Uribe good for Colombia?

soldoncol says on Jan 17, 2006, 10:15:

it seems to be a very complicated issue. on the one hand, everyone wants a violent-free colombia. that would bring business, trade,tourists and investment to this beautiful place.
on the other hand,organiztions like farc make huge money on the drug trade.
we need to legalize it and flood the market and at the same time,give these
farmers and people in the rural areas something else to produce.
we know we have cheap labor and a hardworking labor source at that.
certainly the international market would bring investment in provided they knew it was a safe place to do business.
i applaud uribe for his efforts.........its one tough job

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jan 17, 2006, 11:35:

Complicated is right There are many, many different opinions on this matter, as can be seen here in PBH.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Lucia Rojas says on Jan 17, 2006, 11:50:

Viva Mockus!! Mockus talks about the many things Colombia needs...Specially LEGALITY.

By this he means a place where what is legal and what is culturally accepted doesn't clash.

If these two elements clash, the country will never really develop and the economy wont be strong. Colombians, dont beleive in the law, and ergo dont respect the law.Therefore it is very hard for tourism to prosper and bussiness to prosper if corruption is high and if the law cant act as a support system for this companies. Mockus talks about education, health, education in a culture of legality and respect of Life, economy etc.

Or how many tourist are going to come if they know they cant trust anybody and that colombians will play it to their advantage when ever they can??? Its laike that woman who posted here, who had to leave to Ecuador after a week... she will never come back.

But yes. It is complicated and it is a very tough job!!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jan 17, 2006, 14:58:

mockus sounds good to my ears. All these things, education, health, legality, respect for life etc. sound very basic but are not always, sadly enough, part of the everyday reality for many Colombians. I'm not a guerrilla supporter, gods forbid, but I don't believe Uribe's got the answer for Colombia's troubles. It might look good on the surface; crime rate going down in some parts, more security and some possibility to travel in the countryside during special holidays with armed escort. I would like to see something more substancial than just these small improvements that are mainly cosmetic.

Cheers,
Desi

Embrace your uniqueness. Time is much too short to be living someone
else's life.

-Kobi Yamada

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jan 17, 2006, 15:24:

What a crock It might look good on the surface; crime rate going down in some parts, more security and some possibility to travel in the countryside during special holidays with armed escort. I would like to see something more substancial than just these small improvements that are mainly cosmetic.


Desi:

You don’t know what you are talking about. You need to arrive in Colombia before you start saying cosmetic,, you are a joke to post this nonsense.

Guess I need to get the camera out again but for now,,,

Two schools in my LITTLE town were funded by Bogota. One is a three story remodel and the other is an extension to an existing school.

Botoga has allocated funds to assist the poor,,, selected families were GIVEN about 2.5 million pesos worth of bricks, cement, and rebar to finish their little brick houses.

Almost everywhere you look around Valle Cauca and Pereria (Armenia less so,, a lot less it seems) there are new store that have been built in the last two years,, many opened in 2005. These stores all have employees who now have a job and there are suppliers and construction workers,, it goes up and down the economic spectrum.

New Herrudura in Tulua with Exito, MANY new shopping malls in South Cali, Pereria has a new Home Center, Exito, Centeral shopping center and guess what Dissy,, they have lots of people buying goods and paying taxes,, and these taxes are helping to support these programs.

Travel to countryside with armed escort,,, get a grip,, really,, where do you get this nonsense ? I’m in the rural countryside everyday,,, I’ve never heard of such a thing,, one nearby town is Hosting an internation Para Sailing event,,, guess where,, in a Rural Area,,,, where do the go,, in the mountains,,

"Violence is the first refuge of the incompetent" - Isaac Asimov

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jan 17, 2006, 16:06:

true, I'm not in Colombia right now, but will be there soon. Sometimes you need a little distance to be able to see the whole picture. To solve the myriad of problems that Colombia has right now and has been struggling with for a long period of time you need more than a a new mall in the south of Cali and military presence on the roads during holidays.

I'm not sure I would be convinced by the pictures that are seen through the lense of your camera; it's still your eye, poco, that's behind the lense.

About military escort during holidays; I believe it's well-documented and duly reported by the local media, not a delusionary concept I came up all by myself. I want to travel in a Colombia where I don't need to be guarded by soldiers to see all the beauty and variety the country has to offer.

Cheers,
Desi

Embrace your uniqueness. Time is much too short to be living someone
else's life.

-Kobi Yamada

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Tinto (Moderator) says on Jan 17, 2006, 16:27:

The "secure" roads for Christmas travel 2005 www.mincomercio.gov.co/VBeContent/NewsDetail.asp?ID=3998



These tourist caravans have been happening for a couple of years now.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Gator says on Jan 17, 2006, 16:46:

I Guess... many don't remember what it was like ten years ago. I can remember when people in Cali were afraid to go out and many of the restaurants in places like Medellin had wire mesh grates across the windows to thwart the bomb throwers.

I really did not notice a lot of condemnation against FARC, ELN, Narcos, et.al. in the above posts and they are the real problems. Instant gratification ain't gonna happen-but progress IS being made.

"Brevior Sltare Cum Deformibus Mulieribus Est Vita!" .

0 funny, 0 helpful.

World Citizen says on Jan 17, 2006, 17:06:

Uribe has been a mixed blessing for Colombia.. - He has pushed the fumigation of National parks and small farmers crops.
- He has allowed paramilitaries to give their weapons up and get their crimes forgotten... some may get financial benefits (to be reinserted into society)that nobody in Colombia ever gets.
- He has pushed an agricultural trade agreement without the sufficient backing for the very few farmers that still make a living out of agriculture in Colombia.
- He has changed the constitution to be reelected... legal or not... absolutely unethical.


But hey...

- You do see army EVERYWHERE in the roads. I was able to travel with 3 very white americans all the way from Bogota to Cali, stoping in many small towns and feeling relatively safe. Something that I would have never done a few years ago.
- Colombians feel positive, trust the president (no the government) and believe things are going to change for better. Major steps for a real change!
- International investors are looking at Colombia again.
- Kidnapping rates decreased
- Last year those who had investments in the Colombian markets had an absolutely fantastic year.





