FARC blow up water supply

by ? Tue Mar 14, 2006 15:52

This is probably another impersonation. Please check

by pat c Tue Mar 14, 2006 15:53

ive mailed gearoid.

by Gearoid O Loingsigh - Colombia Solidarity Network Tue Mar 14, 2006 18:13

The posting is from me. I tried to put up a photo of us with the ECAAS people in Saravena but didn't quite manage it.

People may find it strange that the FARC do this type of thing but lots of left organisations have had problems particularly in the last number of years.

I have replied to Pat C confirming that I posted it.

by anton Wed Mar 15, 2006 17:24

Maybe Farc did blow up this water supply , maybe they didn't . The problem is that many indymedia readers won't take Gearoid's word on it ever since he slandered sacked Dublin coke workers and their supporters last year on this site . The coke workers had previously refused to support the Lasc sponsored coke boycott campaign ; when these workers were subsequently made redundant , Gearoid could hardly contain his glee writing that they were being paid back for loyalty to the company .
Anybody that supported the Naas Rd workers was branded a scab , a yellow union bureaucrat or else accused of being in the pay of coca-cola. Mr O'Lionsigh is not the sort of person Lasc should send over to Colombia to represent them . He doesn't support Farc - fair enough , he's entitled to his opinion - but his invective tends to be dishonest and way over the top. Throw any mud you can at a political opponent and hope some of it sticks - that's Gearoid style.

by Gearoid O Loingsigh - Colombia Solidarity Network Wed Mar 15, 2006 21:56

The water supply was blown up by the FARC. Do you have a problem with some saying that? Once again I find myself the target of people who seem to favour both Coke and the FARC a strange world indeed. Is it beyond the realm of possibility that the FARC would do that? Remember that many people who supported the Provos armed campaign couldn't justify strapping some young man to car and ordering him to drive to police/army checkpoint or else his family would be nutted. Many armed groups have done unsavoury things.

Perhaps Anton would like to come to Colombia and see for himself.

The Coke workers were made redundant as part of international restructuring of the company. Not due to the boycott. The rest is slander and should be deleted by teh Indymedia editors. We can't out " on Peter"indymedia on the other thread but lies are fine about what some did or didn't say. What I actually said was that the Naas Rd workers deserved our solidarity adn that they had been betrayed by their union who did nothing to fight the cloisure. IN fact the communique issued lamented the loss of jobs but thanked coke for its new investments!

by Gearoid O Loingsigh Wed Mar 15, 2006 22:00

One last thing Anton, your bile and invective are what is over the top. You say I am not the sort of person who lasc should send to represent them. They didn't. My work in Colombia began in 1995 predating the founding of lasc.

Talk about throwing mud!

The report on the water supply comes from teh social organisations of Aruaca where the attack happened. As always smear the messenger, it is easier than dealing with hard realities.

by k keating - colombian solidarity network Thu Mar 16, 2006 08:35

Gearoid, I think you are wasting your time responding to the likes of Anton or Peter or whatever pseudonyms that they write under the next time. They seek to muddy the water. We have to try to stick to the issues that arise from these developments. Very significant issues of solidarity have been highlighted in recent posts on Colombia.

The predictable attempts to muddy the issue is less significant than the absence of engagement from the left in general. Given the importance that the left rightly give to developments in other parts of Latin America, Venezeula and Bolivia in particular, the lack of engagement on Colombia is puzzling. When the fact that Colombia has a long Border with Venezuela and the U.S. is pouring huge military aid into support for the Uribe regime, (The biggest investment outside of the Middle East ) it seems even more myopic. Its clear from the statement issued by Francisco Ramirez at the launch of his book The Profits of Extermination (on the main page of Indymedia) that a programme of extermination of social organisations is being enacted in Colombia in collusion with multinational interests.
It is reminiscent of Operation Phoenix in Vietnam in which the CIA covertly assassinated up to 40,000 social leaders The book provides damning evidence of the links between multinational corporations and the horrific violence inflicted on trade unions, defenders of human rights and every type of social organisations in Colombia. This fascistic model of neo liberalism which the U.S. and its allies, (British and Israeli "advisors" and mercenaries are also present in the country ) seek to impose against a very heroic resistance, will if successful inevitably lead its extension. Its the alternative future to the Bolivarian process in neighbouring Venezuela.

