http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/2008/07/24/but-the-terrorists-will-not-
trust-us/?print=1
 

“But the terrorists will not trust us!” 
By Judith  <http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/author/jklinghoff/> A.
Klinghoffer (bio
<http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/author/jklinghoff/bio/> ) 


Unfortunately, too much information is being released on the methods used to
fool FARC. It turns out that 2 rescuers posed as journalists. Now the
journalist complain that hence “terrorists will not trust us!” 

Here is the way the Swiss used to help FARC cover up its own blunders:

 <http://colombiareports.com/pics/2008/07/jean-pierre_gontard.jpg%22> 

With the help of captured documents emails, Von Alex Baur details
<http://www.weltwoche.ch/artikel/?AssetID=20495&CategoryID=100> the unsavory
reality of Swiss mediation between the Colombian government and FARC. The
shocker is not the fact that a Swiss professor acting as mediator turns out
<http://colombiareports.com/2008/07/07/colombia-accuses-swiss-diplomat-of-fi
nancing-farc/>  to be a bag man for ransom payments, we all suspected as
much. Much more important is the evidence that the Swiss “even handed”
policy helps FARC look good by helping the terrorist organization cover it’s
own blunders. Indeed, the reason terrorists look so efficient while
democratic governments appear to be faltering is because the mistakes of
terrorists are covered up with the help of “useful idiots” such as the Swiss
in the case of the FARC. Consider the following story:

 

On 18 June 2007, Alfonso Cano sent an e-mail to his boss Manuel Marulanda -
alias “Tirofijo” - concerning a terrible mishap. At the time, Cano was still
a deputy of the since deceased FARC leader. “Good Evening, Comrade,” Cano
writes, “Due to a serious mix-up our unit was attacked by our own people who
thought we were from the ELN [the National Liberation Army, a rival guerilla
force]; the guards holding the representatives then killed eleven of the
twelve hostages, because they thought they were being attacked by the army.
This grave error is going to cause us enormous problems.”
<http://msnbcmedia1.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Photos/070628/070628_hostages
_vmed_4p.widec.jpg%22> 

What had happened? In April 2002, in a daring action in the city of Cali,
the FARC kidnapped twelve members of the regional parliament. The twelve men
were taken off to the jungle by the narco-guerilla and since that time
figured among the FARC’s most prominent hostages along with Ingrid
Betancourt. But in June 2007, just as the negotiations on a “humanitarian
solution” seemed to be progressing and the Colombian government had released
a FARC capo as a gesture of good will, the fatal blunder took place. The
guards holding the hostages were mistakenly attacked by the FARC themselves.
Believing that government troops were undertaking a rescue operation, they
thereupon killed eleven of the twelve parliament members in cold blood. The
hostages were shot in the back. (This is the FARC’s preferred method of
execution, since it always leaves open the option of claiming that hostages
were killed “while trying to escape.”)

In other words, the FARC leadership was dealing with a deadly incident of
friendly fire which cost the lives of valuable “hostages.” What was to be
done/

 

On the very day of the massacre, FARC Chef “Tirofijo” posed three questions
to his deputy Cano: “1. Can we still keep secret the described events among
the guerrilleros and the civil population? 2. Are there army forces nearby,
were there clashes? 3. Can we at least keep the thing secret until our
comrades are free?” On the FARC chief’s assessment, one has to delay the
public being informed as long as possible, but one should have a communiqué
ready just in case. If the second question can be answered positively, then
the solution is very simple: one will simply blame the army. “And if all
that doesn’t work,” Tirofijo concludes, “we will ask the families to forgive
us by way of a political argument: namely, by making the government’s
postponement of the humanitarian exchange [intercambio humanitario]
responsible for the matter.”As the FARC internal e-mail correspondence
shows, over the next few days the FARC bosses engaged in a debate about
optimal disinformation. On 22 June 2007, “Tirofijo” suggests claiming that
the guards retreated with the hostages upon being attacked and that several
people were killed while fleeing. “Comrade Timoschenko” (a known member of
the secretariat) is inclined rather to blame the President without providing
any further explanation. Alfonso Cano is for leaving open the identity of
the attacking forces - “at least for the moment.”

