The March 20, 2002 a car bomb exploded in the Centro Comercial El Polo, killing Peruvian ten innocent. Who chose the mall to commit wrongdoing, it made because it is near the U.S. embassy and the approaching visit of George Bush genocidal. Two days after the explosion, Bush visited Peru, without a massive demonstration of repudiation. 
As the demobilization of anti-Bush protests had been so easy with the car bomb, thought that the main beneficiaries were the real culprits. The explosion caused no damage to the U.S. embassy, \u200b\u200bbecause the device was not placed near it. The shopping center is a moderate distance from the walls of the mission, and also the space between these walls and buildings inside the embassy, \u200b\u200bmade it impossible to produce havoc. The failure of
unable
From the military point of view, the attack was a failure. He made no casualties in the U.S. and even personal damaged the facade of the U.S. Embassy.
From the political point of view, led to the unanimous rejection of the public against the authors and demobilizing favored tactic of the government. Why then do not think that the culprits were in the intelligence services? remember writing online articles that would not let me get in Masks, where he worked. A year later, I was the commission Masks and covered the first anniversary of the murder of ten Peruvians. It was painful to share with family and remember the fateful indifference of the state. Something on which everyone agreed is the negligence of the police to protect the surrounding of the U.S. Embassy on the eve of the arrival of the chair. But even more condemned the lack of speed to act, once warned of a car that was smoking everywhere. It seemed that the government had a part in this.
After publishing my article in Caretas N ° 1764 of March 20, 2003, a working night I dared to visit the website "Red Sun" purportedly attributed to the fraction "Continue" Sendero Luminoso. Amazing and irritating, claimed the attack on El Polo shopping center, which they considered an "act of war" against imperialism.
Demarcation with terrorism
This has given me sufficient reason to clarify, once again, our distances with what Lenin called "terrorism." I am satisfied that no aid of semantic meaning used by the bourgeoisie. For the revolutionaries, and especially to the Communists, a mass or masses revolt is infinitely superior to any bombing. After the death of Lenin's brother, who was sentenced to the maximum penalty for terrorism, it became clear to the great Vladimir Illich what was the road of proletarian revolution. The conspiratorial group can not replace social class to do the revolution. And the revolution, says José Carlos Mariategui is the work of crowds is the work of multitudes.
Another thing is that the vanguard should lead to the crowds, the Party of the Proletariat is who of political and military leadership to the class. No one denies the need for the Party. But the party can not be that small group calling themselves as such and made 100% by imbeciles, illiterates and functional illiterates who are not proletarians. I refer to those illiterates who can not write a web page without writing errors, no spelling mistakes and know of Marxism that I know of celestial mechanics. Perhaps
possible for an appointment, remembering a phrase any of the great classics of scientific socialism but their interpretation will act as an orangutan trying to disarm a Swiss watch. And to make the press should pay attention to what the great Lenin says:
"... need a specialist staff of writers, correspondents specialists (...) an army of men bound by their office to be omnipresent and omniscient. And we, the party that fights against economic oppression, political, social and national, can and must find, collect, train, mobilize and implement such an army of men all-wise. "
(Lenin, What to do, pg. 194 )
This advice extends to the party, which inevitably is constituted elite of professional revolutionaries, to which tasks require them to organize the masses and making political line. For this and many other reasons, especially strategic, Marxists expressly disclaim to terrorism, unconditionally and categorically, distinguishing the revolutionary violence of the brutal attack of desperation transvestite petit bourgeois revolution "proletarian."