In regard to the FARC's attack on the water plant in Saverana it is a criminal blow to the struggles of the workers and peasant organisations in the region. As part of the delegation last summer we were shown around the waterworks and municipal services of Savarana. They had been built up from scratch without any state help and were run by the workers. It was a very impressive achievement and successful despite harassment including murders of its workers.
We were also shown model farms in the area in which the children of peasants were educated up to third level and in which a variety of crops including fish were farmed. These schools / farms created a model which the peasants could develope their small holdings. The director is being held under false charges and the schools closed down.
Its hard to see how the FARC's latest act helps their struggle, but then when the Farc was negotiating a settlement with Uribe or the previous government, the social organisations whose struggles to survive are so important to the future of the region were never consulted or part of the framework.

Solidarity with Colombia is hugely important. At present it is all a one way street, the social organisations there are resisting the worse barbarism Imperialism and the corporations of the EU and US can spawn. We owe them a debt of gratitude. For the likes of Peter or Anton we owe only contempt

by Peter Thu Mar 16, 2006 11:05

I have not commented on this thread and had no intention of doing so. That said, my name being mentioned, K Keating makes an important point above.

by anton Thu Mar 16, 2006 22:06

On Sunday May 1 -on the day of international workers solidarity - in response to Coca -Cola's announcement that it was to close its Dublin plant , Gearoid wrote a diatribe against coke workers under the headline:
" Coke Workers Repaid For Loyalty to Company".
The headline was clearly directed against coke workers and not against the SIPTU bureaucracy . A long and acrimonious thread ensued in which Coke workers and their supporters were branded as scabs ,yellow union bureaucrats and bribe-takers by Lasc supporters . At no time did Gearoid disassociate himself from these smears.
Coke Siptu members were advised by supporters of Lasc that , while they had the right to oppose the consumers’ boycott in private, they had no right to campaign openly against the tactic . By their sheep-like adherence to SIPTU fat-cat Anne Speed the Naas Rd workers really had only themselves to blame for the dilemma they found themselves in ,but , in the unlikely event of them seeing the error of their ways ,they would be offered solidarity by true socialists. That was the nature of the “sympathy”on offer from Gearoid and coke workers quiet rightly told him where he could stick it.
Gearoid’s response to my post today is in the same scurrilous ,anti-democratic vein as his previous postings have been –basically saying that to question his objectivity and authority on matters relating to Colombia is to be in favour of Coca-Cola , and by implication the slaughter of Colombian trade unionists .
Maybe FARC did blow up the peasants' water reservoirs.; maybe they didn’t ; maybe there’s more to it than Gearoid is letting on. Gearoid thinks that I should be censored by IMC editors for saying that . I hope
that is not the position of Socialist Democracy as a whole .

by Adam and the Antons Thu Mar 16, 2006 22:17

No, Anton, Lasc supporters repeatedly denied that they viewed the Coke workers as "scabs" or "yellow" on that thread, again and again, no matter how hard you tried to twist things around and pretend that they did. Your dishonesty was shameless then and it still is. Anyone in any doubt can go back into the archives and read the thread (and spare us one of your typical stunts where you take quotes out of context, twisting their original meaning arseways, to back up your lies).

by Peter Fri Mar 17, 2006 00:06

The record speaks for itself – some supporters of the boycott characterised Irish workers as ‘scabs’ for one reason and one alone – they opposed the boycott tactic. On another thread I was accused of various things that were demonstrably untrue. Some supporters of the boycott do not read what is written by their critics – they ignore it and make up a criticism that was never uttered. Some are so convinced they are right that every alternative is 'contemptible'. A new argument (or impression) is that supporters of the boycott should have a monopoly on commentary on Colombia – critics keep out. If there is any weight to the early part of the commentary by K Keating above (and I believe there is) then this narrow mindedness should end. At one point in the politics of the North a similar approach operated. When that approach was abandoned in the late 1970s the ghettoisation and marginalisation of the politics of the National Question was successfully challenged. Is there a lesson there? You don’t have to abandon what you think is right, you simply have to allow space for a common and agreed political denominator. Who knows, fresh faces might turn up at meetings.

by k keating - Colombia solidarity network Fri Mar 17, 2006 03:53

Before the closure of the Naas rd coke plant was announced, I along with Gearoid and other members of LASC attended a public meeting organised by SIPTU on topic of colombia and the coke boycott. Leaving aside the full time bureaucrats there was as many people from the campaign against coke as there were workers from the Naas road plant. We attended in the hope of adressing coke workers on the call for solidarity from Colombia, but they weren't there.