Life is not what one lived, but rather what one remembers, and how it is remembered to tell the tale. (Gabriel Garcia Marquez)

Life is not what one lived, but rather what one remembers, and how it is remembered to tell the tale. (Gabriel Garcia Marquez)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juanalejo says on Jan 17, 2006, 18:54:

Tinto These caravans started with Uribe, but have disappeared from most of the main roads for some time now. You do see some army check points, but the whole point of the caravans was bringing confidence back into the travellers. Once that was accomplished they dissapeared from most of the country. Now those caravans are heading into red zones only.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jan 17, 2006, 19:31:

Nope but the above is a little too close to attacking the poster rather than the content of a post you disagree with. Thanks.

Tinto,, you are wrong. The poster made baseless statements that are w/o merit and NOT current. The poster has NOT been in Colombia for 3 years (as I remember) and I’d bet may NOT be in a position to observe much below estrado 3, even if living in Colombia. Much has happened in three years. As for the caravans you posted,, this appears to be a “touristy� thing and not a military or police escorted excursion.

Yes, there are many military and police on the roads. Needing to travel with an escort ?? not that I’ve seen. Escort on highway ??? well,, I guess maybe so in some places but I’ve spent Hundreds of hours traveling by bus and other than random checks I’ve not be slowed down.

I want to travel in a Colombia where I don't need to be guarded by soldiers to see all the beauty and variety the country has to offer.

Ola,, this is Colombia, there are still bad guys around and these guys and NOT the current administration is the problem. Cheer up,, I doubt you will have the time to tour the safe parts, ie: those parts that do NOT require a police or military escort.

PS: If you want to travel w/o an armed escort, implies you can actually obtain this armed escort,, OK,, where do you apply ? How much does this cost,, what are the details so I can go somewhere “beautiful� ? oh,, where exactly is the beautiful location ?

"Violence is the first refuge of the incompetent" - Isaac Asimov

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Lucia Rojas says on Jan 17, 2006, 20:24:

So basically Poco, you are saying everything is perfect now? People can travel to their fincas or to melgar or where ever( depending on the strato) for their holidays, so everything is good?
What you are telling us then is that people below estrato 3 are happy and content and have everything they need? That they will be forever happy working in a mall for minimum wage? You are telling me that a minimum wage is enough to sustain your family and send your kids to college so that they have better opportunities? Are you saying that hey now have a ccess to a good health system? Are you saying this people have been given enough? Or at least what they deserve?
I dont get it. And I live here.

When you say funded by Bogota? what do you mean? the district is funding it? or the National goverment? Please explain. I think you were very rude to Desi, who is entitled to her opinion and to not want a militarized county.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jan 17, 2006, 20:49:

Mixed blessing? More like mixed curse... Desi: I'm 99% with you (always leave some space for disagreement, of course). I wouldn't say that the improvements are ALL cosmetic, but most are, at best, demagogic.

Now you can travel to the countryside escorted by the military? Big deal! In 1995 I used to travel through FARC territory at 3am and it was the military I was afraid of! I took buses to Barranquilla, Cali, Cúcuta, and never had a problem. There was a time, not long ago, before the "pescas milagrosas", you know? Still today, when I go to Colombia, I'm more afraid of the police and the military than of a 16 year old guerrilla kid that has nothing against me. I don't pretend it to be everyone's case, but just to let you know: not EVERYONE feels safer. Not the truckers in Putumayo or Arauca that are used as cannon fodder against a "paro armado", nor the defenseless peasants that get the military retaliation after what happened in Macarena, nor the people in Cauca caught in the middle of gunfire. Nor me, for that matter: I rarely leave Bogotá when I go back home.

Bogotá is looking better, absolutely true, but I wouldn't thank Uribe so fast. Maybe 4 consecutive local administrations doing their job properly could have SOMETHING to do with it? Note that the numbers on crime in Bogotá are going up now... I don't suppose Uribe will take credit for it, would he?

But I don't care about little anecdotes about a mall opening here, or your uncle buying new shoes, or whatever. That is BS. Let's talk numbers. Hard cold freaking evidence. I brought some to the table (http://poorbuthappy.com/colombia/node/15113). Got anything better?

"I really did not notice a lot of condemnation against FARC, ELN, Narcos, et.al. in the above posts and they are the real problems."

And you won't hear it from me either, for the same reason that I wouldn't whine about the criminals being "the real problem" when crime rate goes up. You point at a problem to solve it, not to cry about it. Now, the president, he is an elected official that is supposed to represent me. He's getting ALL my flak. The other guys, they get (or should get) jail time (unless you are a paraco, then you get to be a Senator).

"Instant gratification ain't gonna happen-but progress IS being made."

I don't think anyone is expecting "instant gratification", and no, progress is NOT being made, unfortunately. And I DO remember the Bogotá of 10-15-20 years ago (not Cali, and always heard about things going on in Medellín of course). And things are much better. But not thanks to Mr. Uribe they aren't.

But I am glad that Colombians feel more positive. I could feel it in Bogotá, and it was a great feeling. It's a shame that Uribe gets the credit. What about Peñalosa? or Mockus? The sense of progress and optimism in Bogotá was there WAAAY before Uribe was a second-tier candidate constantly whining about San Vicente. Now he's supposed to own my optimism. Screw him.

Now I'm pissed because I missed the deadline to register my cedula close to home, and I am seriously considering traveling to NYC just to cast my vote. So, I'm in no mood to be asked, for the 15th time, "where are you from?" "what do you do?" and BS like that. No sean tan sapos. If you disagree with what I say, or with what Desi said, please share with us and tell us why, but please avoid calling people names and spare us of poorly articulated anecdotes.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Albatross says on Jan 18, 2006, 04:17:

I think I know what's best for Columbia... Columbia should be just like everywhere else.
In fact, ALL countries and ALL people should be the same.
Everybody should hang out at the Mall, watch FOX TV and speak English.

