Politics

Buried!

thefadd.

Posted to Politics on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 06:48:55 AM EST (promoted by port1080). RSS.

One of the greatest tactical victories in history of the War On Terror led the Independence Day news for both the Los Angeles Times and New York Times but was buried on the Friday of a three day holiday weekend.

US intelligence operatives and Colombian officials planned an elaborate infiltration of the FARC rebel group for more than five years. It all finally came to fruition as Colombian commandos took the controversial step of posing as humanitarian aid workers, reporters and cameramen before overpowering several FARC members, freeing 17 hostages.

But did it all really happen that way? The same day the Times of the coasts ran their in depth expose on the dangerously heroics, news was quietly leaked that Colombia had actually paid the rebels $20 million to release the captives. The release is well timed for President Alvaro Uribe who is seeking re-election and had pledged not to negotiate with his armed opposition until hostages were freed.

The official line continued to hold sway among mainstream press while the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia appears to crumbling under the recent death of their leader and an increasing inability to supply themselves and the 700 hostages they are believed to still hold. For her part, new released hostage Ingrid Betancourt decried the "radical, extremist vocabulary of hate and strong words that intimately wound the human being" in calling for talks with her one-time captors.

Tags: edited by Port1080, written by thefadd, FARC, Colombia, politics, media (all tags)

This story: 5 comments (2 from subqueue)
Post a Comment
1

Clarification?

port1080.

Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:07:27 AM EST

5.00 (astute, interesting)

IF this article is true (and it's not clear to me that it is - "well sourced" isn't all that meaningful to me if you don't tell me your sources, sorry random Swiss radio station), one thing that's not made completely clear is whether the money went to FARC itself, or if it was paid to members of FARC to betray their organization. I can very much see the money being spent for the second purpose, but given Uribe's absolutely inflexibility on the FARC issue I find it hard to believe that he would have actually given the money directly to FARC. Possible, but highly unlikely. The issue would have simply been far, far to politically damaging for him if it ever came out, because he's built his entire political career on beating FARC down.

3

^ 1

Re: Clarification?

gerrymander.

Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 12:05:54 AM EST

none

"well sourced" isn't all that meaningful to me if you don't tell me your sources, sorry random Swiss radio station

This was my take, too. The reports of the operation had quite a number of Colombians and Americans at all levels of the operation named and giving quotes to the press. One unnamed source on a European radio station just doesn't have the same credibility.

2

OVER THE LINE!

pO157.

Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 03:45:55 PM EST

5.00 (astute)

Is anybody else bothered by the fact that they supposedly posed as journalists? I didn't see much mention as posing as humanitarian workers at the meet up site, other than to act as if the helicopters were owned by some charity group, so I don't think that is an issue. I think if they were you would have groups like the International Red Cross going nuclear.

I thought it was generally a social gauche to disguise a combatant as a journalist? I'd hate to be a war correspondent in the future and trying to get these shifty people to trust you so you could do your job.

On another note, I wouldn't be surprised if it comes out that they simply bribed some high up FARC commander to make this happen. After it happened I saw on CNN some reporter talking about how the Columbians and US claimed to still have embedded operatives in the FARC leadership. Right now. When did it become policy to announce what groups had been infiltrated? That just seems moronic. I imagine it was more likely that all the operatives had already made it out or there were none there to begin with and they simply want to have some psychological fun with the FARC.

4

^ 2

Re: OVER THE LINE!

gerrymander.

Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 12:19:46 AM EST

5.00 (interesting)

I didn't see much mention as posing as humanitarian workers at the meet up site, other than to act as if the helicopters were owned by some charity group, so I don't think that is an issue.

To my mind, that's more than bad enough -- but not the way you mean. It makes me wonder exactly which and how many charities are collecting tax-free money to materially aid terrorist groups. The cover story given to the FARC captors was that a humanitarian helicopter was being provided to transport the hostages for use in a propaganda video -- and they had no trouble accepting this as a valid operation.

5

^ 4

Re: OVER THE LINE!

port1080.

Thu Jul 10, 2008 at 10:02:17 AM EST

4.00 (astute)

The cover story given to the FARC captors was that a humanitarian helicopter was being provided to transport the hostages for use in a propaganda video -- and they had no trouble accepting this as a valid operation. Eh, I find it hard to get worked up over this - you make it sound like the groups would have had to be working tightly together for this sort of thing, but that's hardly the case. I would view it was more of a quid pro quo arrangement - the humanitarian groups want access to the hostages to make sure that they're being treated well, are alive, etc. The FARC wants helicopter transport. Humanitarian group gives transport, FARC gives access. It'd be different if they were supposed to be running guns for FARC or something, but in this case I don't think it's quite as telling as you make it out to be.

This story: 5 comments (2 from subqueue)
Post a Comment