It had been asserted time and time that the workers were mobilised against the coke boycott, but it was clear to me that like workers everywhere else in the country almost two decades of partnership has disoriented and atomised them and left them in no fit state to challenge coke. hence the lack of any determined attempt to stop coke closing the plant. This is no reflection on the workers concerned but on the parasitic union bureaucracy who have delivered defeat after defeat and shattered morale over the duration of the partnership deals. The idealogical retreat represented by partnership in which the interests of workers are conflated with that of their exploiters render the very idea of class based organisations for workers meaningless. The lack of participation by workers in their unions is unsurprising as is the success of the vicious offensive against them. The identification of the SIPTU union bureaucrats with coke's interests is no more than another facet of partnership.

by Peter Fri Mar 17, 2006 14:14

The workers were against the boycott but it wasn't their fault, it was those nasty bureaucrats. Your view is established. Now, why not write some more about the interesting direction you were going in earlier – and reverse out of this debater’s cul de sac.

by k keating - Colombia Solidarity Network Fri Mar 17, 2006 17:51

COKE CAMPAIGN UPDATES

Message from FUMPAZ, Colombia

Dear Friends,

Warm greetings from FUMPAZ, the Foundation for Environmental Development and Peace in Colombia.

Before all else comrades we inform you that we continue supporting the Boycott against Coca-Cola seeing that it contaminates and assassinates whoever pronounces against it in Colombia.

At the same time, and in spite of this, we continue fighting this corporation, together with our comrades in the Barranquilla branch of SINALTRAINAL. We have had great successes, one of which is that Coca-Cola is no longer consumed or sold in the Atlantic Univerity (Universidad Del Atlantico) in Barranquilla, Colombia. We have to note that this university has a 17,000 student population that has been become conscious of the reasons not to consume this drink, and this thought is now spreading along the Atlantic coasts of Colombia.

FUMPAZ, Colombia

Received 10th March

War on Want – there’s more to it

Mark Thomas reports in this week’s New Statesman that Douglas Trainer, a former National Union of Students president, and now public relations man consulted by Coca-Cola was seen sitting and chatting with the Amicus bloc at the NGO’s AGM on 25 February, shortly before they walked out that is.

http://www.newstatesman.com/200603130014

Coke’s Nazi Adverts Goes Worldwide

After appearing in London (four times), all over Colombia and in Ecuador, the Coke’s Nazi Adverts exhibition brought together by Mark Thomas and Tracey Moberly was shown at the Sofia Imber National Museum for Contemporary Art during the World Social Forum in Caracas. Curators of Venezuela’s new Historic Museum of Popular Power were so impressed that they invited Tracey to set up the work as a permanent display. Tracey took a miniature version of the exhibition to Chiapas, Mexico where again it has been invited to return as a full display for a three month tour. Tracey will take the exhibition to Russia in September.

For latest information: http://redart.tv/nazicoke/news.html

Teamsters join protest against Coca-Cola over workers rights

Coca-Cola is now facing a labour relations problem in the US, after the Teamsters Union joined protesters calling for boycotts against the company over alleged human rights violations in Colombia. While Coca-Cola said that it was "greatly disappointed and offended" by the "false and inflammatory" allegations made by the Teamsters, the union's action marks a situation where its workforce is becoming activist on a global scale.

