20115: Nealy: RE: 20064: Esser: Re: 20038: Nealy: RE: 20030: Esser: Sparring over Aristide's fall (R. Singh) (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: David Nealy <dlnealy@msn.com>

Let's do agree to get the facts straight, but also to distinguish fact from
hypothesis or supposition:

Fact: The"Haitian Opposition" torpedoed the Caricom Peace Plan by insisting
that Aristide resign, period. You did not admit that fact, but it is one.

Supposition: The rest of your note, arguing that the US, France, etc. didn't
want the Caricom plan to succeed, preferring "sudden intervention". Do you
really think that the US administration wanted to have another military
intervention in this election year, with the commitments in Iraq and
Afghanistan in preference to a plan for power sharing in Haiti? I don't. In
any case, you don't call that a fact, do you? My original E mail stressed
getting the FACTS right. I still maintain that's important. What facts
(evidence) do you have to support those suppositions?

David

_________________________________________________________________
Find things fast with the new MSN Toolbar – includes FREE pop-up blocking!
http://clk.atdmt.com/AVE/go/onm00200414ave/direct/01/