Otro Guaitarilla?

platano says on May 23, 2006, 17:47:

I remember... and ... this is the fourth Guaitarilla. FIRST GUAITARILLA
In 1536 our Cali friend Sebastián de Belalcázar and Capitán Francisco Hernández Girón masacred some of the native inhabitants.

SECOND GUAITARILLA
In May of 1800 the indigenas were again masacred, this time when they rebelled against the colonial abuse of the natives by the brothers Rodríguez Clavijo.

THIRD GUAITARILLA (March 2004)
Uribe promised a full report and resolution "punishing those responsible" within a week. A year passes. Charges dropped Feb. 2005 after investigation by Justicia Penal Militar, que como reza su himno, “…la balanza, la venda demuestra la justicia y la imparcialidad;…” “…con su ética siempre será transparente y ceñida a la norma como el fondo de un gran manantial.”

The killers are allowed to walk the streets freely, "gozando de su libertad"... Killers on the loose by order of Justicia Penal Militar...CÓPIESE, NOTIFÍQUESE Y CUMPLASE.

FOURTH GUAITARILLA (see OP)

plátano

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on May 23, 2006, 19:46:

platano I'm afraid that the first two of those events you list, as horrible as they were, in no way constitute a "Guaitarilla" in the sense employed here. Unless you want to talk of thousands of "Guatarillas" as a generic term for massacres and killings (against natives?). I believe that isn't the sense being used here.

Otherwise, your description of the third Guaitarilla is also somewhat inaccurate and definitely incomplete.

As rejectable as JPM's decisions in the case were, and I'm certainly against the very existence of the so-called "fuero militar" in its current form (even though it's been reformed and several of its previous functions removed, it's still far too kind to its own comrades) to begin with...I'd be very surprised if you or anyone else here knew for sure what really happened, what should have been the "true" veredict, or who should be held legally and judicially responsible, in order to say that "the killers are allowed to walk the streets freely" with such ease.

That phrase, IMHO, while perhaps well-meaning at its core, is not one that I would use.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

platano says on May 23, 2006, 20:41:

jcg, I am using the language of the JPM decision... And I quote from the document:
CONFIRMADO PROCESO GUAITARILLA
TRIBUNAL SUPERIOR MILITAR
JUSTICIA PENAL MILITAR

Por segunda vez conoce la Primera Sala de Decisión, en ésta Corporación Colegiada Castrense, la providencia adiada el 4 de febrero de 2005, en el proceso adelantado por Homicidio Múltiple ocurrido en desarrollo de una operación militar... (page 1)

"SEGUNDO: Consecuente con lo anterior disponer que los citados procesados continuaran gozando de su libertad por razón y causa de este proceso." (page 79)

The initial report from the attorney general's office, the forensic report, also shows that the victims were shot inside their vehicles, at short distance and that their bodies were moved out of the cars to make them look as though they had been shot outside.

I don't believe the facts are in dispute in this case. I assume you know they murdered 4 civilians and 7 policemen (a GAULA team).

They are killers, they are exonerated, and they are walking the streets freely, "gozando de su libertad".

The first two Guaitarilla are similar to the third and the fourth in that they also involved killings in Guaitarilla for which no one was held responbible.

plátano

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on May 23, 2006, 22:37:

Doesn't change that much That a multiple homicide occured and that killers were involved and that things were tampered with, something not denied by me anywhere, doesn't mean that "the killers are allowed to walk the streets freely" is an entirely appropiate expression.

That may sound weird at first glance, but my point is this: such general phrases have little use beyond condemnation after the fact, because nobody knows for sure which of the soldiers and officers being investigated were really "the [specific] killers" and which weren't. We can guess that those being investigated were somehow involved in the killings, but not much more than that. A general condemnation that doesn't shed light on the real responsibilities of each person involved (including, of course, who were the real killers).

"The first two Guaitarilla are similar to the third and the fourth in that they also involved killings in Guaitarilla for which no one was held responbible."

Two things.

1. Are you sure that those happened in Guaitarilla and not somewhere else in the same region?

2. That's barely the thinnest of common factors. It would seem that the main element that defines a Guaitarilla, in the sense used here, is a case where members of state forces killed members of other state forces and (optionally) nobody was really held responsible after the fact (we don't know if that will also happen in the latest case, which didn't happen in Guaitarilla at all, btw).