“Democracy - a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H.L. Mencken

0 funny, 0 helpful.

kat1 (Moderator) says on Jan 18, 2006, 04:40:

Albatros but people in Columbia do wear jeans, watch fox and speak English Or you mean Colombia ;)

engage brain before opening mouth

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Albatross says on Jan 18, 2006, 05:15:

Fox News RULES !!! Pat Robertson is a true AMERICAN HERO, and he said that Columbians can never have the grace of GOD with a heathen leader like Chavez. (Amen)

P.S. No Kitty, I meant Columbia... you know... that drug country south of the equator... with the Contras and Noreiga and stuff.

“Democracy - a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H.L. Mencken

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Albatross says on Jan 18, 2006, 06:29:

. I didn't say that Robertson had any ties to Fox.

Also, it's far more than a stretch to include the concept of truth and Fox news in the same paragraph. Kinda like Britney Spears and talent.

In any case, I assumed my sarcasm was obvious.

“Democracy - a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H.L. Mencken

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Albatross says on Jan 18, 2006, 06:33:

;-) P.S... I have no choice but to think for myself... nobody else is.

“Democracy - a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H.L. Mencken

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Albatross says on Jan 18, 2006, 06:46:

True, I'm a proud Liberal... but: The guy shot in the Miami airport:

a) was unarmed
b) was NOT even onboard an aircraft, nevermind actually airborne
c) had already passed through airport security
d) was obviously in a state of distress

I wasn't there, but I suspect his execution was unjustified.

However, the guy in New York who beat his 7 year old step-daughter (Nixzmary Brown) to death last week cannot be executed fast enough.

(But knowing our criminal justice system, the fucker will probably get away with just a few years in prison.)

“Democracy - a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H.L. Mencken

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jan 18, 2006, 08:46:

no, I didn't say anything much about the guerrillas, paras, narcos etc. not because I'm a symphatizer, but rather because I believe they're more like the symptom than the disease itself. I have no illusions about the politically motivated agendas for social justice etc. that the guerrilla claims to have; I believe they may have had such ideals in the past, but not any longer, not for a long time. The real change in Colombia has to come from the democratic process and legality and administrative transparency.

A safe country road for me is not a militarized road, but rather a road that doesn't need to be guarded.

Poco, I'll be staying for three-four months. The places I choose to visit and people I choose to associate myself with don't have to in "safe" areas, like just outside Bogotá, in broad daylight. I just hate the idea of having fear as my constant companion. Your assumption that I wouldn't get to have any dealings with anybody below strata 3 is presumptious, since I don't think I have ever said that I'd only be hanging out at Club Campestre all the time when in Cali.

Cheers,
Desi

Embrace your uniqueness. Time is much too short to be living someone
else's life.

-Kobi Yamada

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Albatross says on Jan 18, 2006, 09:40:

. "All he (security) knows is some guy yelling that he has a bomb."... if thats all they knew, then they did not have just cause to shoot him dead.

The police do not have more of a right to execute someone simply because they happen to be in an airport lobby. The simple statement "I have a bomb" is not justification for summary execution.

An airplane in flight is a different scenario.

Also, do you really think that anyone who actually HAD a bomb would announce it to the cops ? Do you think that suicide bombers walk onto a bus or into a crowd and say "Hey everybody, I've got a bomb... I'll give you a few seconds to shoot at me before I blow us all to hell"... I don't think so.

It's kinda like all those signs saying "No Armas Fuegos"... like anybody you gotta worry about is going to obey a stupid sign.

“Democracy - a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance." - H.L. Mencken

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jan 18, 2006, 10:27:

... While poco might be exaggerating or simplifying things when talking about a few issues, I would argue that is also true of a couple of the statements made in response to poco's (though Sr Tertius and Desideria do make some very valid points).

Sr Tertius:

"I'm more afraid of the police and the military than of a 16 year old guerrilla kid that has nothing against me."

Well, it's your prerrogative. But I'd say that would heavily depend on the specific circumstances surrounding your encounters with any of them. Suffice to say that, as a rule, it's better to avoid any group of armed men (and/or women) in isolated areas unless it's absolutely necessary.

"He's getting ALL my flak. The other guys, they get (or should get) jail time (unless you are a paraco, then you get to be a Senator)."

Now, you probably know that it's a bit more complex than that.

Not to mention, for example, that there's a not insignificant difference between being an armed (or not) "paraco", which is one thing, and being close to the "paracos" or simply intimidated by them, which is another. I don't believe that all of the above automatically qualify as "paracos", with no additional explanations necessary.

"If you disagree with what I say, or with what Desi said, please share with us and tell us why, but please avoid calling people names and spare us of poorly articulated anecdotes."

Agreed.

Desideria:

"A safe country road for me is not a militarized road, but rather a road that doesn't need to be guarded."

Actually, in poco's defense, there are already some roads that are not militarized and yet are reasonably safe (no place in this country, region or world is 100% safe).

Obvously, seeing most/all roads in Colombia becoming roads that don't need to be guarded is something that will take many years, no matter who is elected president, since the pandora's box was already opened a long time ago.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jan 18, 2006, 11:16:

you're such a diplomat juance:)
Yes, I'm aware of the existence of relatively safe roads in Colombia, but unfortunately most of them seem to be in areas where I'm not planning to visit. I just think it's such a bother to be four months in Colombia and be locked up in a house in Cali and not be able to to go to Cauca (Popayan, Silvia and Puracé area) or Los Farallones Natinonal Park or tour the countryside in the Valle.

I've been invited to Villa del Leyva, to stay as a guest in a house that is currently unoccupied, with only the mayordomo living there. I guess that'd be safe enough for a solitary gringa.

Cheers,
Desi

Embrace your uniqueness. Time is much too short to be living someone
else's life.

-Kobi Yamada

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

caslug says on Jan 18, 2006, 11:32:

speaking of politics and danger.. Here's a article I took from PL. Apparently there's been couple of assination of politic figures in Cali RECENTLY as in couple of days ago AND it was NEAR avienda sexta. Thanks Pete for the info!

