Left wing killers use INS

[Raptor]

June 1, 2001  

Wall Street Journal


The U.S. Dabbles in Colombia's
Civil War, on the Wrong Side
By Mary Anastasia O'Grady, editor of the Americas column.

BOGOTA -- Over the past three years the U.S. government has stripped four of Colombia's best generals of their U.S. visas, stamping their files with allegations of associating with terrorists -- that is, collaborating with paramilitary organizations here. One of these men had retired six years before his visa was cancelled, but the other three were relieved of their commands due to U.S. pressure.

These generals had been cleared of charges in Colombian courts, but the story of how they were "convicted" by the U.S. government reveals a pattern of clever underworld deceit designed to destroy the Colombian military. It doesn't take Mensa material to figure out what's going on, but it does require a willingness to look at the facts instead of simply grandstanding on human rights. There is also the question of Colombia's strategic importance to an unstable region. Venezuela is now led by a Fidel Castro admirer, Hugo Chavez, and Colombia's military says it has confiscated weapons from captured guerrillas that bear the Venezuelan army brand.

The country's two most powerful terrorist movements, FARC and ELN, have been trying for decades to convert Colombia from a democracy to a Marxist dictatorship. In a new and effective tactic, they are now launching "judicial warfare" against the country's ablest military leaders. They have a stash of cash derived mostly from narco-traffic and kidnapping, a grip on corrupt officials and terrified peasants in the areas they control, and the sympathy of left-leaning non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Dressing themselves up as noble defenders of human rights, they are dragging military officers into court on war-crimes charges. It can hardly be coincidence that these generals and other lower-ranking officers currently defending themselves in Colombian courts have been among the most successful in killing and capturing subversives.

The declared U.S. policy is to stay out of Colombia's civil conflict. But that's hardly the case. The "Leahy Law," named for Sen. Patrick Leahy (D., Vt.), mandates that U.S. military assistance be withheld from foreign security-force units that have been subject to "credible allegations" of human-rights violations. The U.S. policy is far from neutral in that it scrutinizes the military and ignores the guerrillas, who happily supply as many "credible allegations" as the court traffic will bear.

Having thus involved itself, the U.S. has committed no resources, time or political will to investigating which allegations are "credible." Instead, with only a tiny staff at the U.S. embassy's human-rights office here, the State Department relies heavily on NGO testimony. And despite the fact that a number of these groups have openly expressed support for guerrilla politics and demonstrate a willingness to recycle suborned perjury as fact, the U.S. has not questioned their veracity. The generals never had a hearing in Washington, but their NGO accusers are in the Congressional Record. No one here disputes the fact that there have been military abuses. But efforts to paint effective officers as collaborators with the paramilitaries threaten to erode what remains of law and order in Colombia.

It is also difficult to avoid speculating about the role that bribery and intimidation have played in some of the prosecutions. In the high-profile case of Navy officer Rodrigo Quiñones, accused of orchestrating 57 murders, the accusers were found to be working for a drug cartel. A key witness for the prosecution eventually retracted his statement, telling of how the government oversight office had manipulated him.

Even after the case against Col. Quiñones completely collapsed, it was cited as evidence against him by Human Rights Watch in testimony before Congress in September 2000 and in Amnesty International's 2001 report. In some places the text is exactly the same. These allegations also made it into the American press. "The truth," says one Colombian, "is not important, only the scandal that can be created."

Another example of effective "judicial warfare" was the case of Gen. Rito Alejo del Rio, one of the four whose U.S. visas were revoked. Gen. Del Rio is widely credited in Colombia with the pacification of the northern region of Urabá. He says that before his arrival in December 1995, "the most horrible, sinister massacres in all of Colombia" occurred there. The record supports his claim. The place was a killing field, the agricultural sector was bankrupt and over a year behind in paying wages.

The general analyzed the Urabá battlefield and concluded that his army's lack of mobility was to blame. He mobilized his troops and within a few months they began to control the area, capture enemy guerrillas, and engage more frequently in combat. He instituted a policy of meeting with local workers, labor leaders, farm owners and former guerrillas who had converted themselves into a peaceful political party. Gen. Del Rio says that in those meetings he learned that the army had lost all credibility: "They were very angry with us for not protecting them."

Today, kidnapping, extortion, assaults, executions and massacres are largely a thing of the past in Urabá; banana exports are up sharply and workers are being paid. Colombian presidential candidate Alvaro Uribe, who was the state's governor at that time, says that Mr. Del Rio was an "excellent general."

