12061: Re: 12049: Pina replies to Caze

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

FROM: Kevin Pina       <kpinbox@hotmail.com>


From: Martine Caze <MCaze@nchr.org>

"As an employee of NCHR I can assure you tricky is a word that is not in our
vocabulary nor in our moral code. I can tell you that if liberal lawmakers
in the US are pushing for Bush to accept "claims" of political
persecution, because that is what America was built on. Isn't that how it
all started - people of different religous beliefs landing in America for
hopes to practice what they believe without persecution? For
centuries and centuries, the US has kept to that tradition and adopted it as
a law, that if you are being persecuting in your country and you land in
America we will listen and if your claim is real, we will welcome you in.
Why should the application of the law be any different for the entry of
Haitians?  Does that seem fair to you?  NCHR's mission statement is to work
for fair and equal treatment for Haitians in the US and elsewhere".
........................................................................

I personally don't believe that my country has been fair or even-handed by
any stretch of the imagination where Haiti is concerned. My government has a
great responsibility for supporting the implementation of policies by the
International Republican Institute which led to the creation of the
Democratic Convergence in the name of "political plurality". A small clique
of obstructionists whose greater constituency lies in Washington and yet
have been given the power to politically and economically destabilize this
small nation. And certainly a case can be made that US immigration policy,
and the protection of the rights of refugees, have been manipulated and bent
in the past to serve the interests of US foreign policy. I love my country
because it allows me to express my outrage and disbelief at the duplicitious
nature of policies which seek to cloak self-interest as a nation in the
rhetoric of defending democratic values abroad.

I believe it would be more productive to discuss what criteria is being used
to ascertain the validity of the claims of political persecution. It is not
impossible to verify these claims one way or the other on the ground here in
Haiti. How is the process being handled and how are the testimonies of the
claimants being verified? Can NCHR provide detailed facts of a few of the
cases and the criteria used for verification? It appears a good amount of
resources is being poured into this issue leading one to assume that NCHR
must have pretty iron clad evidence to back up the assertions of political
persecution made by the claimants. All I am asking, is other than the
statements of the claimants themselves, please make the independent evidence
available to the public so that we might better understand how you justify
making this a central issue for your organization.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From: Martine Caze <MCaze@nchr.org>

"They were supporting Democracy and Aristide/Lavalas claimed that that is
what he intended to do. When you are desperate to see some kind of stability
in a land of madness and a man dressed as Superman comes and steps up to a
plate that was empty for years -you tend to bite into their story hook, line
and sinker. Can you blame them"?
........................................................................

Many of these same lawmakers were involved with "restoring democracy" to
Haiti beginning shortly after the coup in September 1991. They did not
suddenly appear on the scene to support a "Superman" just as Aristide did
not magically appear out of nowhere as his people's choice to lead the
nation out of years of dictatorship. As for biting into stories hook, line
and sinker, many Haitians believe that this is exactly what NCHR is doing
with regard to the claims being made of political repression. Can you blame
them?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From: Martine Caze <MCaze@nchr.org>

"Last but not least my response to the unblocking of money is that I
personally agree with a policy in which, if you can't comply with the
rules,we are not giving it to you. It is aid, not an obligation".
........................................................................

I would not consider a signed loan contract for $145 million dollars in
loans to build infrastructure "aid" by any stretch of the imagination.
Particulary if you take into account that the Haitian government has been
forced to pay more than $10 million dollars in interest to keep the loans
current and available in the future. And whose rules are they anyway? Do you
have any idea what is going on in Malaysia right now? No elections, jailing
and killing of the press, mass arrests of opposition figures and yet the
Bush adminstration continues to support the current dictatorship there. What
about when the US and the OAS turned a blind eye to Fulimori's stealing of
elections in Peru the same year as the contested elections in Haiti?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
From: Martine Caze <MCaze@nchr.org>

"However, even if donors do not agree with a political leader and even if
that leader doesn't seem to want to comply with your terms there are still
honest and good organizations that provide free services such as much needed
health care for the poor that rely and should get that money to provide
those services. Maybe what needs to be done is instead of withholding the
money, donors should come up with a system to give out money to specific
reliable organizations or even set up a main foundation center that can take
the loans and aids and distribute it properly for situations such as this.
We need the money to educate, to provide health care to help feed the poor
and to restructure communities. Only then will you seepositive change in
Haiti".
........................................................................

The US provided $70 million dollars to NGOs for such work last year and
another $45 million this year. The average salary for directors of these
NGOs is between $50,000 and $100,000 per year, with benefits, hazard pay and
a generous expense account. This in a country whose per capita income is
rated at about $250.00. What do you consider to be the achivements brought
by the $115 million dollars funneled directly through the NGOs in Haiti over
the past two years? I would really like for you to point to successes that
have actually made a lasting difference to lives of the Haitian people
during this period. I hear many complaints of undue political influence
being brought to bear by these NGOs who will not work with organizations
associated with the Lavalas majority while those who make staements opposing
the constitutional government are rewarded with contracts and jobs. Where is
the evenhandedness and fairness in that?

At the same time, the poorest of the poor continue to suffer, as an example,
of all this money I have not been able to find a single NGO sponsored
program in the poor slums of Cite Soleil. These folks are begging for any
type of assistance and so far the only response they have gotten from the
fat cats in the NGOs is silence and indifference. So what criteria would you
use to identify "honest and good organizations" doing work in Haiti when
most of the ones I know as such are privately funded or working through the
churches?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>From: Martine Caze <MCaze@nchr.org>


"The bottom line is, be part of the solution and offer advice with
constructive criticism when you can".
........................................................................

Those who know me can only interpret that as a cheap shot, even though I am
certain you did not intend it as such. That's okay though, I don't live in a
glass house and, unless provoked, I don't throw stones at others who do.




_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com