Posted by Pete E on 01/18/2006

A candidate for the Mayor of Yumbo,a city just north of here got killed on south Avenida Sexta,a block north of where Avenida 6AN
intersects.

5 guys killed him and his two security guards.They split,3 were caught when the switched from motorcycles to a car about 3 blocks from where I live.One guy was wounded,he is in the hospital.
The story is in El Pais this morning,google search for El Pais will find it,maybe someone like Calibound can read it and fill us in better.

So,its the wild west here,NOTHING like the US.Luz Meri my maid said her boyfriend saw part of it.She asked if this happens in the US.The last assasination of politicians I can think of is when the mayor and a councilman in San Francisco got killed almost 30 years ago,and that was more grudge than political,plus crazy hombre not hired assasins.

Posted by CaliBound on 01/18/2006

In Reply to: Political assasination 8 blocks from here posted by Pete E on 01/18/2006:

Hey Pete - unfortunately, these killings are part of life in Colombia. It's on the paper today, but tomorrow it will be forgotten and replaced by another headline of yet another killing.

The police were right around the corner when it happened - as Avenida Sexta has more policemen on patrol than most area in Cali. They quickly got three of the killers. As usual, the killers were using motorcycles. It was like a Wild West movie. The police were pursuing and shooting at the killers and the killers were shooting back. Two of them where riding on one bike and when cornered ran up a stair near your place that connects to 10 Norte where the police got them. Another one abandoned the bike and forced a couple to give up their car, but the police arrested him quickly.

They are looking for 4 other guys connected with the killing. Hopefully, they will find who hired the killers. The police do not know the motive for the killing yet.

Most people agreed that the deceased was a good and honorable man. His two body guards were half brothers (not to the deceased) and were killed as well.

Remind me not to run for office when I move to Colombia!


Posted by colgre on 01/18/2006

In Reply to: Re: Political assasination 8 blocks from here posted by CaliBound on 01/18/2006:

This is very normal here. Several weeks back another political figure was killed in the restaurant La Antorcha close to Pete's apartment. Same scenario, the guy was eating dinner and sicarios rode up and popped some caps into him killing the guy, then took off. It was in the local RCN news, not sure if it made the papers. Cali is dangerous - period.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jan 18, 2006, 18:19:

Sour Grapes But not thanks to Mr. Uribe they aren't.

Faced with all the facts, unemployment numbers, educational system improvements and better security in many parts of the country there are still those who refuse to acknowledge why that happened in the last 4 years (extremely fast) and NOTHING happened during the previous 60.

This is especially true when the faced with the fact that Colombia has “coddled� it’s most heinous criminals or attempted and failed at negotiations with criminals during previous administrations. Many of these failures of appeasement directly resulted in the pain and suffering of many innocent people.

I’ve noticed some posters are still living in the 20th century and seem to have very little experience with affairs during the last 5 years especially when current facts don’t suit their idealized view on what should have happened or what they wanted to happen didn’t.

I have reason to believe the current unemployment rate is about 14% and was in the mid 20’s before Uribe. How many millions now have a job or opportunity now vrs. no job and no opportunity ? I think Uribe has a goal to get it below 10%.

"Violence is the first refuge of the incompetent" - Isaac Asimov

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Wastelandlive says on Jan 19, 2006, 12:08:

And if that weren't obvious enough... You've just got to love the circular logic involved.

Sr. T: "Now, the president, he is an elected official that is supposed to represent me. He's getting ALL my flak. The other guys, they get (or should get) jail time (unless you are a paraco, then you get to be a Senator)."

In otherwords - quite reasonably - when judging the executive on performance, the question is not, "Who is to blame for the violence and criminality?" but, "Is the President enforcing the law against those responsible?"

Except that if the President tries to enforce the law using force, he's criticised for "militarizing" the nation:

Sr. T:"In 1995 I used to travel through FARC territory at 3am and it was the military I was afraid of! ... Still today, when I go to Colombia, I'm more afraid of the police and the military than of a 16 year old guerrilla kid that has nothing against me. ... [Not] EVERYONE feels safer. Not the truckers in Putumayo or Arauca that are used as cannon fodder against a "paro armado", nor the defenseless peasants that get the military retaliation after what happened in Macarena..."

Now, if the President tries to reestablish the rule of law by negotiating a peace, he's criticised for granting immunity to the crooks and served up a dish of bitter sarcasm:

Sr. T:"unless you are a paraco, then you get to be a Senator"

Which might leave the casual observer wondering... what, exactly, is a President of Colombia to do? He can neither please his critics by negotiating for peace nor by prosecuting a military campaign. Nor can he do nothing, because solving the problem IS his responsibility...

Kind of a tough criteria. Is it inconsistency, or perhaps it's just an ideological thing?

Do you think deep down in their souls the critics would be equally unhappy if the Colombian army was hunting down Paras, and sitting at the negotiating table with the guerilla?

And then you get the entire unreality of dismissing the fact that Colombia has indeed improved with his policies:

Sr. T: "But I don't care about little anecdotes about a mall opening here, or your uncle buying new shoes, or whatever. That is BS. Let's talk numbers. Hard cold freaking evidence."

In other words, all the articles you've read in every credible newsjournal about improving conditions in Colombia, all the statistics, what you've seen with your OWN EYES... it's all nonsense. Mere anectdotes.

But a poorly formed argument based on reports published by the "Seguridad y Democracia Fundacion" "prove" that things are actually worse in Auraca and Putamaya, so therefore things must be worse in Colombia as a whole.

That's not "annecdotal," that's "cold hard facts."

In fact, that post is as airtight as Newton's theory of gravity, and from here on out can be footnoted to prove that security and violence is actually worse under Uribe than it was in prior administrations.