0 funny, 0 helpful.

platano says on May 24, 2006, 05:49:

jcg, you say: "nobody knows for sure which of the soldiers and officers being investigated were really "the [specific] killers"

I respectfully disagree. The Colombian Army does know the precise identity of the killers:

"...SS. HOYOS ESCOBAR LUIS ORLANDO, C3. GARCIA FRANCO WILSON, SLP. QUISOBONY DUQUE JORGE FERNANDO, SLP. NUÑEZ ESCOBAR CARLOS JULIO, SLP. LUCUMI RODRIGUEZ OMAR TULIO, SLP. ESCOBAR TENORIO ROBINSON, SLP. ROSERO GUEVARA JUAN MANUEL, SLP. PAZ SUAREZ JHON ALEXANDER, SLP. MAZUERA GOMEZ CESAR ELIECER, SLP. JIMENEZ CARDENAS CARLOS ALBERTO, SLP. UYAQUE TULCAN EFREN RAFAEL, y SLP. CORTES VALENCIA CARLOS ALBERTO, de condiciones personales y militares conocidas en autos, orgánicos del Batallón de Infantería No.9 “Batalla de Boyacá”, a quienes se les sindicó el delito de HOMICIDIO, cometido por las causales de justificación en estricto cumplimiento de un deber legal; en cumplimiento de orden legitima de autoridad competente emitida con las formalidades legales..." [the capitalization is in the original document]

A legal killing of GAULA officers and civilians. And the killers are walking the streets freely, "gozando de su libertad"

I accept your other point. Aside from being a mass murder, committed by the powers that be, in which no one was held accountable, the similarity ends in that the victims were not state personnel (although in the THIRD GUAITARILLA not all the victims were officials either. Civilians were mass murdered in the FIRST, SECOND, THIRD, and apparently one civilian was killed in the FOURTH, and there are probably other similar "incidents" I have no knowledge of. Civilians are regularly murdered.

Just last week the military murdered another civilian. I hold no hope that anyone will be held accountable. There have been literally thousands of murders of civilians by the military and rarely is anyone held accountable. ("Todo queda impune" is a phrase I heard over and over in Colombia). From such actions by the military the FARC is guaranteed continued willing combatants. (las matanzas de civiles por los militares nutren las FARC).

plátano

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Miguel_Clavo says on May 24, 2006, 07:46:

Damn, dont you just love a "conspiracy"...or, could it have been a simple "accident" between armed government agents who assumed the other party was the bad guy? does the term "Friendly Fire" ring a bell??? or is it more likely Platano just likes to cut and paste his trashing of everything the governments of either the US or Colombia does?? (more likely the truth, IMHO). But what would one expect from a FARC cheerleader who cheers for the real killers over there, namely FARC...yet wants readers to do a group hug for the sake of humanity and "loving relationships"....Just a total contradiction in postings, which is par for the course for him....But lets ignore the fact that both the anti-narco troups and the military were doing their assignments, and yes, i guess they are human too, and can make mistakes as humans do...Well, my friend, at least they are actively doing something to improve life in colombia, as opposed to your normal useless rantings and cut and paste exercises....many miles away, in the comfort of your own home, with nothing but a sense of security about you and yours.....Typical internet pseudo-intellectual, whiner and theorist...but at least the damage done by your posts and the posts of the other antigovernment cheerleaders is limited to internet fodder on PBH, and as such, is inconsequential in the real world.

But other than that, i am sure you are a nice person! =)

Just my opinion...

Miguel_Clavo.......faltan 37 días.....

"Ignorance is a Weapon of Mass Destruction..."

"I would rather die living life, than to live a dying life."........ Oh, and my PM is always ON. Great Bumper Sticker: "Home of the Free, Because of the Brave"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

platano says on May 24, 2006, 07:50:

Miguel_Clavo, Thank you for the kind words. (the last 30 characters of your post before the smiley)

plátano

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Miguel says on May 24, 2006, 09:11:

After reading today's EL TIEMPO Seems to me this incident is wide open to speculation.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on May 24, 2006, 10:12:

platano "I respectfully disagree. The Colombian Army does know the precise identity of the killers:"

Forgive me, but I think that isn't an exact statement at all.

That is a list of people that were accused and were being investigated for the killings, "se les sindicó el delito de HOMICIDIO", not a list of people that were judicially or otherwise found to be the killers. It doesn't say "se les dictó sentencia por el delito de HOMICIDIO".

