“TFP Newsletter”, Vol. IV –
No. 17 – 1986 (www.tfp.org)
THE
COLOMBIAN TFP APPLAUDS ARMY MOVE AGAINST TERRORISM
WHEN guerillas of the Marxist M-19 took hundreds of
hostages in the Bogota Palace of Justice last
November, the Colombian army responded in a way the guerillas had not expected.
When the fighting ceased on November 7, the guerillas lay dead. On November 10,
the Colombian TFP—itself victim of several terrorist attacks—published a
manifesto in El Tiempo, Bogota's
major newspaper.
In the manifesto, the TFP praised the energy with
which the authorities had reacted to the brutal and bloody guerilla aggression.
The TFP also expressed its sadness at the death of so many innocent people in
the cross fire or at the hands of the guerillas.
Regarding the fate of the 12 Supreme Court justices,
the TFP declared:
"This society [the TFP] cannot fail to express
here its indignation and sorrow over the cruel assassination of the hostages.
This feeling is intensified by the fact that the distinguished president of the
Supreme Court of Justice, the most illustrious of the victims, was known for
his strong support of a conciliatory attitude toward the subversives, for
which, however, the assassins showed not the least sign of gratitude."
The manifesto recalled the amnesty granted the
guerillas in 1982. Three years ago, the TFP had warned in El Tiempo:
"The TFP must voice its fear, which is surely
shared by countless Colombians that, as things now stand, granting freedom
through an unconditional amnesty to numerous active leaders of subversion would
enable them to proceed headlong in our urban centers with a type of violence
much more advanced than [the present] guerilla activity… The effect of the
amnesty would not be the disarming of the guerillas, but rather the transfer of
agitation from the deep of the jungle to the heart of the major cities.''
The TFP has repeatedly stressed that a radical antiguerilla reaction is indispensable. Its November
manifesto stated:
"A superficial analysis of the events would
create the impression that the radical solution is always the most cruel. Such an impression is a sad illusion of
vacillating, indefinite minds, who think that every categorical attitude is
necessarily reprehensible. The recent tragic episode illustrates the opposite
to be true: Very often to radicalize is to prevent; it is to avoid disaster
and bloodshed; it is to protect rights; it is to defend law and order. This
is especially true when one faces implacable adversaries, such as the
Colombian guerillas, who are incited, armed and directed by
"This is the lesson given to our nation by the
terrible attack on the