Clara Rojas, who was freed along with Consuelo Gonzalez by the FARC guerrillas on January 10 following negotiations brokered by Chavecito and Colombian senator Piedad Cordoba, has been viciously slandered by her fellow ex-captive Ingrid Betancourt, and feels compelled to set the record straight:
Clara Rojas would not vote for former presidential candidate Ingrid Betancourt if the presidential elections in Colombia were to take place today, according to an interview given yesterday to the RCN channel.
“As they say over there, if the elections were held today, I would not vote for Ingrid,” said Rojas, without ruling out that in future she might change her mind.
[…]
The cracks in the relationship between two women who campaigned in 2002 as running mates for president and vice-president, came to light for both before the news media.
Rojas decried the false stories that have been spun about her relationship with Betancourt, and that Betancourt and another ex-hostage, Luis Eladio Perez, have smeared her name. She referred to declarations made by Betancourt to US journalist Larry King on Wednesday.
In that interview, King referred to an episode in which Clara Rojas supposedly tried to drown her son Emmanuel in a river in the jungle and Ingrid stopped her.
Translation mine. Link to videos and transcript of the Larry King interview here. In the transcript, Ingrid coyly side-steps King’s question of how she allegedly saved Emmanuel, but it smells suspiciously of false modesty, if not outright falsity, period. If those things really happened, I think she’d be bursting to talk about them, because this was her big chance. And if she were honest, she’d give King a verbal bitch-slap for even suggesting such despicable things.
Clara Rojas was never interviewed, on this occasion or at the time of her safe arrival in Caracas. At least not by the North American lamestream media, and certainly not Larry King. None of them asked her for her take. They could have scared up a Spanish-speaking interpreter if they really wanted to, but they really didn’t want to. And no wonder; she’s basically refused to condemn the FARC. And she refuses to utter the sugary platitudes and high-flown rhetoric that Ingrid keeps spouting, either. In contrast to her erstwhile running mate, Clara Rojas has been straightforward and low-key when interviewed by local media. In this, she is very much like Ingrid’s mother, Yolanda Pulecio, whom the media have shunned because she, too, has expressed understanding rather than blanket condemnation for the FARC, and saves her outrage for pathological liars like Alvaro Uribe.
But don’t just take my word for it. Here is Clara Rojas at a press conference in Venezuela shortly after her rescue, talking about the birth of her son Emmanuel, who is the result of an affair with an as yet unnamed FARC guerrilla, under constant threat of bombardment in the jungle:
As you can see, she at no point refers to Emmanuel’s birth with anything less than love and joy, and gratitude to the FARC for providing her what medical assistance they could. Which kind of casts doubt on Larry King’s lurid allegations of rape, as well as Ingrid’s tall tales.
And speaking of tall tales, check out what Machetera has to say about the Ingrid “rescue” and how that phoney story just keeps on crumblin’ down. Also see her very interesting post on the FARC’s response to all the media fuckery. Warning: May cause you to turn off your damn TV for good.
With all due respect to Ms. Rojas intention to protect her son from any speculations, when you look at the transcript of the Larry King interview it is clear that Ms. Betancourt didn’t answer the question regarding the alleged incident. Also, Larry King only asked if Ms. Betancourt saved Ms. Rojas son’s life. It said nowhere in the trancript anything about a river, drowning or Ms. Rojas involvement in this alleged incident. I also don’t think Ms. Betancourt’s answer is a sign of “false modesty”. For most parts of this interview she looks exhausted. I guess her advisors told her to say she refuses to answer all questions that she considers invasive (she also didn’t answer LK’s questions about abuse).
Ingrid is not too damn smart–and her comments after being release indicate a level of egoism and obsequiousness that is very ignoble.
That she helped bolster the propaganda war waged by the empire and the far right in Colombia is quite despicable and impolitic.
It is as though she is tone deaf.
I am not saying that she should have excused the FARC’s brutality and ineffective tactics–but she could have balanced the situation by taking into account the intransigence on the part of Colombia and the United States.
She could have tried to triangulate–but she took the easier path of playing into the empire-aligned propaganda.
Further, her self-aggrandizing trip to bask in the lap of luxury in France is a bit of a kick in the face to the Colombian people. Again, not to smart if she has political ambitions.
I am sure she was ecstatic about being free after so many years–but she should have kept her mouth shut and studied the political and humanitarian terrain for a couple of weeks before spouting off as she did.
Ingrid’s actions after being released point up her propensity to vulgar egoism and for kissing up to the most powerful players–so as to give tribute to a system that allows her and her family an extremely priviledged position in both France and Colombia.
It is a shame, really, because, given her celebrity status, she could have played an important and constructive role as a mediator in this conflict.
She fucked her opprotunity up in my opinion.
Too easily swayed by the trappings of luxury and the flattery coming from quislings to the imperial order.
It is not only Clara Rojas who critisizes Ingrid Betancourt (in her book) but also the three Americans who were freed lately. In their book “Out of Captivity” they spoke of the egoistic Betancourt who wouldnot share food with the other prisoners. Please read the books of Rojas and of the three American prisoners and you will see the truth about Ingrid (the spoiled diplomats daughter).