An accusation or an investigation doesn't equal a sentence, as former magistrate Carlos Gaviria well knows. Innocent people can be among the accused, just as guilty people may avoid investigations entirely. Recognizing that isn't too hard, I think.

Can you swear that every single person on that list is a killer, bar none? It is perfectly possible, but it is not totally certain. The document you are citing doesn't confirm anything either.

"Civilians were mass murdered in the FIRST, SECOND, THIRD, and apparently one civilian was killed in the FOURTH, and there are probably other similar "incidents" I have no knowledge of. Civilians are regularly murdered."

Never said otherwise. But the proportion of civilians murdered and the circumstances are very different, especially in the first two examples.

"Just last week the military murdered another civilian. I hold no hope that anyone will be held accountable."

I wouldn't count on it, but I wouldn't deem it impossible either.

"There have been literally thousands of murders of civilians by the military and rarely is anyone held accountable. ("Todo queda impune" is a phrase I heard over and over in Colombia)."

A phrase which is usually true, but strictly speaking it is also a slight exaggeration.

"From such actions by the military the FARC is guaranteed continued willing combatants. (las matanzas de civiles por los militares nutren las FARC)."

I could say the same thing in reverse: Y las matanzas (o simplemente los ataques y presiones, para no quedarnos sólo en las matanzas) de civiles por las FARC nutren a las fuerzas militares y policiales y a los paramilitares.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on May 24, 2006, 10:15:

Miguel Wide speculation indeed.

Which is why I've avoided making any guesses about the most recent incident, because too many things are possible at this point in time.

EDIT: Sorry I confused the two Miguels, mea culpa!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Miguel says on May 24, 2006, 10:19:

juancegomez Miguel_Clavo posted something different, yet very valid.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on May 24, 2006, 11:18:

More on the latest case
Fueron trasladados los veinticuatro militares vinculados a la tragedia de Jamundí

Valle del Cauca, Colombia, 24 Mayo (RCN) – Los uniformados llegaron a la tercera Brigada del Ejército en Cali, allí serán sometidos a interrogatorios por parte de la Justicia.

El presidente Álvaro Uribe anunció que la Justicia Penal Militar se aparta de esta investigación y que todo queda en manos de la Fiscalía.

http://noticias.canalrcn.com/noticia.php3?nt=30743

24-05-2006
11:35 a.m.
Hay indicios de que muerte de 10 policías en Jamundí no ocurrió por error, afirmó el Vicepresidente

"No podemos quedarnos con la duda de qué pasó y las sanciones deben llegar a los niveles más altos'', advirtió Francisco Santos.

En declaraciones a Caracol Radio, Santos calificó el hecho como "muy grave'' y enumeró los elementos que lo hacen dudar de que se haya tratado de un simple error:

Primero, era "un operativo a la luz del día. Segundo, porque los señores iban identificados. Tercero, era un operativo a 500 metros de una carretera. Cuarto, porque no quedó nadie vivo''.

"El ejército tiene que responder y va a tener que contarnos cómo se hizo ese operativo con semejante uso de fuerza'', agregó.

El incidente se produjo el lunes en la tarde, cuando los policías antinarcóticos iban acompañados de un informante civil que supuestamente les iba a mostrar el lugar en el cual había un alijo de cocaína.

Con AP

http://eltiempo.terra.com.co/judi/2006-05-24/ARTICULO-WEB-_NOTA_INTERIOR-2908886.html

Mayo 24 de 2006
Comandante del Ejército y Director de la Dijín explican las versiones sobre el caso

'Iban con chaquetas de identificación'

El director de la Dijín, general Óscar Naranjo, le dijo a EL TIEMPO:

“Esto no se puede comparar con Guaitarilla . La orden de esta operación salió de Bogotá, avalada por mí. El informante hablaba de la existencia de 200 kilos de cocaína en la zona”.

“Los policías iban con chaquetas y gorras (de la Dijín) que los hacían plenamente identificables”.

“La zona donde ocurrieron los hechos no es boscosa, no es selvática, es un área suburbana de casas de recreo, que al parecer no representa complejidades para un proceso de identificación”.

“No estoy en condiciones de decir si hubo o no respuesta (armada) de los policías, eso hace parte de la investigación y la Fiscalía es la responsable de las pesquisas”.

“La Policía y el Ejército vamos a garantizar la investigación”.

