Jump to content

Talk:ANNCOL

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled

[edit]

I removed this line due its subjective nature and add a minor update about the last working host.

"This is most likely due to being sponsored by terrorist groups trying to spoil the good image of the colombian goverment internationally."

My reasons:

"Most likely due to being sponsored by terrorist groups.." based on what? The fact that this press agency supports in its writing several subversive groups ideology doesn't mean it is sponsored by any terrorist group.

"... trying to spoil the good image of the colombian goverment internationally." The colombian government international image gives for a whole book. If we take the latest reports from UN or HRW we can say the opposite but because this note is about ANNCOL press agency i find that interpretation out of place and more than subjective.


_________

I didnt write the original article but:

- You MUST be kidding.. everyone knows about about Ingrid Betancourt and other kidnapped and the only portal that even tries to sustain such horrendous anti-humane actions as a valid solution to the Colombian conflict is Anncol. That pretty much shows their close ties with the FARC. "Most likely" is pretty much unbiased in this case.

- Whether you like it or not, the Colombian government has been recognized as the democratically elected government of the Republic of Colombia by all the countries in the UN. And while HRW has been critical of the Colombian government, they are very far away from condemning it or supporting any form of violence against it.

Well, the fact that "everybody knows" is not a good enough reference for me. I confess I heavily edited the article after being a little disappointed by its lack of references. I apologize if this causes any controversy. I did my utmost effort to make visible all the "facets of the pyramid": we all know that's something impossible to do, but anyway... I also splitted the meager information I could collect about ANNCOL, in a short introduction, from the controversy about its mere existance. I sincerely tried to read all what I could from sources related with most, if not all, the parties involved in the fight about ANNCOL intentions and relations. I live in Colombia, so my point of view its certainly (and highly) subjective and not neutral at all (and with latin passion!). I also, instictively, when in doubt, incline myself towards the "free speech" party, even if its intentions are wrong, something that most colombians claim happens with ANNCOL. I referenced every phrase in the article, so I took the liberty of elliminating the "Lack of references" tag that the article had, I don't know if I shouldn't had done it, my apologies if that's the case. Anyway, I think that that the "Controversy" part now has the correct form: instead of giving first person opinions, now is a collection of quotes of the parties involved in the controversy, for the reader to figure out who's right. Good luck about that, btw. Sorry for the multiple edits, but the collection of information I got was huge, at least for my abilities, so I incorporated it "in batches". --Ciroa (talk) 06:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comparatively speaking, I think you have improved the article, and for that I would thank you in purely "Wikipedian" terms (personally, I couldn't care less about ANNCOL, to say the least...I'm in favor of free speech and all, but that doesn't mean I appreciate everything equally). However, I believe that some phrases you added still need references, and several statements or paragraphs seem to be trying to argue points from an external (editorial?) point of view, rather than just referring to the sources and being neutral (incidentally, that reminds me of something that should be quoted: ANNCOL itself says it's not trying to be neutral). That should also be edited or expanded, I would think. Juancarlos2004 (talk) 06:56, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revamp

[edit]

I am going to start working in this article. First off, the article is not an alternative news agency is a propaganda website. There are a number of un-sourced statements. It definitely needs some work --Camilo Sanchez (talk) 02:58, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I´ll support you, people must know the truth about this web-side, that has nothing to do with a alternative news agency, but more for the propaganda of a terrorist organisation. --Thebigcompany (talk) 14:11, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

On the concept of "terrorism"

[edit]

The concept of "terrorism" is being freely used today, in a blatant politically motivated manner, to include any form of armed struggle against an oppressive regime. The aim is to delegitimize such struggle. Such an attempt by ruling elites, in South America and elsewhere, is not a new phenomenon, but it has gained new ground in the first years of the 21st century.

The original article on ANNCOL in Wikipedia is an obvious propaganda piece of the Colombian government, a government which, despite its "democratic" credentials, is deeply rooted in the financial interests of the Colombian oligarchy and traces its origins in the paramilitary and state-terrorist activities against the popular movement of Colombia.

FARC is a guerilla organization waging an armed struggle against the oligarchical and pro-imperialist regime of Colombia for decades. It has resisted arms-in-hand the violent onslaught against civil liberties and popular rights, an onslaught managed by the Colombian government that has led to thousands of disappearances and executions of trade unionists, student leaders, farmers, etc. Labelling FARC as a "terrorist" organization has clear political connotations, given that FARC by its very own guiding ideology has a definite approach vis-a-vis terrorism (anyone remotely familiar with Marxism would know its attitude towards terrorism).

The dissemination of news about the activities of the popular movement in Colombia (a part of which are the activities of FARC)does not therefore entail any support for "terrorism" and, even more, does not prove any funding by the guerilla organization.

The original article on ANNCOL is therefore heavily biased, with clear political motivations and constitutes part of a smearing campaign against a legitimate form of action throughout human history (i.e armed struggle against violent, oppressive regimes). It is an attempt to silence critical voices, the other side of the coin of the silencing execution-style (the side much favored by the ruling elites of Colombia). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vasias (talk • contribs) 06:29, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Right, it all looks nice and pretty until they mess with the civilians they claim to protect, or fight for. Kidnapping (I hope this one needs no explanation), mine planting (oh, people won't mind if we plant these mines near their children's school), massacres of their own. Popular movement? Funny, seeing how they majorly lack popular support. Feel free to blanket them under the definition of a guerilla group as much as you want in a sad attempt to justify their actions, but they have long become the very cancer they wanted to remove.
Oh, and don't forget about drug trafficking, their main source of income. It brings me to another of their hobbies, fighting with paramilitaries and other terrorist groups over drug-ridden territories. Drugs are bad, mkay?
Please remember to put your signature in all your posts. Here is mine. A Concerned Colombian Citizen 190.84.67.223 (talk) 08:17, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

removing POV tag with no active discussion per Template:POV

[edit]

I've removed an old neutrality tag from this page that appears to have no active discussion per the instructions at Template:POV:

This template is not meant to be a permanent resident on any article. Remove this template whenever:
  1. There is consensus on the talkpage or the NPOV Noticeboard that the issue has been resolved
  2. It is not clear what the neutrality issue is, and no satisfactory explanation has been given
  3. In the absence of any discussion, or if the discussion has become dormant.

Since there's no evidence of ongoing discussion, I'm removing the tag for now. If discussion is continuing and I've failed to see it, however, please feel free to restore the template and continue to address the issues. Thanks to everybody working on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:04, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on ANNCOL. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:59, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on ANNCOL. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:43, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on ANNCOL. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:12, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on ANNCOL. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:29, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:ANNCOL&oldid=1242535319"