Yet despite these facts and his overwhelming popularity in the region, the general is persona non grata in the U.S. because a colonel with a questionable resumé denounced him as a paramilitary collaborator. The general says that the colonel was a "totally inept officer" and that the record will show that the worst massacres in the region in 1995 occurred whenever the colonel was left in charge. He also says the colonel had links to the guerrillas and once accused a soldier of being a paramilitary sympathizer because he wore a crucifix around his neck. The general's counter-charges can't be evaluated here, but the objective reality is that he achieved a desirable result for the people of Urabá, one that a great many Colombians in other regions would welcome

Despite a climate of terror, some Colombians are quietly asking for a U.S. investigation into what they say is the systematic dismantling of military leadership by a network of corrupt public officials and terrorists that has gained access to the courts. The military is rated as the country's most respected institution. It deserves a fair hearing.

[FredFresno]

... in response to Left wing killers use INS, posted by Raptor on Jun 1, 2001

A few years ago we in the US had an ambassador to the UN who made a disingenuous distinction between “authoritarian” and “totalitarian” regimes.  The former, apparently were to be dealt with something like constructive engagement, and the latter were pariah states (or, in some cases, political movements) to be opposed by any means necessary.  While it was never spelled out, apparently capitalist or right wing regimes that tortured and killed their opponents were “authoritarian”, whereas any socialist or left-wing regime, regardless of its behavior with respect to human rights, was considered “totalitarian”.  Those in the US who made this distinction were people making excuses for the military regimes that rounded their opponents into football stadiums and shot them, or pushed them out of airplanes.  These were the people who recruited these war criminals of the “southern cone” nations of the 1970s, and got them to do a reprise in Central America in the 1980s.  Of course the Wall Street Journal was a great supporter of the policies of the administration that Jean Kirkpatrick served under.  So excuse me if I don’t immediately conclude that the US Congress or some faction of it has persecuted Colombian generals and allied themselves with FARC and ELN.  I would come closer to thinking that this writer is being slightly coy about what is, in fact, whole-hearted support for the AUC.

Colombia has a true mess on its hands.  It seems to have little to unite its geographically and socioeconomically diverse peoples as a nation.  In the years between the end of the porfiriaro and the Constitution of 1917, Mexico seemed to have come through its bloodshed and legitimate intranational grievances to become a true nation with true (albeit admittedly imperfect) respect for civilian rule and equality of its citizens before the law.  Colombia and other South American nations seem to be a much longer way from any such developments.  This should give pause to North American supportersof FTAA.  It also seems to me that one has to acknowledge that the US has long been hypocritical with respect to its behavior in Latin America.  While professing respect for rule of law and equality for the law and setting a fair example of these principles at home, the estadounidense who have shownthe greatest interest and involvement in Latin America have typicallyenriched themselves by allying themselves with South American elites who defecated on these principles.  During the Cold War these was done in the name of opposing communism.  In the post-cold War World and in the pre-Cold War world, other pretexts will be used.  The war on drugs comes to mind.

Oh well, back to the usual now...

[Raptor]

... in response to Autodefensas Unitas de Wall Street, posted by FredFresno on Jun 2, 2001

"Of course the Wall Street Journal was a great supporter of the policies of the administration that Jean Kirkpatrick served under. So excuse me if I don’t immediately conclude that the US Congress or some faction of it has persecuted Colombian generals and allied themselves with FARC and ELN. I would come closer to thinking that this writer is being slightly coy about what is, in fact, whole-hearted support for the AUC."

Well well Fred,

In typical left wing fashion you have attempted to destroy the source (WSJ) while never offering any data to the contrary.  Sorry Fred it won't work.  Yes we have socialist/communist in our congress who have enacted this law.  And yes there are good Colombian military men.  And yes they kill communist.  And yes the law is being used to farther left wing ideals here in the USA.

Deal with it.

I have lived there. (Colombia)  And I speak Spanish.  I have seen the real story. I have friend who have been bombed and had family killed.

I don't know here you live, nor do I care however I think you're just a clueless left winger who lives in lala land if you think that FARC is not a power hungry group of thieves and killers. You sound like fool.

I have seen it with my own eyes.  Have you?

[FredFresno]

... in response to Re: Autodefensas Unitas de Wall Street, posted by Raptor on Jun 2, 2001

Raptor, I'm willing, if you care to, to try to discuss this offline.  My email should be included with this post.  I doubt that either you or I will open or change many minds here but who knows--I might learn something.

[Raptor]

... in response to Let's take this discussion offline, posted by FredFresno on Jun 2, 2001

Nope not interested.  I have a life dude, a wife and two kids. And I don't have time to give you a class in media bias.

Besides I'm still waiting to find out if you speak Spanish or have ever been to Colombia.

