18481: Pierre Jean: Re: 18440: erzilidanto: a challenged accepted - but not quite what I expected (Jean) (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: Pierre Jean <pierrejean2004@yahoo.com>

Well, what an interesting post we have here. Some
truth mixed in and slanted with overstatements, huh?
How 'bout that. So let's go through through Ms.
Marguerite Laurent's ... er, erzilidanto@aol.com ...
post for a second. [Warning, this is a long post as I
have kept most of Ms. Laurent's text.]

> COMMENT ONE: If the leading gangs in Cite Soleil
> are, in fact, "sharply
> against" Aristide, then, it follows that the
> opposition to Aristide may no longer
> blame and brand Aristide for "supporting" their
> "chime" operations, if any, now
> can they?

Unless you, erzilidanto, know Cité Soleil and
understand the dynamics, your question (but also Anne
Fuller's point about the gangs turning against
Aristide) is a little too simple.

At any given time, there are several gangs that fight
for control of their turf in Cité Soleil. And those
fights means often bloody gunfights that end up
hurting the innocent. When you add to that volatile
mix the intrusion of political operatives looking to
manipulate one gang against another, you get some
"favored" gangs who receive help - money, weapons,
cars - from government allies (please look up the
names HERMIONE LEONARD or NANCY LIBERUS just to name
two as go-betweens in these matters.)

Allegiances are therefore made and unmade based on the
need for these gangs to survive against the attacks of
another. When they are in need they will do whatever
their government patrons ask them to do. When they
fall out of favor, they use their guns and ammo to
basically threaten the operatives that handled them.
That is what happened to Fritz Joseph. This is what
led to the problem in Gonaives today. Who suffers, may
I ask? The answer is self-evident.

> COMMENT TWO: Perhaps I may help with Ms. Fuller's
> puzzlement. I was in Haiti
> when Aristide first got back. I am a
> Haitian-American lawyer who participated
> in and observed the processes of that time. Haiti
> was not demilitarized and
> the Haitian people where forced into integrating the
> old military with the new
> U.S-trained police. That integration with those
> responsible for assassinating
> the defenseless people doing the Coup was not our
> choice, Ms. Fuller, Mr.
> Pierre. The U.S. and the international community
> pushed Aristide and therefore, the
> Haitian public at large, to not only give asylum and
> amnesty to the military
> junta responsible for the worst bloodbath in Haitian
> history. But, they also
> forced the Haitian coup victims, in Cite Soleil, and
> all over Haiti and the
> Diaspora, to reconcile with this injustice.

Pray tell, how did the US do that? This is a part of
Haitian history that I am not familiar with. And so,
the Haitian government accepted Cecchi just like that,
sight unseen?

> We had to LUMP it no matter how it stuck in our
> throats!!

WOW!!! Really? That bad?

> The U. S. gave
> asylum to Toto Constant and absconded with the
> papers necessary to prosecute many
> of the guilty for the 91-94 bloodbath. The process
> towards institutionalizing
> the rule of law in Haiti has been blocked by the
> works of USAID consulting
> firms like Checci, by the likes of a disbarred but
> U.S.-annointed US-lawyer
> running our Judicial reforms, by the various
> neoliberalism mandates of the world
> financial institutions, by a U.S--led embargo, by
> the lack of Haitian judicial
> infrastructure because of 29-years of Duvalier
> dictatorship and what went on
> since 1914; by the internal political divisions and
> fissures within Lavalas
> which have been thoroughly exploited and widen from
> 1994 to 2004 by their own
> incompetence and experience and especially by the
> right-wing and reactionary
> interests opposed to social spending and development
> in Haiti.

That is quite a conspiracy. Let's assume for a moment
that all the reasons you cite above for not meting out
justice appropriately are true, what does that have to
do with naming a criminal as Mayor of Cité Soleil? I
can understand that you cannot prosecute someone for
lack of proof. But naming a criminal? There is
something called DUE DILIGENCE. How many witnesses
were there? It is an open secret in Cité Soleil that
Fritz Joseph was a FRAPH operator, for Pete's sake.
You mean to tell me that in a population numbering a
few tens of thousands at least, no one else but a
criminal reviled by the population could do the job?

