine trade. The U.S. State Department has listed both the FARC and Colombia's right-wing paramilitary armies as terrorist groups.

Standing up to the FARC has made the conservative Uribe a widely popular President, with both Colombians and the Bush Administration, which counts Uribe as its closest Latin American ally. But Uribe didn't exactly help matters late Monday when, as observers still held out hope that the FARC might come through, he seemed to break his own promise to stay clear of the process and arrived in Villavicencio with stunning news. Colombian government intelligence, he said, suggests that 3-year-old Emmanuel was released two years ago to a foster family. Whether that's true or not, Uribe left the impression that he was passively-aggressively scuttling the release effort to avoid the embarrassment of having FARC hostages delivered to Chavez; last month Uribe all but cut off the Venezuelan leader from the government-rebel negotiations when a dispute erupted between the two Presidents and their notoriously oversized egos. Chavez wondered the same thing aloud to reporters. Uribe, whose government is embroiled in a scandal over alleged ties to the right-wing paramilitary armies, denied it, insisting the FARC "has no excuse."

Chavez, however, may have set himself up for embarrassment. The New Year's debacle capped what has been a dismal few months for the radical, anti-U.S. leader, who controls the hemisphere's largest oil reserves. He started the year seemingly at the height of power, taking office after a landslide re-election and with crude prices breaking records by the day. But in November, during one of Chavez's rants at a summit in Chile, the King of Spain publicly told him to "shut up." That rebuke was followed this month by another from Venezuelans, who in a constitutional referendum voted down his bid to deepen his "21st-century socialism" and eliminate presidential term limits. As a result, Chavez and his backers no doubt saw the FARC hostage release as a way to revitalize his hemispheric influence — leading him, perhaps, to a naïve trust in the FARC.

This week's setback could, by the same token, make Chavez a smarter and more effective mediator in the long run. Many still believe that his leftist bona fides make him the right man to persuade the guerrillas to release hostages and the government to free hundreds of jailed rebels. All that could in turn help end a war that has killed almost 40,000 people, displaced millions more and drawn the U.S., albeit indirectly, into the conflict with some $1 billion a year in anti-drug aid.

February, in fact, marks the fifth anniversary of the FARC's capture of three U.S. defense contractors — and the sixth for the rebels' best known captive, liberal Colombian Senator and presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt, whose dual Colombia-French citizenship has made her a cause celebre in Europe. Chavez said he still believes the FARC will release Gonzalez and Rojas, who was Betancourt's running mate. But if they don't, 2008 will begin as yet one more year of shame for Colombia.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Jan 2, 2008, 07:00:

Enero 2 de 2008

Fracaso de liberación de secuestrados es de las Farc, considera en Secretario de la OEA


Según José Miguel Insulza, quien gana con esta polémica es la
guerrilla, porque así "consigue lo que quiere: publicidad y dividir
a la gente, como si alguno de los Gobiernos fuera culpable".

"Yo creo que aquí lo principal es no confundir, en ningún caso,
donde están los verdaderos culpables de esto, aquí los responsables no son ni el presidente �?lvaro Uribe ni el presidente Hugo Chávez", subrayó.

Uribe, a su juicio, "hace todo lo que puede por proporcionar la
paz a su país", mientras Chávez, "efectivamente ha hecho un gran esfuerzo personal".

"Los responsables son los secuestradores, los que tienen a esta
gente", agregó el secretario general de la OEA, que recordó que las Farc mantienen muchas personas secuestradas "desde antes que �?lvaro Uribe fuera presidente de Colombia y él ya está en su segundo período".

Agregó que ''lo principal es no confundir en ningún caso dónde están los verdaderos culpables de esto''.

"Las Farc son una organización muy hermética y muy impredecible, entonces de pronto pueden aparecer entregando información respecto de dónde están las personas", afirmó Insulza en declaraciones a radio Cooperativa.