And if the absurdity of that conclusion becomes too loud to be ignored, well, credit improved conditions in Colombia to a few mayors:

Sr. T: "What about Peñalosa? or Mockus? The sense of progress and optimism in Bogotá was there WAAAY before Uribe was a second-tier candidate constantly whining about San Vicente."

Whatever.

Note to Desi: IMHO, Uribe didn't "militarize" Colombia. The GEURILLA did, and if the state had cared enough to respond responsibly and appropriately when it had the chance, it wouldn't be struggling with Paramilitaries now.

Maybe it's a matter of perspective. But would you really feel safer if Uribe WASN'T a law and order president? I mean really -

D: "I want to travel in a Colombia where I don't need to be guarded by soldiers to see all the beauty and variety the country has to offer."

Don't we all.

But understanding that Uribe was elected in a nation which had the worse security situation in the world, how would you suggest that the President deal with the realities on the ground?

Wasteland

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jan 19, 2006, 13:32:

my problem is the same as everybody else's. I know what I want for Colombia and yet don't have the formula to produce the desired effect. It's all academic. Greater minds than mine have been trying to crack that nut without much success. I had placed my hopes on the negotiated peace, yet none of the parts showed any real desire to reach an agreement to put a stop on this armed conflict. There was pride and fear of loosing face, advantage position and handle from both parts. I know there isn't hardly anybody left who believes that a negotiated peace can be achieved, yet that would have been my option.

I know also what Sr. T is talking about. I was also taught to be aware of the police and soldiers in Colombia; they were perceived only slightly less dangerous and corrupt than the crooks. Colombians have a long tradition in believing in legality; an inheritance from the post-independent wars when Colombians chose to support Santander, "El hombre de las leyes" instead of the war hero and dictator-to-be Bolivar. Colombians have never had any love for the strong-arm tactics and military governments: "Botas no!"

However, in these troubled times they have put their faith on a hard-handed leader like Uribe, because everybody is so fed up with violence and insecurity and people just want to be left alone to live their lives as they have always done. Incidentally, I don't dislike Uribe as a person; I believe he has plenty of admirable qualities. It's mostly his supporters I have a problem with. What would I do if I were Sr. Uribe: I'd probably swallow my pride and sit down with the bad guys to talk and see if they could at least start with releasing the people they are holding. With paraco senators it doesn't seem to be such a big sacriface to exchange the life and liberty of Ingrid Betancourt and all the other kidnapped people for the liberty of a bunch of campesinos and misguided youths sucked into the guerrilla and captured.

I'd apply the same rule for the leaders of the guerrilla as to the leaders of the paracos: bring them to the justice and make them rot in the prison. I know I'm an idealist. I prefer to be that way.

Cheers,
Desi



Embrace your uniqueness. Time is much too short to be living someone
else's life.

-Kobi Yamada

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Wastelandlive says on Jan 19, 2006, 13:38:

And if you offer to negotiate... and nobody comes to take you up on your offer? If your predecessor negotiated for years, and got nowhere?

Ah - you say bring them all to justice - left and right - and make them rot in prison. But... it seems like one might have to "militarize" the nation to do that, no?

And even then, with the worlds greatest superpower as your ally, you might not succeed. But you'll get a lot of criticism from people who don't like the military. Or your supporters.

You're a rough crowd indeed.

Wasteland

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jan 19, 2006, 13:57:

as a leader I would always be critized, if I chose one way or the other, that's part of the job. I didn't say my solution was workable, at the present-day situation, yet I had to bring it forth, because that's what I basically believe is the right and fair way of doing it.

As a leader, you'd have to be able to offer a better alternative to people that are currently supporting the guerrilla. Unfortunately, Mr. Uribe's reach is short in this respect. Poco speaks of schools, health care, employment, housing projects: that would be very good if these admirable projects would reach the whole national territory and not only small, selected portions of the country. The help that our Big Brother from the north is giving should be directed to improving people's lives rather than buying more arms and training more elite troups.

And, I'm not a rough crowd. I'm a dreamer.

Cheers,
Desi


Embrace your uniqueness. Time is much too short to be living someone
else's life.

-Kobi Yamada

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Wastelandlive says on Jan 19, 2006, 14:07:

Couldn't agree more... Now...

How many doctors, nurses, and school teachers are signing up to go work in the border zones?
How many investors want to create jobs where illegal armed groups hold sway?
How many farmers can get to their fields and make them profitable, like only an owner can?

You're right - Uribe shouldn't be spending on both the military, AND social programs and infrastructure. Money spent on the former could be thrown at the latter, making it easier still for the guerilla to destroy any and all gains.

That's a winning plan! :)

Wasteland

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jan 19, 2006, 14:19:

I believe you are being both cynical and oversimplifying. There's no point in continuing this exchange if you are just making me to look like an idiot.
All the newly-examined medical doctors and schoolteachers are obligated by law to do their "rural year"; that's how the more remote regions get any health or educational service at all. I still insist on saying that the problems ought to be solved at the root of the evil instead of creating untenable superficial conditions that will collapse in the long run because there's no foundation or bases to support them.

Cheers, or whatever,
Desi

Embrace your uniqueness. Time is much too short to be living someone
else's life.

-Kobi Yamada

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

poco says on Jan 19, 2006, 18:13:

Groan With paraco senators it doesn't seem to be such a big sacriface to exchange the life and liberty of Ingrid Betancourt and all the other kidnapped people for the liberty of a bunch of campesinos and misguided youths sucked into the guerrilla and captured.


With Pablo Escobar it didn’t seem like such a bad idea to change the constitution so he couldn’t be extradited and let him build his own prison. After giving in to his demands he released most of the people he kidnapped,,, OH,, gosh,, he kidnapped them to make his demands in the first place,, did he somehow think he would be appeased ? Would the entire country of Colombia bend to his will ???

Why not trade a few women prisoners to save the life of a woman journalist in Iraq.

Appeasement NEVER works,, but some still drag out this failed concept,, Much like discovering a twenty year old size 5 dress in the corner of the closet and believes that somehow it can be cleaned, altered and expanded to a size 12 and be the hit of the spring thaw party.