The Teamsters are also afraid of job losses due to the cancellation by universities of a number of lucrative contracts with the company. The universities have been pressured into action due to student protests over allegations involving hit squads, murder and pollution. "Coca-Cola's refusal to take the students seriously is having a direct impact on the company, its reputation and the Teamsters who service university contracts," stated Joe Wojciechowski, president of Teamsters Local 812, which represents about 2,000 of the company's workers in New York.

http://www.foodproductiondaily.com/news/ng.asp?n=65735-...tling

Court Action by Turkish Workers

Twenty six Turkish and Kurdish workers have raised a civil action in the New York District Court against the Coca-Cola Company and its Turkish affiliates, demanding a jury trial for relief and damages. The case “involves the systematic intimidation and torture of workers” in Istanbul who decided to join the Nakliyat I trade union affiliated to the progressive DISK federation. But “Coke’s local managers, employees, agents and/or co-venturers unleashed the brutal Çevik Kuvvet, a ‘special branch’ of the Turkish police on the workers and their families, who were peacefully assembled to protest that all of the workers who joined or supported the Union were summarily discharged by Coke”.

The case can be downloaded from http://laborrights.org/projects/corporate/coke

Coke Looses Appeal in Mexico: Gay Discrimination Case Goes Ahead

”On January 2, 2006 the judge presiding over Mexico City's 30th Civil Court stated that the claim submitted by Roberto Mendoza Ralph against Coca-Cola FEMSA for moral damage was not to be dismissed. Coca-Cola had attempted to argue that since Mendoza Ralph resigned and had been paid the wages due to him, the matter was settled. However, the judge ruled that the civil trial was not about "labor rights but the moral damage the plaintiff claims to have suffered due to the defendants' discriminatory behavior."

Roberto Mendoza Ralph was forced to resign from his executive position at the Company in October 2004, for being gay” reports the International Gay and Lesbian Human Rights Commission.

More information http://iglhrc.org

Coca-Cola: Poisoning Water, Land and People

by Amit Srivastava, India Resource Center, 14 March, 2006

In the last two weeks, the Coca-Cola company has come under scrutiny once again for selling harmful products - this time, with high levels of benzene, a cancer causing chemical. The company's products are being investigated all across the world, including the US, UK, China and Australia…

For full article visit www.IndiaResource.org

Coke’s Secret Ingredient?

When still president-elect, Evo Morales of Bolivia complained that while the US tries to criminalise Bolivians who cultivate the coca leaf, one of its own corporations maintains a monopoly on legal exports, "It's not possible that the coca leaf can be legal for Coca Cola and not for us. It's hypocritical," he said. Coca-Cola bought 115 tons of coca leaf from Peru and 105 tons from Bolivia to make 500 million bottles of the soft drink, without alkaloids, and the corporation is even thought to have had a UN Convention specially written to allow it to do so.

See Reuters report http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060214/lf_nm/latam_coca_dc_1

And http://www.narconews.com/Issue26/article569.html

Coca-Cola threatens to quit schools (? not likely!)

According to a BBC report, letters show that Coca-Cola warned Education Secretary Ruth Kelly it might withdraw its vending machines network from schools over her ban on ‘junk food’.

“The company told her last November that the proposed ending of fizzy drinks sales would make the business unviable. It said schools would lose money and pupils would suffer from the removal of such ‘a highly efficient country-wide beverage distribution system’.”

A threat that is pure bluff, as Coke is desperate to keep its addictive and unethical products in the face of school students, whatever the consequences for their health.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/4771676.stm

Caracas World Social Forum Endorsement

The World Social Forum held in Caracas 24-29 January demonstrated strengthening Latin American solidarity with Colombian workers. Edgar Paez International Secretary of SINALTRAINAL spoke movingly to a 300 strong seminar hosted by ‘Hands Off Venezuela’ campaign, and his union participated in the broad front launching of a two year programme of hearings into multinationals and human rights, that affect all public and private sector workers as well as communities in Colombia.

The United Students Against Sweatshops agitated tirelessly at the WSF to raise the issue of Coke’s crimes. As a result of these initiatives the final assembly of all WSF social movements endorsed the international campaign against Killer Cola.

by Dan Fri Mar 17, 2006 18:41

"Who knows, fresh faces might turn up at meetings."

