#2942: On Chirac's statement : Poincy comments

[Robert Corbett <bcorbett@netcom.com>]

From: Jean Poincy <caineve@idt.net>

On this list I am a fierce opponent of the current Ayitian flag, "blue
and red" for the simple fact that it was unconstitutional after the
country's birth. My stance is a legal matter. I am not disclaiming the
legitimacy of the "blue and red" in relation to the revolutionary war
that brought independence to the western portion of the island of
Saint-Domingue.  However, the constitutional inception of the country in
1805 placed such a symbol in the new country's historical annals. That's
a legal matter most Ayitians choose to dismiss due to emotional
attachment.

When considering further the statement made by President Chirac, I want
to further go wild to try to understand why he said what he said. Again,
I am repeating: the man is no fool to publicly made such a statement.
Far from making him an angel, I am doing what a rational mind would do
when facing an unusual situation by asking why. There must be a reason
and to ease some minds, that reason is not to justify his saying. 

The power of language is when things are said in a way that conveys
different justifiable meanings.

Apparently, for carefully choosing his words, he knew that what he was
about to say would not have unanimous approval. That's why "strictly
speaking" is right at the heart of his statement to tell everyone that
there is something else he is not saying. The whole meaning of his
statement resides in "strictly speaking".  What is that something else?
Since I can find no portal to inquire Chirac's mind, I am taking the
liberty to bring some rational meaning to his statement. I've done so
before and I am continuing to do so now.

Now put aside, what I've said earlier and consider the legal aspect of
it.  The French colony was the island of Saint-Domingue and not Ayiti.
The latter was not a country then, but became one after the war of
independence. Moreover, a portion of the colony has become a new
country. "Strictly speaking" or "legally speaking", Ayiti was not a
French colony just like the "blue and red" flag was never a legal symbol
of the new country.

We have to allow ourselves to do some thinking before jumping up and
down trying to catch a booboo made by a prominent person and start
throwing political jabs. Understanding why things are the way they are
and not taking them for what they appear to be is the key to scientific
knowledge. Let's say that Chirac considered this aspect in making the
statement, does that mean he is correct? It's a yes and no that depends
on one's perspective. "A proprement parle" it all boils down to where
one is coming from.


Ayiti has lived, lives and will live
Mozeb