#4471: Re: #4461: Lafortune replies to Stephenson

[Robert Corbett <bcorbett@netcom.com>]

From: joseph lafortune <ctec4234@yahoo.com>

 
 Dear Mr Stephenson,
 I have carefully read you reply to goff regarding UN
invasion. I..... do not think it would be a wise
decision.
In retrospect, the constitutional order has been a
total deception after the world ha fought for the
restauration of constitutional government in September
1994, and the peaceful transition of power in
february,1996. The Canadian dialogues feel no shame
when making this remark. Political conflict is
paralysing the Haitian governemenal, legislative
processand the credibility of the country's electoral
system is being called into question.Contrary to what
was expectedbwith the returnto constitutional order,
the level of poverty is higher than during the
military occupation.The high level of internationalof
internatrional involvement in assistance to Haiti's
political and economic activities raises further
concerns for Haiti's autonomus capacity to build
democraacy and the confidence of its citizens in their
country's leaders and institution.
BE IT KNOWN, HAITI IS IN NEED OF TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

"Alternatives" hsa been the adopted by the Caribbean
Health& Research Studies with mission and objectives
to emphasize on histoical necessities of which is in
need to ignite the democratic process.
These are the dominant point of ALTERNATIVES:
 a) Rehabilitation of the Haitian mentality
 b) The Diaspora, its historical in the democratic    
process.
 c)Recognition of the protestant sector.
 d)New Political Platform (etc)

 In the hope we shall chat again,
   Joe lafortune 
  ctec4234@yaoo.com                         














--- Robert Corbett <bcorbett@netcom.com> wrote:
> 
> From: Wrede Stevenson <wrede25@hotmail.com>
> 
> Thanks, Goff, for explaining why the US will invade
> Haiti.  The analysis, 
> though long on rhetoric, was short on facts. 
> (Citing all of US - Haitian 
> History as evidence is a neat trick.)  The idea that
> powerful factions in 
> the US government don't like Aristide much hardly
> translates to an invasion 
> or the conclusion that they won't allow him to take
> power.
> 
> The CIA works with all sorts of unsavory characters,
> and not much can be 
> drawn from the fact that some coup leaders were on
> the payroll.  What should 
> be made of the fact that those in the CIA who
> manufactured the sharpest 
> anti-Aristide propaganda have been reassigned,
> reprimanded, and 
> marginalized?
> 
> Fact is, policy makers in the US were reluctant to
> engaged in operations in 
> Haiti the last time, and they are even more
> reluctant now.  General Shelton 
> sure doesn't support the idea, nor does Colonel
> Patton.  Who is shaping the 
> policy to which you refer?  The State Department? 
> Political parties?
> 
> Please not that I'm not supporting any specific
> policy the US has toward 
> Haiti, but the idea that part of policy is to invade
> Haiti again, or that 
> the plans are in the works, is quite a stretch.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Wred
>
________________________________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at
> http://www.hotmail.com
> 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Kick off your party with Yahoo! Invites.
http://invites.yahoo.com/