"Peter", with the greatest possible respect, I don't think we'll be in any hurry to take your advice about how to advance solidarity campaigns with SINALTRAINAL and the Colombian people in general. We've had plenty of fresh faces showing up at meetings lately. We're in contact with plenty of people who want to get involved in activity, both around the Coke boycott and Colombia solidarity in general. Somehow I don't expect to see your face at any of our meetings, but you never know I suppose...

by StablinskiFusion Sat Mar 18, 2006 19:51

and if at some stage you have time, because you seem very busy with your egos..., check this link:

http://kanalb.org/clip.php?clipId=1296

the site is german but you can downlaod the clip 'San José de Apartadó' (in Spanish) easily

it is about a village community in Colombia that decided to be neutral i.e. not to support either Farc nor Paras...and unfortunately paid the price ... but those with sensible egos around here could learn something from it :)

peace :-)

StablinskiFusion

by anton Wed Mar 22, 2006 17:25

Sorry if my remarks don’t seem relevant to you Stablinski and thanks for trying to shed some light on the intricacies of the Colombian situation. History has shown that in a civil war situation lots of bad things are done by both sides involved – there are no saints and no sinners. People who just want to get on with their lives peacefully find themselves squeezed and forced to take sides .
I have a problem with the inordinate amount of space that Gearoid devotes to attacks on Farc in his postings from Colombia . They would give anybody unfamiliar with the situation there the impression that Farc was only involved in a war against peasants and trade union leaders . Given Gearoid’s track record of smearing political opponentsin Ireland , I think that there is every possibility that he is not giving Indymedia readers an accurate picture of what is taking place in Colombia.
The IRA ,as Gearoid points out ,did some very bad things during the course of their war against British intervention in Ireland – made mistakes , killed innocent people . Throughout that campaign the media
sought to portray the IRA as responsible for everything ,always highlighting and decontextualizing sufferings attributable to republicans while downplaying the over- riding responsibility of British imperialism for
the conflict in this country. Gearoid's postings on Farc are the equivalent of writng about the IRA and only mentioning Black Friday , the McCartney sisters and the kidnapping of Shergar.
KK regrets that Indymedia and the Irish left in general have not paid adequate attention to Colombia ,but I would say the main responsibility for that lies with the sectarianism of Lasc .When the Colombia 3 were still in prison how many indymedia threads did Lasc initiate calling for the men’s release? The Bring Them Home Campaign had a thread going in 2002 http://www.indymedia.ie/article/18355
Somebody calling him/herself “Let them stand trial” posted this to it on Tue Nov 19, 2002 14:02

“Remember that FARC mortared a church and murdered over 100 people a few months ago”.

“Let them stand trial” was obviously a right-winger and didn’t feel the need to mention that right wing paramilitaries were using the church at the time for a well-fortified base . Gearoid’s reports from Colombia have a similar , skewed aspect to them . I would like to know more about what’s going on in Colombia ,so please keep up the good work Stanliski ,but I don’t trust Gearoid’s objectivity.

by pat c Wed Mar 22, 2006 17:29

i dont think that gearoid has made an inordinate amount of attacks on farc. i have regularly come up against the colombian rightwingers when i defend FARC and gearoid has never been on their side. sometimes FARC commit acts which cannot be defended.

"Let them stand trial” was obviously a right-winger and didn’t feel the need to mention that right wing paramilitaries were using the church at the time for a well-fortified base ."

have you any links to sources which back this up? this incident is dragged out by the media here regukarly in a slaughter of the innocents manner.

by anton Wed Mar 22, 2006 17:53

I don't have sources to hand on that - maybe Mags does. It was a tactic that the Falangists used deliberately during the Spanish civil war :civil wars are always dirty.

by Dan Wed Mar 22, 2006 18:40

Anton, this is not the first time that you've claimed Gearoid has a sinister, anti-FARC agenda. Now I'm genuinely curious to hear why you think this is. What motivates Gearoid to attack FARC?

Perhaps he's really a CIA agent? Or maybe he's working on behalf of the paramilitaries? Maybe the Sunday Independent has paid him to smear FARC, so they have another stick to beat the Provos with?

These suggestions only have to be stated for their absurdity to be obvious. But these are the only logical implications that can be drawn from your remarks.

The truth is, Gearoid has no hidden agenda. He is exactly what he says he is - a left-wing activist who, unlike you, actually works with the Colombian workers' movement every day. When he was living in Ireland, he did his best to promote solidarity activism with Colombia, and he's now gone back to the country to work with the union movement.