'La tropa llevaba ocho días en la zona'

El general Mario Montoya, comandante del Ejército, señaló a este diario:

“Las tropas del Batallón de Alta Montaña de Los Farallones estaban desplegadas por el plan electoral desde hace más de ocho días, en esta y todas las cabeceras municipales”.

“La orden de desplazarse la recibieron del comandante del Batallón”

“Ellos permanecían en la parte alta de la cordillera, en el sitio llamado Villa María, pero se percataron de una situación anómala y por eso bajaron hasta el sitio de los hechos”.

“Los soldados me dicen que hubo un combate, que no estaban emboscados, la tropa no estaba esperando que pasara un grupo. Estaban desplegados y se les presentó esta situación”.

http://eltiempo.terra.com.co/judi/2006-05-24/ARTICULO-WEB-_NOTA_INTERIOR-2908191.html

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Miguel says on May 24, 2006, 11:32:

Interesante That part in EL TIEMPO where they talked about the changing of the body positions really raised my "bandera roja"

0 funny, 0 helpful.

platano says on May 24, 2006, 11:35:

Moving the bodies or placing weapons in their hands... is not unusual. I've been reading accounts like that since I started reading Colombian newspapers twenty years ago. The Army shoots first and doesn't leave anybody alive to ask questions... usually the victims are judged, sentenced and executed in a matter of minutes (or seconds) and then the description is given to the press that justifies killing civilians: "los presuntos guerrilleros".

plátano

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Miguel says on May 24, 2006, 11:45:

To me It sounds like business as usual in colombia.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on May 24, 2006, 11:46:

platano "Placing weapons in their hands" may not be unusual at all in an undeterminate number of incidents, but really isn't the case here, for extremely obvious reasons.

Moving the bodies, on the other hand (although I haven't read where EL TIEMPO says that), might actually make sense here, from the point of view of the presumed criminals.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on May 24, 2006, 11:52:

Miguel "It sounds like business as usual in colombia."

I would beg to differ because, even if they are also very suspicious, the circumstances of this latest case should be taken into account specifically, instead of automatically generalizing.

It is too early to tell exactly what happened, but I'm certainly not denying that, say, it's perfectly possible that the soldiers involved killed the policemen as part of a criminal activity. But I can't swear on it either.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Miguel says on May 24, 2006, 12:20:

oye juancegomez... I am not trying to make assumptions, and you are right that it is too early to come to conclusions. My take is that it is very strange that the best of the best anti drug police were taken out so easily by "el ejercito" when they were bearing down on 200 kilos held by a big player in Cali. I am thinking the army might have been paid off...

En todo caso, estoy triste porque ahora hay 11 familias sin padres.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Neonovo says on Jun 19, 2006, 19:52:

That it is very strange... I'm rearing my ugly head just to say that Miguel's comments reflect
exactly what I read in one of the initial newstories...decía uno de los fiscales investigando, algo como: "Se me hace muy raro que a plena luz del día (6:00 pm), en vehiculos oficiales, perfectamente uniformados...".

Then elsewhere I read a sharpshooter was also used by the army...(didn't he see through the scope the large insignias in the vehicles, the caps, and the backs of thier uniforms?)

My gut feeling, (and probably that of any colombian who has seen first hand what colombians can do to their own countryman) is that this is just another example of the long tradition in colombian history where murder is used by the powers that be, as a tool for political and / or economic expediency.

Paz
Neonovo

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jun 20, 2006, 17:33:

Neonovo If you would notice, I have not said a word that may run contrary to the statement you quoted. On the contrary, I myself consider that those elements (and others) have shown the criminal nature of the event and those involved in it.

"My gut feeling, (and probably that of any colombian who has seen first hand what colombians can do to their own countryman) is that this is just another example of the long tradition in colombian history where murder is used by the powers that be, as a tool for political and / or economic expediency."

As a gut feeling, I can perfectly understand that being the case.

However, the last part of your "gut feeling" is only strictly correct if, within the context and the particular specifics of this situation, it is understood extremely generally.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Neonovo says on Jun 21, 2006, 16:10:

Generally speaking... JG...strictly generalizing, I have replaced "colombian govermnet" with "powers that be" (intereses creados) as a means to be more accurate in my peeves about our predicament, which I'm sure some here are growing tired of.

After all, those dedicated man that were gunned down were representatives of the colombian goverment, working for Colombia. So the gvt now finds itself on both sided of the coin; perps-victims.

It is a hell of of place to be.

Paz
Neonovo

0 funny, 0 helpful.