> Now, this is not to say that Aristide is not to
> blame for the state of
> Haiti's judiciary and security.  Or, that i don't
> share Mr. Pierre's indignation (
> "Can anyone explain why Lavalas would welcome in its
> ranks a murderer like
> Fritz Joseph?")
>
> Let's, for the purposes of this dialogue, though I
> have no independent
> knowledge of this, take Mr. Pierre's word that he
> has legal evidence and proof that
> Mr. Fritz Joseph is a murderer. His allegations
> seems to be corroborated by
> the Nation article he cited, though I have not
> checked it independently.  But,
> if these allegations are correct, Mr. Fritz Joseph
> should be tried, and, if
> found guilty, put in jail just as Mr. Tatoune NEEDS
> to be put back in jail. No
> questions about it there should not be double
> standards for those who support
> Aristide who commit crimes and those who don't
> support Aristide and commit
> crimes. All criminals, no matter, their political
> inclinations or affiliations need
> to be behind bars! Period, no comma. I agree 100%
> with Mr. Pierre on this.

I am glad we agree on this.

> However, lets look at this allegation (in Ms.
> Fuller's article) of Aristide's
> fault in not bringing about peace and security in
> Haiti a bit closer and
> within a larger context. It is my contention that
> Aristide's measure of blame for
> the state of Haiti's affairs today amounts to 2
> years for the state of things
> during his first term and the 3-years he's been in
> office in this second term.

Okay. Here is where I get off the train. You are
defending Aristide, but Aristide is really the
embodiment (sp?) of Lavalas. You seem to forget that
we have had 5 years of René Préval as well. This means
that we have had a total of 2+5+3= 10 years of Lavalas
at the very least. So in 10 years we could not make
one iota of progress in terms of Justice? And please
don't tell me "it's not Aristide's fault." You would
perpetuating the "se pa fot mwen" so prevalent in
Haiti today. We call that "marronage."

> ...Those are the years Aristide is legally and
> morally responsible for. To be
> fair and balanced, Aristide's share of blame for the
> non-development of peace
> and security in Haiti should not go beyond those
> years of his stewardship.

What is Rene Aristide's "marassa"? Chopped liver? You
know that Préval was really a figurehead during those
five years. Anyone looking to do something serious was
SENT to Tabarre to discuss it with Aristide first. So
I conclude that he ruled during that time as well.

> But, can we say the same thing for the
> institutionalized but tragic "elite"
> in Haiti. The families who are now in the opposition
> to the democratically
> elected Haitian president but who have been running
> things, as imperial agents,
> and/or for their own selfish interests with the help
> of the U.S. for generations
> upon generations, even generations before Duvalier
> came to power? How much
> more responsible are they, the Nadals, Boulos,
> Apaids, and their tragic ilk for
> the devastating state Haiti is in today?

Okay, if we are to be factual and very NARROW about
the names you just cited:

When the "Syrians" as they are called in Haiti came to
this country at the turn of the century, they came
basically as dockworkers. They were fleeing the havoc
wreaked by the breakup of the Ottoman Empire, and they
didn't have a penny to their name. We are talking
early 20th century.

It took them about 2 generations to become comfortable
which puts us in the late 1950's, early 60's. So you
have picked the WRONG names for the generations upon
generations of oppressors you mention. You probably
meant to talk about the old families (some of European
extraction) that indeed kept the country in their grip
for a very long time but who had very little, if any,
Middle Easter blood coursing through their veins. But
then it is so easy to LUMP all of those light-skinned
bloodsuckers into one basket, isn't it?

My point here, Ms Laurent, is not to say that you are
incorrect. Indeed, there existed for a very long time
a form of institutionalized discrimination in our
country along complexion and economic lines. But every
time someone from the "lower" classes acceded to
power, they did nothing to change the situation.
Duvalier and Aristide are no exception.

I also must ask another question: how come Aristide
hasn't created a plan to establish his "own" economic
group to counter the light-skinned economic dinosaurs
that financed the coup against him in 1991? Why hasn't
Lavalas worked to diversify the power structure? My
answer: because there was no real interest in doing
that. Lavalas bigwigs just wanted to enrich themselves
and struck incredible deals with the SAME morally
repugnant elite that you are now attacking. Either you
are completely out of the loop on those deals, or you
are really naive.

> What, other
> than racial apartheid,
> military rule and Piat massacres, Raboteau
> Massacres, et have they offered Haiti
> and why are these businessmen not MORE culpable, in
> real terms, than
> hamstrung, resourcessless,
> reviled-by-the-greatest-power-on-earth Aristide?

I would say that Aristide is AS culpable, not less,
for a couple of reasons:

+ as one of the founders of Lavalas, and as
"spiritual" head, you have a responsibility to make
sure that the principles of your party are
continuously upheld. Since Lavalas represented the
turning point in our history when we would shed that
feudal system of ours, it stands to reason that any
failure on that front would have to be borne by its
leaders. Therefore, as I have done above, I would say
that Lavalas has had so far 10 years to effect changes
... and they didn't;

+ I am not sure I buy the reviled-by-the-greatest
power-on-Earth argument. After all, there are a few
within the power structure of that power who are quite
vocal in their support of Aristide. AND IT IS THIS
SAME POWER THAT REINSTATED HIM AS THE LEGITIMATE,
DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED PRESIDENT IN OCTOBER 1994,
ISN'T IT? Did you forget that?