Although Gearoid is not a political supporter of FARC, he has no possible incentive to smear them. For anyone who wants to put the spotlight where it belongs - on the Colombian state, its paramilitary allies, the foreign multinationals who support them and the US government that bankrolls the whole system - it would be much simpler if FARC had never done anything wrong.

Unfortunately, FARC have done some appalling things. Their abuses are bad in themselves, and they have also undermined the broader struggle against the Colombian state. They alienate people who might otherwise support the guerrillas, and they provide Uribe and his supporters with valuable propaganda.

This is not a point of view that Gearoid has come up with on his own. Most well-informed people who are sympathetic to the Colombian people would tell you the same thing.

Since you mentioned the Troubles, there is a parallel alright. Bloody Friday undermined the struggle against state repression, so did Kingsmill, so did Teebane, so did the Warrington bombing. Killing Robert McCartney was a despicable thing in itself, but it also handed Paisley, McDowell and the Sunday Indo a stick to beat the Provos with.

Naturally, anyone who talked endlessly about these atrocities, without ever mentioning state or loyalist violence, shouldn't be taken seriously. But if you are suggesting that Gearoid has never said anything critical about the Colombian army or the paramilitaries, then the only person whose credibility is called into question is you, Anton.

by Peter Fri Mar 24, 2006 01:54

Dan,

With the greatest of respect, the problem is that Gearoid concentrates on writing about a multinational drinks company, when he is not being critical of FARC.

Gearoid has authored 15 news pieces on Indymedia, 12 are about Coca Cola, one is critical of FARC, one compares Uribe and Michael McDowell and one is about an International Caravan to protect Colombian trade unionists (In truth this is about Coca Cola as well). That makes 13 out of 15.

In the latter piece Gearoid writes:

“The international campaigns being waged against multinational corporations are very important. These have allowed us to show the world how companies like Nestlé, Coca Cola, Occidental Petroleum, Repsol, Frontino Gold Mines, Mineros of Antioquia, Corona Golfields, South American Gold Corporation, Normandy Mining, and BP, among others, have benefited from the criminal actions committed by paramilitary groups, that have led to practically annihilate the social organizations and the communities in the zones where these corporations operate.”

It is strange therefore that Gearoid concentrates on Coca Cola. If we examine LASC authored pieces, some of which Gearoid authored as PRO, the predominant strategy appears also to be to write about Coca Cola. And there is yet another piece critical of FARC.

Of the thousands of trade unionists killed by the military and their death squad allies in Colombia I believe 8 worked in Coca Cola bottling plants. Am I correct?

This statistic puzzles me, as does the strategy that seems to have flown from it. In looking at an Indymedia feature on the extensive oppression of miners in Colombia I see little interest apart from the actual posting of the piece - www.indymedia.ie/article/74763. Photographs depicting the publicising of a book on the subject show large posters denouncing “killer coke” (referring to cola rather than coal). So much for the miners and their problems.

Perhaps I could make the point with a Jewish Joke.

After his arrest the Gestapo interrogated a Jewish prisoner. “Who is to blame for Germany’s problems?” shouted the Gestapo. “I blame the bicycles” said the Jew. “Why the bicycles?” said the Gestapo. “Why the Jews?” shrugged the Jew.

Why Coca Cola?

(A note to concrete thinkers, though I doubt it will do much good: no I am not comparing the treatment of the Jews in Nazi Germany with the position of Coca Cola in Colombia.)

Coca Cola has a case to answer, particularly in relation to Carepa in the mid 1990s. But why are other forces let off the hook by default - the state, the military, their death squad surrogates - as far as the Colombia solidarity campaigners are concerned? Those who kill, rape torture and maim get less attention than FARC, and Coca Cola gets more attention than the lot. Anyone who questions this lop sided strategy is denounced as an ally of the enemies of the working class.

I would be interested in an answer. If it is not a waste of anyone’s time.

(This is another observation. On another thread I asked a simple question about a possible UN ILO investigation into labour conditions in Colombia. No answer. However, given the opportunity to write at length about the Coca Cola boycott, and to defend it with vigour, even when it has not been specifically attacked or even raised as an issue, Colombia solidarity campaigners wax lyrical. Odd. Anyway, any chance of a reply on the right of workers to give evidence to the ILO enquiry, if it happens, without intimidation?)