"Violence is the first refuge of the incompetent" - Isaac Asimov

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jan 20, 2006, 01:43:

I don't really know know what you are talking about,poco. In negotiated peace there's always an exchange that is not appeasement, but rather a show of good will from both partners to be able to proceed with the talks. It wouldn't be the first time in history when armed conflicts would be solved by negotiations rather than massacring the opponents.

Cheers,
Desi

Embrace your uniqueness. Time is much too short to be living someone
else's life.

-Kobi Yamada

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Wastelandlive says on Jan 20, 2006, 08:00:

Desi - I wasn't aware that new doctors and teachers must by law serve thier "rural year." If that's so, and its enforced... it sounds like a great idea, so long as the government provides those people the security that they need.

That said, I'd still bet that they are not required to go to the regions where they are needed most. There are some things you simply can't compell people to do.

But I'd love to learn more. When was this legislation passed?

So far as your criticism that I'm "oversimplifying things," well, I suspect we're all guilty of that at sometime or another.

Your notion, for example, that problems (social problems?) can be solved at all at the "root causes," without first - or at least simultaneously - providing those "superficial" solutions (law, order, security?) might strike some as a little simplistic.

I just hope you'll think about it.

D: "There's no point in continuing this exchange if you are just making me to look like an idiot."

I'm certainly not calling you an idiot. But I'm following your logic, and finding it very unconvincing. That's all.

Wasteland

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Colombiche says on Jan 20, 2006, 09:23:

Is Uribe Good for Colombia? The numbers speak for themselves.

Poverty decreasing, unemployement decreasing, an improved sense of national security, foreign investment on the rise, higher economic growth...

One of the posters made a valid point, that doctors, nurses, teachers, investors, aid workers...etc etc will not dare venture to Putumayo until the area is not a hot spot. First the egg, then the chicken the way I see it.

Uribe took a country that was a mess. He can't change it in 4 years, but I think he is doing a lot more than just "cosmetic changes".

No me den trago extranjero, que es caro y no sabe a bueno.... (Rafael Godoy)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jccg says on Jan 20, 2006, 09:42:

Electoral lies Poco and COlombiche
Poverty decrising - FALSE
unemployement decreasing - FALSE
improved sense of national security- TRUE
The situation is each day worse, but the media is in electoral campaingne and they say every thing is good. So of course, the people starts to belive it is. Please do not belive every thing you read.

Facts:
Before I can go to almost any town without fear (I am not rich, not narco so no problem with guerillas). Now guerrillas are paranoic and it make them dangerous.
Medellin belongs to the narco-mercenaries (AUC), and people can not protest. Comuna 13 is 3 times more dangeruos than before, now the NarcoMercenaries (NM) have the place (funny, they are the same kids with a different shield, before FARC, now AUC) and social liders dissapear there.

Poco:
You have to live in the real colombia to been able to talk. Yes, you can say than "El Poblado" is safe, but Medellin is bigger than that.
The versions of RCN and CARACOL must not be belived, that are mostly makeups of the reality

This is just the true!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jan 20, 2006, 09:57:

gringoinbogota
Plan Colombia has mostly been an anti-drug initiative, not a pro-security one.

I mostly agree with Adam Isacson's comments here (among other things):

"This improvement in security in more-populated areas can’t be attributed to U.S. aid. Our assistance has focused overwhelmingly on drug eradication and pipeline-protection (with only modest success) in less-populated areas. Protecting Colombians? Colombia has had to do that with its own money."

http://www.democracyarsenal.org/2006/01/did_plan_colomb.html

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Colombiche says on Jan 20, 2006, 09:59:

jggc So the recent report that Colombias poverty rate decreased from 57% to 49.5% over the last 3 years is a lie?

No me den trago extranjero, que es caro y no sabe a bueno.... (Rafael Godoy)

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Wastelandlive says on Jan 20, 2006, 10:03:

And here the conversation breaks down... ... to pretty much nothing.

You - jccg - now want to discredit the versions of RCN and CARACOL. So you must include El Tiempo, Semana, and Cambio in your list. To accept your version, I also have to throw out the Miami Herald, the Washington Post and the LA Times.

Which I could do; every source has some bias, sometimes spin sells, I don't pretend that what the majority believes is always "right."

But then I have to ignore my own experience. I was living in Colombia when Uribe was elected, and I enjoyed the first two years of his administration.

So take no offense when I say simply that I don't believe you, and I'm at a loss to explain why your perception differs not only from mine, but from most Colombians I know.

Wasteland

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jan 20, 2006, 10:08:

Careful there... jccg :

"Poverty decrising - FALSE"

"unemployement decreasing - FALSE"

While I don't necessarily agree with the government's figures, your blunt statements are not necessarily all that correct either.

"improved sense of national security- TRUE"

Agreed, but only partially so. In some areas, as Sr Tertius and others have mentioned, the opposite is true.

"Please do not belive every thing you read."

Including, of course, the blanket statements of people that outright claim that "the situation is each day worse" without further elaboration.

"Facts:"

Opinions based on a few selected facts, rather.

"Before I can go to almost any town without fear (I am not rich, not narco so no problem with guerillas). Now guerrillas are paranoic and it make them dangerous."

While those statements may somewhat adequately represent your personal experience, you should realize that doesn't make it a comprehensive assessment of the overall situation in Colombia. Your first statement, in particular, becomes quite questionable if applied to the country as a whole.

"Medellin belongs to the narco-mercenaries (AUC), and people can not protest."

Nobody will deny their heavy influence there, but can you really say that they "own" the city or that people "can not protest" so bluntly?

"Comuna 13 is 3 times more dangeruos than before"

You've made a valid statistical analysis and the proper mathematical calculations in order to conclude this, haven't you?

"now the NarcoMercenaries (NM) have the place (funny, they are the same kids with a different shield, before FARC, now AUC) and social liders dissapear there."

Again, these statements may properly represent your personal experiences, but that doesn't mean that they fully represent everything that may be going on in Medellín.