El máximo responsable de la Organización de Estados Americanos
(OEA) precisó que, pese a la tensión entre Venezuela y Colombia, aún no es seguro dar por fracasado la liberación de Clara Rojas, su hijo Emmanuel y de la ex congresista colombiana Consuelo González.

La operación "Emmanuel" pareció fracasar el pasado martes, cuando el presidente de Venezuela, Hugo Chávez, difundió una declaración de las Farc en que la guerrilla afirmaba que operativos militares colombianos no les permitían entregar las coordenadas del lugar donde serían liberados los rehenes.

El presidente de Colombia, �?lvaro Uribe, acusó por su parte a la
guerrilla de mentir y aseguró que los rehenes no fueron liberados
porque el niño Emmanuel, nacido de una relación entre Clara Rojas y un guerrillero, no está en manos de las FARC sino que vive en
Bogotá, bajo otra identidad.

Los parientes de la compañera de fórmula de la ex candidata
presidencial Ingrid Betancourt, también secuestrada por las Farc, se someterán a pruebas de ADN para verificar la afirmación de Uribe.

Santiago de Chile
Con AP y EFE

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Jan 2, 2008, 09:06:

Argentinean opposition lambastes Kirchner for ties with Chávez (El Universal)




Leaders of the Argentinean opposition lamented the failed release of three hostages, as trumpeted by the Colombian Revolutionary Armed Forces (FARC), and railed on ex Argentinean President Néstor Kirchner for his ties with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez.

"The failed handover of Colombian hostages is regrettable," said Elisa Carrió, the leader of center-leftwing Coalición Cívica, the third political force in Argentina, told daily newspaper Clarín on Wednesday.

"The demagogic handling of the situation by Kirchner and Chávez is immoral," said the ex presidential candidate.

For his part, Ernesto Sanz, the head of opposition Unión Cívica Radical (URC), the second force at Congress, claimed that the move to free the FARC hostages "turned into quite a movie-like event."

Kirchner, he said, "ended up by getting the country in troubles due to his dangerous liaisons" with the Venezuelan president.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

goin_south says on Jan 2, 2008, 14:39:

can someone summarize, what's happened today...
I don't have time to read through the mess.

“ I would rather be a conservative nut job rather than a liberal with no nuts and no job.” But, really what I am is a colombiana's sex slave; she took me by force, and I submitted ;-)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Jan 2, 2008, 15:04:

I'll summerize for you, NOTHING. They got DNA samples from Clara's mom and brother to compare with the kid, the wait continues.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

catherine b says on Jan 2, 2008, 15:58:

Well, this story has more twists than a Byzantine labrynth. Now there's a hostage William Johany Domínguez who was kidnapped in February of 2007 who claims he always saw a child with Clara and Ingrid. But Jhon Pinchao who escaped from farc in April, 2007 claims that Ingrid and Clara had ben separated for several months before his escape and he remembers seeing the child when he was about 1 year old. The farc would bring him occasionally to Clara but she was not allowed to keep him.
I guess it's just wait and see...as ALWAYS!

http://www.talcualdigital.com/Avances/SeccionAvances.asp?IdAvance=4553...

http://www.elpais.com.co/paisonline/notas/Enero022008/nac02.html

http://www.abn.info.ve/go_news5.php?articulo=115588&lee=18

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Jan 2, 2008, 19:07:

eltiempo.com / politica



Hombre que entregó a niño que sería Emmanuel dijo que las Farc le dio ultimátum para recuperarlo

José Crisanto Gómez afirmó que la guerrilla le dio el niño para cuidarlo, pero el ICBF se lo quitó al llevarlo a un hospital. Luego, amenazaron con matarlo si no lo devolvía antes del 30 de diciembre.

Gómez, que fue trasladado ayer a Bogotá con sus familiares en un avión de la Policía, rindió declaración por varias horas ante el CTI.

Tal como lo había revelado ayer EL TIEMPO, reiteró que no tiene parentesco con el niño y pidió que él y su familia fueran acogidos en el programa de protección de testigos.