Despite the disagreement, I wish Gearoid well in his endeavours. And all the best to you too Dan.

by Dan Fri Mar 24, 2006 23:11

We have nothing more to discuss, "Peter", I'm afraid. You aren't willing to debate these issues unless we accept everything you say at face value and take it for granted that you are honest and sincere. I've already explained at length why I don't accept this for a moment.

I won't debate these issues with you as if you were a genuine activist with a genuine interest in helping the people of Colombia, because I am quite sure that you are not. Your only interest is to undermine one of the most effective solidarity campaigns with Colombian trade unionists in recent years. This is your only agenda, however much you try to deny it.

If I deal with every single one of the points in your post, once and for all, I'm quite sure you'll respond with another lengthy post, and on, and on, and on, until everyone else has fallen asleep. You never acknowledge that your arguments have been dealt with, you just change the subject and carry on. Unlike you, I'm not paid to sit in an office beside a computer all day. I don't have time for this sterile, unproductive drudgery.

If you want to have an discussion about any issue relating to Colombia, I suggest you acquire the courage to sign your real name to your posts. As long as you are unwilling to make yourself accountable, there is no chance of an honest debate.

BTW, if anyone is tempted for a moment to give credence to "Anton"'s absurd claims about Gearoid, they might like to know that Gearoid has taken the trouble to write a full-length book about the abuses of the paramilitaries in the Magdalena Medio region and the complicity of the state forces. I doubt "Anton" could find the Magdalena Medio on a map.

by anton Sat Mar 25, 2006 15:01

If it's so much trouble for Gearoid to write a full-length book could I suggest that it may be because he only ever gives half the story?

by anton Sat Mar 25, 2006 16:27

You wonder whether I think this about Gearoid’s motives:

“Perhaps he's really a CIA agent? Or maybe he's working on behalf of the paramilitaries? Maybe the Sunday Independent has paid him to smear FARC, so they have another stick to beat the Provos with?”

No ,you’re really off the mark , I don’t think that about Gearoid. Wouldn’t you agree that the judgement of people who do rationalize in such a way should be doubted?
You're right about one thing though Dan , I couldn't find Magdalena
Medio on the map. I've looked it up on google though . I keep getting
stuff about the peace community there ,reports from Chris Patten things
like that. Is that the place you're talking about - is Gearoid involved
with the peace laboratry process?

by Dan Sat Mar 25, 2006 20:16

No, I'm afraid you can't wriggle out of it that easily Anton. The only logical conclusion to be drawn from your sly innuendos is that Gearoid has some kind of hidden anti-FARC agenda that he's not being honest about. Either he's a CIA agent, or working for the paramilitaries, or on the payroll of Tony O'Reilly, or something else of that sort. There's no other way that your remarks can be interpreted.

Obviously, you don't want to say this directly, because you know how absurd it sounds (and is). So you're trying to slither out of it. You're going to have to say DIRECTLY why you believe that Gearoid has a hidden anti-FARC agenda, or else withdraw the insinuation. You try to dismiss the fact that he has written a full-length book detailing the crimes of the paramilitaries and the complicity of the state by making some moronic quip. For somebody who likes to flaunt his Provo sympathies, you seem to be a student of the Eoghan Harris school of political debate: slime, smear and innuendo are your only weapons.

Let's imagine that there was an American journalist who had gone to live in Belfast during the Troubles, and always supported the nationalist cause. This journalist had then written a hard-hitting book detailing collusion between loyalist paramilitaries and the British state. He was then attacked by an ignorant arm-chair Provo from Boston for criticising the Warrington bombing and accused of being a lackey of British imperialism.

This is an absolutely precise analogy for what you are attempting to do. I see from your latest outbursts on another thread that you are as unwilling to hear any criticism of Coca Cola as you are to hear criticism of FARC. A bizarre ideological mixture indeed.

