The Continuing Laptop Saga � 

Interpol finally reported on the files in the laptops allegedly captured by the Colombian army on March 1st after a FARC encampment on Ecuadorian territory was bombed and then invaded by the Colombians violating Ecuador�s sovereignty. 

Interpol Secretary General, Ronald Noble, answered technical questions about the analysis of the data � all 610 gigabytes � at a midday press conference in Bogot� and confirmed that Colombia�s security forces had not tampered with the information. He refused to comment on the political contents of the files since this was not �Interpol�s task�. 

Noble also confirmed that the computers in question had been captured at a FARC terrorist encampment and that they belonged to the late FARC number 2, Ra�l Reyes. Noble said that the electronic files had been handled by the Colombian authorities in line with internationally accepted principles after March 3rd.  

However, from the capture of the computers on March 1st until March 3rd Interpol states on page #8 of the report:

�Interpol�s computer forensic examination confirmed Colombian law enforcement�s own admission that access to the data contained in the eight seized FARC computer exhibits between 1 March 2008, when they were seized by the Colombian authorities, and 3 March 2008 at 11.45am, when they were handed over to the Grupo Investigativo de Delitos Inform�ticos of the Colombian Judicial Police, did not confirm to internationally recognized principles for the ordinary handling of electronic evidence by law enforcement. That is, instead of taking the time to make write-protected images of all eight seized exhibits before accessing them, they accessed the exhibits directly.�

In U.S. legal terms, this means that �the chain of custody� for this evidence was broken, thereby rendering it inadmissible in a court of law. In fact, in these two days during which the files could have been contaminated, the files were accessed 48,555 times, according to Interpol.

More tellingly, after reading the first pages of the report when it is stated unequivocally by Interpol that the computers were seized at a FARC terrorist encampment and belonged to Ra�l Reyes, page #9 of the report states in stark contradiction:

"The verification of the eight seized FARC computer exhibits by INTERPOL does not imply the validation of the accuracy of the user files, the validation of any country's interpretation of the user files or the validation of the source of the user files."

Secretary General Noble confirmed that the computers belonged to Reyes at the press conference in response to a journalist from Telesur. "We are absolutely certain that the computer discs our experts examined came from a Farc terrorist camp," he replied to Telesur�s question. 

Readers � �certainty� does not equate to �proof�, however you spin it. 

This contrasts with what the Interpol report actually said. Did Noble even read the report in depth, one may ask? 

There has been enough media coverage since March 1st repeatedly confirming that the computers belonged to Ra�l Reyes to create a powerful �matrix of opinion� that this is a fact. Interpol has cast grave doubt on this matter perhaps because many observers believe that the computers could not have survived the bombing of the FARC encampment. 

What we now have is a full blown media campaign saying that since the files had not been tampered with, which one can accept, that the evidence in them points to the fact that Ch�vez was colluding with the FARC. He was allegedly going to, or had provided them with finance and weapons, and even a plan to sell them uranium to make a �dirty bomb�. Hence, according to the Western media campaign, Chavez and Venezuela are �sponsors of terrorism�. 

The contradictions outlined above in the report itself and Noble�s declarations are enough to cast more than a �reasonable doubt� on Chavez�s links with the FARC and his support for them.

Of course Chavez had contact with the FARC when he was in contact with Manuel Marulanda, FARC�s Commander-in Chief. However, this occurred when he was in the capacity of facilitator on behalf on the Colombian government, at President Uribe�s invitation, to negotiate hostage releases.  

The emails from the computers published in Colombia while the computers were being analyzed by Interpol prove absolutely nothing. The communications are between members of the FARC high command � Marulanda, Reyes, Mono Jojoy and Julian Corrado.  

There are no messages from the Venezuelan side. Chavez is not mentioned by name. Money is spoken about between the FARC commanders � about asking for a loan of US$250 million from Venezuela � but there is no evidence that Venezuela ever responded to this request, let alone transferred the funds.  

None of this �evidence� would ever stand up in an international tribunal, since Interpol�s report cannot confirm beyond a reasonable doubt to whom the user files belonged. Ownership could not be validated, despite all the �window dressing� in the first pages on the report. 

What we now have is an international media campaign trying in vain to make mud stick to Chavez and Venezuela so as to influence public opinion both in and outside the country. Two reports which were published yesterday illustrate the extremes which reporters will go to: 

Fox News� Adam �jump to irrational conclusions� Housley succeeds in discrediting himself with his twist of the report.

The BBC�s on the Interpol statement and report is less hysterical.

Chavez may be sympathetic to the FARC�s Bolivarian ideology. Is that an international crime? The question of providing funds and weapons to a terrorist group is another matter. Up to now there has never been any proof that Venezuela has acted in such a way.

At this point we must ask, who says that the FARC are �terrorists�? FARC was classified as such by the US, EU and Colombia after 9/11 and the initiation of the global war on terror. 

Before the end of 2001 FARC were �insurgents� controlling around 40% of Colombia�s territory. It suited the US to classify them as terrorists so as to continue to justify the war on drugs and terrorism in Colombia using Plan Colombia and hence maintain the beach head into the Latin American region so as to spread their influence and free market policies in the South American continent. The master plan of the Free Trade Area of the America�s was defeated at Mar del Plata in November 2005. 

Hiding behind a smoke screen

Colombia desperately needs a smoke screen to deflect attention to the parapolitics scandal which has shaken the Uribe regime. 34 senators and congressmen are in jail and a further 26 under investigation for links with the paramilitaries. Most are from Uribe�s ruling party � one of them is Uribe�s cousin, Mario.  

Unfortunately for the Colombian people, Colombian justice and in the interests of the truth, the 14 main paramilitary witnesses were unceremoniously extradited to the US to stand trial for drug running last Tuesday May 13th. How can they now testify against the corrupt politicians and multinationals such as Coca Cola, Chiquita and others who paid money to and/or had links with the paramilitaries? (Washington Post)  

The big picture goes far beyond the laptop saga, but it is not in the interests of the corporate press to link the dots. Manipulation is the key word. Journalistic ethics or investigative reporting does not come into the equation for these hacks. 

In summary, all what Interpol has proven is that Colombia did not tamper with the �non validated user files�, whoever they belonged to. Nothing more. Nothing less.  

The media campaign will continue as part of a 4th generation asymmetrical war against Chavez and the Venezuelan people despite lack of any credible evidence. The media has lifted itself to accuser, judge, jury and executioner in order to protect its masters� interests which are those of the Global Corporate Empire.

English version

Spanish version

This material is available for republication as long as reprints include verbatim copy of the article its entirety, respecting its integrity. Reprints must cite the author and Axis of Logic as the original source including a "live link" to the article. Thank you!