"You have to live in the real colombia to been able to talk. Yes, you can say than "El Poblado" is safe, but Medellin is bigger than that."

Even living in the so-called "real Colombia", by itself, doesn't give anybody the authority to pretend to allow other people to talk or not.

"The versions of RCN and CARACOL must not be belived, that are mostly makeups of the reality"

Unfortunately, while that may be partially (and very partially) true, the so-called "makeups of the reality" aren't limited to RCN and Caracol, as can be seen here and elsewhere.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Desideria (Moderator) says on Jan 20, 2006, 10:10:

yes, I see the point "that doctors, nurses, teachers, investors, aid workers...etc etc will not dare venture to Putumayo until the area is not a hot spot. First the egg, then the chicken the way I see it." Colombiche

This discussion is older than the hills around my beloved Cali.So, would there be eggs if a chicken wasn't there first? A couple of years ago being a mayor in a town in the war zone was the most dangerous job on earth. Right now it seems to be being a campesino in rural Cauca. The terror just shifts around, lessening in some places, picking up in others. I don't think rural Cauca or Putumayo actually benefit from being militarized. I'm for de-militarizing the countryside and maybe bring in some neutral, peace-keeping troups as observers and to make sure that both insurgents and government troups vacate the areas letting people to live a normal life. But for that, the parts will have to negotiate first. New chickens can not hatch from stale eggs.

Wasteland, this law of the rural year has been there forever. It's not recent at all. As far as I know, it's enforced.

I wouldn't be that quick to believe all this wonderful "statistics" that the media is giving us on daily basis about how much better everything has become under Uribe rule. As the previous poster mentioned, it's election year. What I do believe is that the major cities except Cali have become safer and about Cali becoming more dangerous I'm not that convinced about either. I have been talking to my people in Cali on messenger for hours in the last few days and they don't seem to think the situation in Cali has worsened much for the normal people. "You'd just have to know who you walk with, have dealings with and not give papaya".

Cheers,
Desi




Embrace your uniqueness. Time is much too short to be living someone
else's life.

-Kobi Yamada

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jccg says on Jan 20, 2006, 10:15:

mmmm... Well, I have also heard that "la sierra" do not exist and it was a lie because this things doesn't happend in medellin (A girl friend of my sister that born in El poblado and now lives in USA).
The news are viased, it do not mean that every thing is a lie, but they do not say the true, they say the official version, wich you know is differend, I mention the most popular news chains, not the only ones. I say what I see becouse I live here. My salary hasn't increased substantialy since I have this job and my adquisition power is decresing, same for every one I know. Some thing have changed, now if you sell candy in the buses, you appear to have a job in the statistics.

This is just the true!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jan 20, 2006, 10:39:

jccg
While I could question your saying that "La Sierra" did not exist, since even before the area received media coverage it had been mentioned in other sources, admittedly I am not in a position to prove otherwise right now (which doesn't mean that I couldn't, if given enough time/will to try to do so).

Even if some of that bias is inevitable, the news doesn't ***always*** say things that only favor the "official version". Don't try to fight perceived exaggerations with equal (or worse) exaggerations.

Again, I don't necessarily agree with all the statistics, but people claiming outright that they are automatically "electoral lies" aren't exactly making a substantiated argument either.

Sigh...sometimes it all becomes a matter of "who do you trust", instead of a matter of debating specific issues and verifiable evidence.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jccg says on Jan 21, 2006, 13:01:

juancegomez "While I could question your saying that "La Sierra" did not exist, since even before the area received media coverage it had been mentioned in other sources, admittedly I am not in a position to prove otherwise right now (which doesn't mean that I couldn't, if given enough time/will to try to do so)."

Sorry, but I miss your point here... ¿what do you mean?

I say, someone told me things doesn't happend, because they have not lived nor saw those situations. And I wanted to show with it, that there are more things that those you heard ord see. ¿was it clear before?

This is just the true!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jccg says on Jan 21, 2006, 13:06:

juancegomez "Even if some of that bias is inevitable, the news doesn't ***always*** say things that only favor the "official version""
I agreed

This is just the true!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jan 21, 2006, 18:52:

jccg Sorry for the rather longwinded way to express myself there...

In other words, my opinion is that I don't think that "La Sierra" doesn't exist, which I what (I believe) you were saying.

It is true that not everything mentioned about "La Sierra" has to be real, and I can agree that many things that occur there are unknown to the rest of us.

Still, even the people that live there don't know everything that happens (because some will only remember certain things that affect them, for example, and will ignore things that happen far from their homes, even if in the same city/barrio).

Thanks for your reply.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

jccg says on Jan 22, 2006, 13:43:

juancegomez La Sierra
The problem with those documentaries is that people miss the time line, things happend, but not everyday, not every hour. So Medellin is not a permanent "battlefield". However there have been some really difficult days.
"Still, even the people that live there don't know everything that happens"
True, by this I suggest not only belive in one surce, but heard people, and try to lisen (read) different version, there is NOT someone that will tell the "objetive" true, because their version is biased by their own perseption. The secret is then, to lisen (read) all the versions you get and try to interpolate the true. However, the figure presented here (49.5% or something) for the dissminusion in poberty is too higt, if it were true, we could see it in the streets.

This is just the true!!

0 funny, 0 helpful.

valdemar says on Jan 22, 2006, 15:16:

journalism in Colombia With the highest number of journalists killed in the world, I would be extremely sceptical towards the media in Colombia. Concluding on any trends on the devlopments in the colombian society, based on the official media only, would be quite naive.

Saludos,
Valdemar

Chao - Jens

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jan 23, 2006, 08:31:

re: valdemar The matter is complex, and it can be debated at length. It's not the first time the subject is raised here in PBH.

For the sake of clarity, I believe that it has been reported in several sources that Iraq and a few other places are currently as dangerous or even much more directly dangerous for journalism than Colombia. Might want to check up on that.