Gómez llevó en 2005 al hospital de San José del Guaviare a un menor que identificó como Juan David Gómez Tapiero, quien según la hipótesis del Gobierno es Emmanuel, el hijo de Clara Rojas.

El hombre contó que el menor se lo entregaron guerrilleros de las Farc que, en el 2005, llegaron en lanchas hasta El Retorno (Guaviare), lugar donde vive. Le dijeron que debía responder por él y que si no lo hacía tendría problemas.

El niño, dijo, presentaba alto grado de desnutrición, comía poco y unos días después de recibirlo sufrió una diarrea crónica que lo obligó a llevarlo al hospital de San José del Guaviare. En el centro de salud, el ICBF lo tomó bajo su custodia porque pensaron que se trataba de un caso de maltrato infantil.

El hombre aseguró que luego de esto no hizo nada por recuperarlo y solo tuvo noticias de las Farc hace un mes, cuando lo buscaron y le preguntaron por el niño.

Les contó dónde estaba y ellos le notificaron que tenía plazo hasta el 30 de diciembre pasado para recuperarlo.

Dijo que en vista de la amenaza acudió a reclamarlo al Icbf, en Bogotá, y se presentó como el padre. En el 2005, dijo que era su tío abuelo.

Sin embargo, la Fiscalía ya investigaba el caso luego de que hace unos días recibió cuatro llamadas anónimas que hablaban de un menor en poder del ICBF, al parecer, el hijo de Clara Rojas, y que por eso las Farc estaban dilatando la entrega de ella, el pequeño y Consuelo González.

La Fiscalía solicitó información a ese organismo sobre los menores entregados en San José del Guaviare y todo coincidía con la descripción del caso de Juan David.

Para el Gobierno, lo contado por Gómez explicaría porqué las Farc dilataron la entrega de los secuestrados.

El Gobierno lanzó la hipótesis sobre Emmanuel el lunes, luego de que el presidente Hugo Chávez, en una carta, dijo que las Farc suspendían la liberación por supuestos operativos militares.

Ayer, fuentes de la Fiscalía explicaron que la prueba de ADN para determinar si se trata o no de Emmanuel podría tardar entre 24 y 48 horas, y que esta daría los primeros indicios científicos.

Hay otras pistas

Uno de los episodios que ha generado mayor suspicacia en el caso del niño Juan David Gómez Tapiero, señalado por el Gobierno de ser en realidad Emmanuel, el hijo de Clara Rojas, tiene que ver con el defensor de Familia Alberto Cuta, que habría remitido al menor a Bogotá para su cuidado.

Corrieron rumores de que el defensor fue asesinado poco tiempo después, pero según el coronel Eugenio Ramos, comandante de la Policía de Guaviare, el crimen habría ocurrido hace apenas un par de meses y no existe indicio alguno que permita establecer las causas del mismo.

En medio de las versiones sobre la identidad del menor de edad salieron a relucir las declaraciones del oficial del Ejército William Giovanni Domínguez Castro, secuestrado por las Farc desde el 20 de enero del 2007, quien en unas pruebas de supervivencia conocidas a mediados del año pasado, dedicó buena parte del tiempo a hablar de Clara Rojas y de su pequeño, a los que habría visto en manos de la guerrilla durante su cautiverio.

Anncol descalifica pruebas de ADN

La agencia de noticias Anncol -que publica en Internet información de las Farc-, puso en duda ayer un eventual resultado positivo de las pruebas de ADN que se le hicieron al niño Juan David, quien, según el Gobierno, podría ser Emmanuel y está bajo protección del Instituto Colombiano de Bienestar Familiar desde el 2005.

