The opposite was given. The military had won the war of the weapons and had lost the war of the speech. As he affirms Jarbas Passarinho: ' ' The support of the press, we lose it when the censorship was imposed it and, over this, for censors unprepared, incapable to distinguish a notice from a message for the guerrilla. As the freedom is for the press the same that the oxygen for the life, the media did not delay to be against the government and to season, skillfully, land for the leaders of oposio' ' .6 The imposition to ' ' silncio' ' on the guerrilla, in the sample how much we must recoup the voice of the military, does not stop becoming it only regarding the subject, but yes to point it as enriquecedora contradiction with respect to the constitution of ampler history of the conflict. ' ' The destruction of the past? or better, of the social mechanisms that tie our personal experience with the one of the last generations? he is one of the dismal phenomena most characteristic and of the end of century XX. Almost all the young of today grow in a species of continuous gift, without any organic relation with the public past of the time where they live.
Therefore historians, whose craft is to remember what others forget, never becomes more important that ' ' (HOBSBAWM: 1995:13) our objective is to extend the quarrel on the directions of the guerrilla. It must, therefore, to effect the exploration of the divergences. The military are the only ones that they have information that they are useful to the clarification of the episode, as tells to the reporter Jose Mitchell in news article in the Periodical of Brazil: ' ' Private documents of the Army, disclosed have two months for the Periodical of Brazil, had shown that more than 60 guerrillas of the PC of the B had been died and are buried in places of difficult access and that 16 6 military Jarbas Passarinho are colonel of the reserve.