What you mean by "official media", while maybe kinda obvious at first sight, is also rather vague in practice. It gives the image that all or most media is uniform, directly controlled by the government in any significant way, threatened into submission or else, when that is definitely not an accurate description of what is a more complex situation. Even within the "official media" there is a huge amount of diversity.

Especially when you take into account that most of the journalists that suffer are, believe it or not, those that work in the so-called "official media", and despite that there are still plenty of critical reports of the situation in Colombia, including of the government's actions and those of the other groups at large. This isn't heaven, but neither is it Soviet Russia or Cuba, by far.

I say this because implying that the media that is, as an example, in opposition to the government and in favor of any of the armed groups may actually be better, is also quite naive (if not more so, given that such outlets are more directly concerned with pandering to the special interests of illegal armed groups and thus have zero accountability).

This is not meant to say that the "official media" is enough. No, and it's always better to try and check out as many sources as possible.

It just means that just because something proudly calls itself "independent" or "alternative" to an "official media" doesn't mean that it's automatically better or more complete; it can be just as wrong, misleading, incomplete or biased, if not more so.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Tinto (Moderator) says on Jan 23, 2006, 08:45:

Still, unless this research is out of date the major media in Colombia is owned by the families of Vice Presidents, former Presidents and the same oligarchs that own some of the largest corporations in the country. Perhaps they hire the occasional muckraker, but as an entity, I doubt any of them want to shake up the system that has served them so well.



http://home.earthlink.net/~cafe.tinto/media.htm

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jan 23, 2006, 09:58:

Not out of date at all, but definitely incomplete The "major media" is not equal to "all media" or all so-called "official media" either.

And by the way, EL TIEMPO is owned by the Santos family, yes, but even that publication has criticized the Vicepresident himself and has also published articles critical of Uribe and many of his policies.

So I'd actually want to see proof of EL TIEMPO's position actually being actively altered, in a negative manner, by the fact that one of the members of the Santos family is vicepresident. This point keeps coming up, but the required evidence is nowhere to be found. It is simply an assumption taken as "obvious" far too easily.

SEMANA, EL ESPECTADOR and EL PAÃ?S have published a ton of critical articles as well. In fact, some of them are even more critical than EL TIEMPO's too.

The fact that oligarchs or major corporations own the major media outlets is also true, but that is not exclusive to Colombia or the region either. Is that not true in more than a few countries in Europe or even in the USA itself? Obviously there are more corporations and oligarchs involved, true, but that part of the situation is hardly all that different.

And btw, the public media directly owned by the state is actively more critical of the state itself (though not uniformly so). Ever watched Señal Colombia or Canal UNO lately? Even the Institutional Channel itself isn't uncritical.

Finally, that depends on what you mean by not "shaking up the system". If you mean that they want uniformity and zero criticism of the status quo and its more than evident problems, then that is clearly not the case. If you mean that they don't want a huge revolutionary change and are reasonably defensive of their immediate interests, then that is true. But then again, that is hardly exclusive to Colombia either.

Does this mean that I'm happy that corporations own the major media or that there are no grave problems with journalism in Colombia? No. It means that I'm trying to be pragmatic and within the confines of realism (at the sake of idealism).

0 funny, 0 helpful.

protocol13 says on Jan 23, 2006, 15:54:

Read the topic about Uribe named leader of the year 2005. It will answer your questions. Uribe has been responsible for turning back the tide of foreign investments leaving Colombia and reducing unemployment, reducing red tape for business owners, increasing exports and eliminating the trade deficit, etc.... The aformentioned article is very extensive and very informative. Those who dislike Uribe, will not like the detailed article that has verifiable and reliable facts and sources.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jan 27, 2006, 17:16:

"Those who dislike Uribe..." "will not like the detailed article that has verifiable and reliable facts and sources."

Quite ironic statement, given that it is Mr. Uribe that disdains factual evidence so much (e.g., recent bogus accusations against Rafael Pardo... there are many more examples, though).

The article is highly selective of facts and numbers, nevermind the absence of any discussion on the fact that virtually ALL South America has grown very fast during the last few years (in fact, Colombia has been rather slow compared to many of our neighbors). Trading short-term gains for long-term sustainable development is hardly the mark of a leader. Unless you are a speculative investor, of course.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

juancegomez says on Jan 28, 2006, 09:18:

... "Quite ironic statement, given that it is Mr. Uribe that disdains factual evidence so much (e.g., recent bogus accusations against Rafael Pardo... there are many more examples, though)."

Mostly in agreement...I also believe that the accusations against Pardo are very likely bogus...but what ended up happening tends to make it very difficult to reach any certain conclusions (ie: it is unknown whether the evidence actually exists or not, whether it is fully bogus or only partially so, etc.).

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jan 30, 2006, 18:57:

"Is the campaigning starting up in Colombia?" Indeed it has.

"Why no news stories here about Campaigning?"

There's plenty of coverage in the news. Or do you mean here?

"Everyone and everyone conceeds victory to Uribe?"

No, especially now that he keeps shooting himself on the foot. Although, there is some truth to his description as "teflon president": He could be found starring in a child porn flick, and it would somehow be that (a) It was somebody else's fault. Fire him. Or (b) Everyone is overblowing the whole thing, exaggerations, nothing more.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Mr. Hollywood says on Jan 31, 2006, 11:20:

Blah, blah, blah Meta debates like this get boring so quick. One minute you're discussing whether or not the poor have benefited from presidential policy and then, suddenly, it's all about Fox News and Federal Air Marshalls in the US?

Whatever.

I think it's naive to try to describe something as multi-faceted as the impact of a presidential administration as "Good" or "Bad". Let's just come right out and say it, what you're really talking about is do you "like" him or not. Apparently a lot of Colombians do, though I know that will launch the next round of debate about polling.

0 funny, 0 helpful.

Sr Tertius says on Jan 31, 2006, 21:34:

I'm with you Mr H. Lame generic questions ask for lame generic answers. I'm all about discussing specific issues (hopefully in a separate thread) with reasonable arguments in hand. Until then, I'll keep myself busy doing other things.

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

0 funny, 0 helpful.