You might as well come clean and admit that your only motivation is personal spite and malice. This has nothing to do with politics in the grown up sense of the term. In any context your behaviour would be pathetic, but in this context it's obscene and disgusting. Every day people are dying in Colombia at the hands of the army and the paramilitaries, and your only concern is to attack people who are trying to do something about it, because of your own sad personal grudges.

Enough is enough. It's time for your shabby little smear campaign to end, Anton. Give us all a rest and stop abusing Indymedia for your purposes - it's a resource for people who want alternative news sources, not a forum for bitter spiteful trolls.

by Peter Mon Mar 27, 2006 10:07

Dan,
Your opinion of me is neither here nor there. I suspect that you do not deal with some of the issues because you cannot. On a previous occasion you made assertions about my views that were in your head but did not exist in reality.
You are free to decide that the issue of whether workers should be allowed to give evidence to an enquiry without intimidation is not worthy of comment.
As I said before, all the best.

by anton Mon Mar 27, 2006 17:52

Dan, one minute your ambassador to Colomibia calls FARC murderers and now you tell me that to say Gearoid is anti-farc is the same as saying :
“Either he's a CIA agent, or working for the paramilitaries, or on the payroll of Tony O'Reilly, or something else of that sort. There's no other way that your remarks can be interpreted.”
I’ll say it again ,just to be clear - I don’t think any of those things about Gearoid..

by Dan Sun Apr 09, 2006 19:06

Hadn't bothered looking at this thread in a long while, but just had a check there. God almighty, "Peter" and "Anton" really are something aren't they?

"Peter" wants to lay down the following rules for debate: "Nobody is allowed to question my motivations. Everything I say must be taken at face value. I must be permitted to change my arguments whenever I find it convenient to do so. Nobody is allowed to point out my inconsistencies."

And when people draw attention to his actual record on this issue (as shown by his previous contributions) he affects a display of horror and indignation, as if it was the most shocking thing imaginable that anyone could be so nasty and cynical that they would question a pure, honest soul like himself. The hypocrisy is nauseating.

People have dealt with "Peter"'s bogus arguments on Indymedia (whether they were made under that particular pseudonym or other ones), again and again and again. I've done it myself, Gearoid has done it, many other people have done it. A clear pattern has emerged: "Peter" will simply change his position once his arguments have been dealt with, and pretend that he never adopted the previous position in the first place. Then he will repeat the process, again and again.

When dealing with someone as shamelessly dishonest as "Peter", it's actually impossible to win the argument, because the terms of the debate keep changing. The goalposts will move every time "Peter" finds it convenient and go for a wander around the pitch.

I've made it clear that I'm not willing to discuss these issues with "Peter" if I have to take it for granted that "Peter" is honest and sincere and wants to help SINALTRAINAL and the Colombian labour movement, because I know very well that that is a lie (if anyone is wondering why I am so certain of this, I suggest they follow "Peter"'s contributions to this thread http://www.indymedia.ie/article/70037 . It's tiresome but very revealing.)

Meanwhile, "Peter" has made it clear that he won't tolerate any questioning of his purer-than-pure motivations (he decrees that it is "neither here nor there"). So there is no point carrying on: both parties will simply be repeating themselves.

As I said, there's only one way to get past this: "Peter" could summon the courage to start posting under his real name. Otherwise there's no point debating with people who won't make themselves accountable and won't take responsibility for their own record.

"Peter" can pretend to himself that he has won the argument, that I am not debating with him because the points he made were so devastatingly effective, I had to slink off shame-faced. I really don't care what delusions he harbours.

As for "Anton", your insults are as ham-fisted as your jokes. "Peter" may be slippery and disingenuous, but at least he's intelligent. Whenever you attempt to debate with people, you sound more and more deranged as you go on, eventually reaching a state of total lunacy (your exchange with Chekov in this thread is a good example: http://www.indymedia.ie/article/69627). But worst of all, you fancy yourself as a real comedian, so along with all the lies, we have to put up with your moronic one-liners.

Meanwhile, people are dying in Colombia every day, and all you want to do is attack people who are trying to do something about it. You appear surprised that anyone could get angry about this behaviour. Maybe if you had even the slightest concern for the victims (trade unionists and otherwise, Coke workers and otherwise), you wouldn't find it so baffling. Judging by your contributions, you think the whole thing is a big joke.