18636: Dorce: Re: 18618: Simidor: further clarification (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: LAKAT47@aol.com

In a message dated 2/14/04 3:13:19 PM Pacific Standard Time, Simidor writes:

<< Let me also add “for the record” that “an obvious material connection”
doesn’t suggest payment under the table.  >>
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Actually it does suggest that.  It was what I thought of.  You might have not
meant that he was taking money under the table but that's what those words
suggested.  If you meant he has a sister who was involved with the government,
why didn't you say so?  By the way, it occurs to me that many Haitian
intellectuals, who are not in the convergence, seem to feel that not committing to any
side of a political situation is the noble position to take.  Criticizing both
sides seems to be the aristocratic way to be above it all.  Maybe that's why
Guy Antoine's defense of Aristide bothers you so much.  He is not playing it
right, is he.  Even though he has been more than even-handed in his later
criticism of Aristide, you see him forever as an apologist.  I rather admire that
he didn't agree with you that Aristide should have died in 1991.

Also, I don't know why having a sister in the employ of Aristide precludes
him from telling the truth as he knows it.  Do you think he would lie about
things because his sister worked with Aristide?  Perhaps he was privy to things
you don't know about because of her.

I appreciate that you do not like Aristide and you wish he hadn't been
elected twice as president of Haiti, but to wish for his death and to wish he would
be overthrown is to wish for the destruction of Haiti.  What they say about
Haiti always bending but not breaking is a lovely sentiment but it may not be
true forever.  Just two more years, it would be nice if the opposition would
work for the betterment of the country instead of the destruction of Aristide and
Lavalas.

Kathy Dorce~