This is the version that is finally chosen. The parliament members were
killed in crossfire during an attack by unknown troops, the FARC claim
officially. On 15 August 2007, comrade Ivan Marquez “congratulates” the
secretariat “for its exceptional handling of the case of the parliament
members. Even the OAS [Organization of American States] admits that there
was in fact an exchange of gunfire.”

The Colombian government denied it’s forces were involved in any rescue
attempt but to little avail. The even handed Swiss deliberately refused to
give to democratic government pronouncements greater credibility than to
terrorist ones.

 <http://www.nzz.ch/images/Calmy-Rey_1.553343.jpg%22> 

 

In an article that appeared on 13 September 2007, the Swiss daily Die Basler
Zeitung summarized the attitude of the Swiss Department of Foreign Affairs
(EDA) as follows: “The politicians kidnapped by the FARC were presumably
shot by the rebels during an attack by unidentified forces. In response,
Switzerland reminded the Colombian government of the necessity of
negotiations and criticized army operations aimed at freeing the hostages.”
This is the line that the EDA under the leadership of Foreign Minister
Calmy-Rey has always defended: in Colombia, there is an “internal conflict”
between two equal parties, the “rebels” and the security forces. On this
account, the guerilla forces are not criminals, but a social problem, which
has to be solved not with arms but by “dialogue.” Following Calmy-Rey’s
démarche, Colombian President Uribe complained that Switzerland was placing
the Colombian government on the same level as the FARC.

The result?

The Swiss government helped FARC cover up it’s own inefficiency but also
present it’s killing of 11 hostages as an argument for the efficacy of
ransom payments and against military rescue attempts. It should be
remembered that the Swiss government is not really a disinterested party.
After all, it’s “glory” is firmly embedded in its own usefulness as a
“neutral” mediator.

Thus seemingly successful Norwegian role in the Israeli-PLO negotiations led
to it’s invitation to play a similar one in Sri Lanka between the government
and the Tamil Tigers. Those mediations have done little to improve the lives
of the populations involved or enhance peace but they brought very low cost
prestige and glory to the mediators. Hence, it should not be surprising that
nothing would please European leaders than being able to play such mediating
role not only in intra state conflicts but also inter great power conflicts
such as the United States, Iran, China, India and Pakistan to name but a
few.

  <http://media.ft.com/cms/e66c16fa-5422-11dd-aa78-000077b07658.jpg> 

The ultimate difficulty with this European ambition is not only that such a
realistic foreign policy is bound to “infuriate” it’s natural allies
including the US. The real difficulty is that continued European peace
depends on a more peaceful world but that it’s ‘even handed’ policy rewards
strife and punishes those who seek to end it. In other words, European
ambition to serve as a model of the efficacy of a region ruled by democratic
consensus is undermined by the consequence of it’s own policy of providing
aid and comfort to forces committed to doing everything they can to prevent
the emergence of a similar regional or even national consensus elsewhere.



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]


------------------------------------

--------------------------
Want to discuss this topic?  Head on over to our discussion list, [EMAIL 
PROTECTED]
--------------------------
Brooks Isoldi, editor
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

http://www.intellnet.org

  Post message: [email protected]
  Subscribe:    [EMAIL PROTECTED]
  Unsubscribe:  [EMAIL PROTECTED]


*** FAIR USE NOTICE. This message contains copyrighted material whose use has 
not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. OSINT, as a part of 
The Intelligence Network, is making it available without profit to OSINT 
YahooGroups members who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the 
included information in their efforts to advance the understanding of 
intelligence and law enforcement organizations, their activities, methods, 
techniques, human rights, civil liberties, social justice and other 
intelligence related issues, for non-profit research and educational purposes 
only. We believe that this constitutes a 'fair use' of the copyrighted material 
as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. If you wish to use 
this copyrighted material for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use,' 
you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtmlYahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/osint/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to