> Yes Aristide is responsible for the state of things
> during these last three
> years.  But there is a backdrop here that may
> mitigate his level of
> responsibility compared to the institutionalized
> tragic elites responsibility for failing
> at promoting peace and security in Haiti, even
> further.  For, Aristide's
> acquired "pragmatism," this "businessmen" attitude
> towards "balancing interests"
> was fostered on him during his three years of
> miseducation in Washington. Like
> Mandela, Aristide accepted the most cost-effective
> road to keeping his job,
> though it wasn't and is not the most ethical or the
> moral high ground.  In the
> long run, this is the backdrop that must not be
> forgotten  as we hold Aristide
> responsible for not only the Duvaliarists
> appointments he has made throughout
> his tenures, his Free trade zone concessions but
> also, for his "management"
> of "murderers"  to quote Mr. Pierre Jean on the
> Fritz Joseph example. The
> Haitian people may understand why Aristide made some
> of the concessions he has
> made, but that doesn't mean we accepted reconciling
> with injustice. They are
> unacceptable but we-Haitians of the peasant classes
> are constantly being forced to
> live with the unacceptable - like the violent
> protests of Apaid and the
> Convergence passing off, in the international
> corporate media, as peaceful in
> intent, when they expressly call for forceful
> overthrow of a duly elected president.
> Like our containment in poverty for over 200-years
> and the tragic elites and
> "businessmen" complicity in this, our
> underdevelopment.
>
> Yet and still, the fact does remain, it is
> unethical, if not technically
> illegal, for Aristide or any leader of Haiti to
> pay-off criminals or reward them.
> No matter how much pressure the international
> community puts on them to do so.
> One cannot institutionalize the rule of law that
> way. From 1994 to now,
> Haitians have tried it the "businessmen" and
> Internationals' way. it didn't. Look
> at where we are now with Gonaive. It doesn't work to
> manage injustice. It must
> be confronted, prevented, punished, eradicated.
> Today, those responsible for
> the current terror our people in Gonaive are living
> under and elsewhere are e
> xperiencing should NOT go unpunshished in a court of
> law.
>
> Haitians with some knowledge of the neo-colonial
> blueprint and some knowledge
> of the alleged 2001 resignation of Chavez in
> Venezuela, today expect the U.S.
> and mainstream press releases to now try and
> distance Apaid and their other
> cohorts from these killings in Gonaive,
> Port-au-Prince, St. Marc, etc., But
> that won't make us forget that last Thursday group
> 184 was jubilantly welcoming
> the events in Gonaive and taking credit,

Please provide proof of that statement!!!

> or that
> they called for the boycott of
> the commemoration of our ancestors' greatest
> achievement and their
> demonstration led to the burning of many houses in
> Gonaive even before the arm terrorist
> take-over from the "arm wing" of their opposition
> organization. As I said
> above, criminals, no matter their political
> affiliation must face justice and the
> current distancing from the bloodbath, that won't
> make us-law abiding
> Haitians forget that on January 7, 2004 three
> Haitians died, in the course of an
> illegally routed demonstrations supervised by Apaid
> and the Convergence leaders.
> These homicides can be said to have flowed from the
> negligence of those who
> illegally rerouted this demonstration for their own
> purposes.

Oh, I get it now! If I run a march and I decided to
deviate from the established course - albeit illegally
- then it is quite possible that death will ensue.
Now, HOW did those people die? Because they were not
where they should have been? Who killed them? What
about their responsibility? Is it normal that marchers
- whatever their political affiliation - should expect
to be shot upon or stoned?

Frankly, my expectation is that anyone rerouting a
march illegally should be immediately arrested by the
police. Why weren't they arrested? Weren't they
breaking the law?

If I am to follow your logic, then the police should
bear the full blame for the deaths of these three
people, not the opposition and certainly not the
killers.