I'm sure you're just regurgitating what your left wing teachers told you is the truth.  But they never left their warm cozy house to see if they had been told the truth either.  The Clueless leading the clueless.

[Raptor]

... in response to Re: Let's take this discussion offline/n..., posted by Raptor on Jun 3, 2001

"By the way, is your class in media bias going to include anything I won't get from listening one time to Rush Limbaugh?"

Dude,  First  I became a libertarian in college. I don't listen to Rush.  But he is annoying to the homosexuals and the left wing so he can't be that bad.

2nd,  find some other guy to arge your leftwing facination with homosexual rights, animal rights, human rights ect..
I don't believe a thing that you've written.
You could be posting from prison for all we know

3rd, You must be real bored to have come here to spew you're anti American crap.

Want to meet me in Colombia on Wednesday?  I'll show you a few thing about how great we Americans really are.

Besos!

[FredFresno]

... in response to Re: Let's take this discussion offline/n..., posted by Raptor on Jun 3, 2001

Nope not interested. I have a life dude, a wife and two
kids. And I don't have time to give you a class in media
bias.

No one with a life had ought to be spending time on these boards!  That's almost as bad as watching television ;-)  By the way, is your class in media bias going to include anything I won't get from listening one time to Rush Limbaugh?

Besides I'm still waiting to find out if you speak
Spanish or have ever been to Colombia.

I speak Spanish at what the UN considers "level B".  That means I can follow the proceedings of a meeting imperfectly, but do not write or speak in Spanish at a professional level.  While I try not to be this blunt with Colombians I deal with face to face, my general attitude towards Colombia is not to spend more time there than I need to. More time = more risk.  Are only those who speak German and were in German-occupied territory during WWII allowed to have an opinion on the Halocaust?  Are only those who speak Russian and were in Soviet territory prior to 1991 allowed to have an opinion on the merits of the former Soviet Union?

I'm sure you're just regurgitating what your left
wing teachers told you is the truth. But they never
left their warm cozy house to see if they had been
told the truth either. The Clueless leading the
clueless.

So you've got me all figured out, huh?  Sorry, wrong.  While I spent a fair amount of time on university campuses here in the States (several degrees), my education was primarily in the natural sciences and not in the social sciences or humanities.  Therefore my beliefs and attitudes concerning Latin American are from reading a variety of sources on my own, not from one charismatic university lecturer.

There may be some things we can agree on; perhaps that AUC, FARC, and ELN are all terrorists with no political legitimacy?  Obviously there are other things that we would disagree greatly on, such as the accuracy and objectivity of, say, the Wall Street Journal v. the Washington Post or the New York Times, and say the Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch v. the US State Department.  Long ago John Adams and Thomas Jefferson set a precedent in their correspondence for intellectual honesty in exploring honest differences.  This is a precedent that I feel lesser citizens, such as myself should aspire to.  On the other hand, that is nowhere near as interesting as stories about scopolamine (I presume that's what it was) on mammary glands.  Sadly, the Internet is more about the latter than the former.  That is my last word in this thread.  I wish you luck in providing guidance and an example to your children.  Que le vaya bien.

[Hoda]

... in response to Re: Autodefensas Unitas de Wall Street, posted by Raptor on Jun 2, 2001

But the fight isn't political. This so-called "Civil" war in Colombia ended probaly 10 to 15 years ago atbest. This is a "Drug/Money" War. Elements of both the right & left freely admit, that they finance their activities being involved in the growing, processing & distribution cocaine. We can go back & forth forever on this issue. Until the demand ceases or drops dramatically or the Colombian Military suddenly gets 500,000+ troops to flood the country side...it'll only get worse, before it gets better.

Now back to our regularly scheduled programming....Hoda

[Wasp]

... in response to Not to take sides...., posted by Hoda on Jun 2, 2001

Another option that no one is considering is to legalize cocaine.

Anyway, it's an idea worth debating.

[DallasSteve]

... in response to Re: Not to take sides...., posted by Wasp on Jun 2, 2001

Coca Cola still has a legal coca farm in Hawaii.  That's where the government tested the chemical they are spraying in Colombia.  At least that's what I read.  

So what is Coca Cola putting in their secret formula?  It used to contain cocaine 100 years ago, if you didn't know.  What a surprise!  The name is "coca" cola.

This country is a long way from legalizing drugs, which is probably the best way to control the situation.  But, at least with George W. at the helm I think we got one step closer.  Now they are finally talking about control on the demand side.

And if you don't want to legalize drugs, at least maybe you want your tax dollars to be spent wisely.  They say it takes about ten dollars spent in Colombia to equal one dollar spent here on drug abuse treatment and education.