"Ya ellos saben el resultado. Allí estará la mano siniestra de los Estados Unidos. Todos los exámenes que ellos hagan demostrarán que ese niño 'es Emmanuel'. Habrá en consecuencia dos Emmanuel. Sólo su madre sabrá cuál es el verdadero, el de ella", dice la agencia al cuestionar la veracidad de la hipótesis del Gobierno. Así las cosas, la verdad solo se conocería si hay una liberación.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Jan 2, 2008, 19:15:

"Ya ellos saben el resultado. Allí estará la mano siniestra de los Estados Unidos. Todos los exámenes que ellos hagan demostrarán que ese niño 'es Emmanuel'. Habrá en consecuencia dos Emmanuel

Looks like the FARC is already getting their "story" ready for when the child is proven to be Clara's.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

goin_south says on Jan 2, 2008, 19:56:

(brief, capsulizations... en ingles... por todos.. as this story unravels, .. por favor.)

and,.......THANKS.

“ I would rather be a conservative nut job rather than a liberal with no nuts and no job.” But, really what I am is a colombiana's sex slave; she took me by force, and I submitted ;-)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

christobeldawg says on Jan 2, 2008, 20:08:

pero Gs you are forgetting some of us speak primarily Spanish here. You gringos think we all should speak English.

admittedly, arriving can feel great too

0 funny, 0 helpful.

goin_south says on Jan 2, 2008, 20:11:

hay no problema Dawg.
and I hope this time arrivin is better than the travelin.

You wanna purchase my pbh handle?
I shouldn't be .. Goin_South... much longer ;-)

“ I would rather be a conservative nut job rather than a liberal with no nuts and no job.” But, really what I am is a colombiana's sex slave; she took me by force, and I submitted ;-)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

christobeldawg says on Jan 2, 2008, 20:24:

jajaja. agreed. manifestations are also sweet.

admittedly, arriving can feel great too

0 funny, 0 helpful.

christobeldawg says on Jan 2, 2008, 20:54:

so is the hostage deal definitely done, or just on hold, or on wtf?

admittedly, arriving can feel great too

0 funny, 0 helpful.

lpdiver says on Jan 2, 2008, 20:54:

or what

"cook some rice!"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Jan 3, 2008, 05:44:

Still on hold. A loose translation of the post above is that the FARC, through their mouthpiece, ANNCOL, are already preparing their story for when DNA might prove that the kid in Bogota is Clara's and are starting to say that of course the DNA will say it is, because the US will manipulate the results. So like everything else on this earth, it is the fault of you fokin americans, jaja.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Jan 3, 2008, 07:55:

Of course, it was those scurvy Brits who discovered DNA, so maybe it will be their fault.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

athensugadawg says on Jan 3, 2008, 18:00:

A better way to handle this is to split samples among the Colombian team and a designated Venezuelan team and then compare the independent results....given that these are not "precious" samples (i.e. the child in question and the abuela are still alive), I think that this would be a feasible solution that the FARC could not dispute...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

athensugadawg says on Jan 3, 2008, 18:10:

Even better...submit samples to each country that had observers that were present at the hostage hand-off that never happened. Then have Oliver Stone present the results in his "mockumentary"...

0 funny, 0 helpful.

CatGirl says on Jan 3, 2008, 19:45:

MMmm Hello boys....It's like Anna Nichole all over again....waiting for DNA. Purrr

Love and Time: the only two things that cannot be bought, but only spent

0 funny, 0 helpful.

goin_south says on Jan 3, 2008, 20:32:

Anna 1, anna 2, anna ... who?

“ I would rather be a conservative nut job rather than a liberal with no nuts and no job.” But, really what I am is a colombiana's sex slave; she took me by force, and I submitted ;-)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

billyb says on Jan 4, 2008, 06:16:

The OAS is going to do follow up tests.


http://www.elpais.com.co/paisonline/notas/Enero032008/oeaadn.html

0 funny, 0 helpful.

robi666 says on Jan 4, 2008, 06:31:

http://www.eltiempo.com/politica/2008-01-04/ARTICULO-WEB-NOTA_INTERIOR...

"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.

athensugadawg says on Jan 4, 2008, 09:12:

Does Mr. Stone have an apology ready?

0 funny, 0 helpful.

slguy says on Jan 4, 2008, 10:04:

The Miami Herald's reporting a match.

http://www.miamiherald.com/news/breaking_news/story/367174.html

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.