> These three lives
> count and one cannot blame Aristide for routes that
> where changes by Apaid and
> others in the opposition -leading to the deaths of
> Haitians, both from the pro
> and anti government camps.  Haitians will not
> reconcile with injustices any
> longer.
>
> Ms. Fuller writes:
>
> "Today, Joseph is finally being denounced, but it's
> by
>
> the gang members he helped nurture. They say that he
>
> was behind the Oct. 31 killing of an influential
>
> 23-year-old thug and former Aristide loyalist
>
> nicknamed ''Colobri.'' A new leading Aristide
> loyalist
>
> has already emerged : Emmanuel ''Dread'' Wilmé. He
> is
>
> only 22, but, as most of his predecessors, he likes
> to
>
> call himself a political militant who faithfully
>
> serves the president. How long will he survive ?
>
> Again, all Haitian life should be protected to the
> best of our abilities, no
> matter their political affiliation and those who
> create an atmosphere of fear
> and terror should be made accountable.
>
>
>
> Finally, Ms. Fuller says "As for Cité Soleil, there
> is more violence here
> today
>
> than during the military rule. ..... what they need
> most is
>
> peace and security."
>
> COMMENT THREE: Peace, security, education, roads,
> health care, what the
> majority of Haitians need most, requires that those
> not demilitarized back in 1994
> and still committing violence are made accountable.
> But, I do question this
> statement in Ms. Fuller's article: "As for Cité
> Soleil, there is more violence
> here today
>
> than during the military rule. ....."   I'd like to
> see the facts behind that
> statement.
>
> During the military rule of 1991-1994 more than 5000
> Haitians where killed by
> FRAPH, countless drowned in their attempt to flee on
> the shark-infested seas,
> more than 50,000 passed through and where
> incarcerated in Guantanamo bay and
> 300,000 thousand Haitians were forced into hiding
> within Haiti because of the
> military rule. I just return from the bicentennial
> celebrations in Haiti. i
> didn't see one body or chopped-up face attributable
> to government police
> actions, although I did here about the opposition's
> torture of Louvoi Petit. Up until

But you forgot to mention the "chime". Nice little
oversight. Ms. Laurent, do armed gangs at the service
of Lavalas exist? Yes or no? If no, who then are the
armed auxiliaries in civilian attire who commandeer
government pick-up trucks (Teleco, EdH, etc.) and then
proceed to "enforce" police orders against the
opposition when there are no policement to be seen?
Who are the armed auxiliaries who accompanied the
USGPN group that is attempting to retake Saint-Marc as
we speak and who shot their way indiscriminately
through the town? Who are the armed groups that have
taken over police precints in the South to "protect"
the government against the kamoken? By what authority
are these aremed groups able to carry heavy weaponry
in the open? What is their legal status?

As for your anecdotal testimony reagrding the peaceful
demonstrations, I assume that you were also present on
December 5 when the Dean of the State University had
both legs broken by no other than members of a
specialized unit of the Police ... while he was
attempting to negotiate an end to the troubles at the
University, no less!!! Do you care to see pictures of
what two broken legs and a severe beating look like?
Or is this event, just to pick that one, a figment of
my imagination?

> last Thursday's Gonaive OPPOSITION-TO ARTISTIDE-LED
> terrorist acts, the
> numbers dead, in these last months, were at about 50
> people primarily due to the
> increased daily opposition-initiated demonstrations.
> So, how can there be MORE
> violence in Cite Soleil today than in those bloody
> ever (1991-1994) Haitian
> times? Please enlighten me with the body counts from
> 1994 to 2004 in Cite Soleil
> and how they surpass the cataclysmic terror of the
> bloody
> but elite/Boulos/Apaid/Nadal-supported Cedras-Fraph
> days? Inquiring minds
> really
>
> want to know.
>
> Ezili Danto

Ms. Laurent,

I will agree with you that Anne Fuller has to shore up
her claim a bit more on that count. But then I could
turn around and ask you: who counted the 5,000 bodies
during the three years? How do we know it is not 3,000
or 7,000?Can you factually PROVE that? You seem where
I am heading with this?

The fact is that people are killed regularly in Cité
Soleil. It happened under Duvalier, it happened under
Namphy, Manigat, etc., it happened under Cedras, and
it sure as hell is happening today. (5 more bodies on
Sunday, for example.) I know it, not because of the
press, but because I am surrounded by people from Cité
Soleil to whom I talk on a daily basis. Bodies found
on the street, charred, or dumped on Route Neuf late
at night. Who cares about them? I used to see the
bodies on the now-infamous Route Batimat during the
coup years; Route Neuf is the new dumping ground.

What does matter, in my opinion, is that too many
lives have been lost because of the desire by some
megalomaniac politicos (Aristide, Cedras, Duvalier) to
hold on to power at ANY cost.

Now Ms. Laurent, I have a very simple question for
you: do you believe that Lavalas has made progress on
its fundamental principles: Justice, Transparency,
Participation?

Pierre Jean


__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Finance: Get your refund fast by filing online.
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html