a1446: Re: 1398 (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: Lonbrit Ayisyen <lonbritayisyen@hotmail.com>

I will also state my position on the poll.. and then clearly explain why I
responded to your post as I did, Fr Graves.

Although exasperated by the consequences of what seems to be non profitable
accusations made by the Convergence, which sometimes seems to border on
ridicule, I think the reason behind it's necessity, was clear.   Some of the
May elections were proven to be fraudulent (showing that the majority did
not elect the Lavalas), and the "opposition" contested. These elections were
stolen, which is unacceptable in a democracy. (Lavalas did not win by a
majority , according to the independent Organization of American States-some
of the Lavalas Candidates, were not winners by the majority of the votes in
their districts.)
As upsetting as it may be to everyone who truly would like to see Haiti
start moving forward, this is a 'fair' (democratic) way to go.  This lengthy
process could have been averted, had the 'contested' elected officials
agreed to go through the warranted run-off elections.  I am convinced, that
had they done so, it would have avoided the situation we are now having to
deal with on a national level, and the most well organized of parties; being
the Lavalas, would have probably won. The Democratic process would have been
respected, and there would have been no Convergence to deal with.  In
retrospect, it would have been the right thing to do, and it would have
saved Haiti years of additional suffering.

[Senou: Gore conceded to the elections, because he in fact did lose the
elections, as per the laws governing the Presidential elections in the
United States.  He was the most popular with the "majority" of Americans...
but that did not change the result of the electoral vote ( chad or no
chad,it was a Republican win in Florida.)]

Now, as for my "chastising" you in reference to the use of the word
"normal", let me tell you, that in fact the correct opposite of the word is
"abnormal".  Your use of the word was incorrect, and I will accept your
explanation that you were only stressing the point :
'majority of Haitians'.

The need for any adjective to describe a Haitian, shows that you are
prejudicial, and I find, that categorizing Haitians, trys to somehow show
one's 'group' differs from the other, in an insulting kind of way,
especially in this content.  I did not 'play' with the word to make a
point... I just told you what I thought was your intent to divide.

I see the necessity for the compromise between the Lavalas and the
Convergence, if only to make sure we are working things out for the good of
all Haitians.  Convergence is only a group of opposition members who
(finally) managed to get together to form one voice, to bring to light, the
issues, which caused the democratic system to fail in Haiti.  That this
effort was recognized by the OAS, as a means to resolve the electoral
situation in Haiti, in order to move the process in a positive direction, is
correct, in my opinion.  (You don't have to agree with me either.)

"What is important in all our sharing of opinions, is to find a way to
tolerate our differences in the hope of arriving at one end: A prosperous
Haiti.  The roads to this end would definitely be countless; some taking
bends through the steepest of hills, and others through flowering meadows.
The point that should be well understood, is that regardless of the path we
choose, it would be nice if all 'Haitians' would take the path together,
because we've agreed to reach the end of the road.  "






_________________________________________________________________
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com