a173: Petit-Goâve: Chamberlain answers Pina

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: Greg Chamberlain <GregChamberlain@compuserve.com>

_____________

> kevin pina <kpinbox@hotmail.com> wrote:


> No one called that grounds for moral absolution and if you recall I said 
> the events do not justify such a horrible murder. 

You did say it was a horrible murder, Kevin, but then proceded 
to "explain" that "the Convergence supporters provoked the
attack," in a barely-veiled attempt to minimise Lindor's summary 
execution.  This is not a _direct_ moral absolution of the killers, 
but we are permitted to judge what you say in the light of your 
many previous contortionate posts here in defence of the 
powers-that-be.  In fact, let's look at the entirety of your short 
November 18 post, because it illustrates perfectly a sinister 
approach that threatens the health of any society, in Haiti or 
anywhere, and the basic liberties of both rich and poor.

____________

From: kevin pina <kpinbox@hotmail.com>

No, Senator Toussaint has not been "indicted." The last word on that comes 
from the office of the Minister of the Interior. Nor does Rene Civil or
Paul 
Raymond have any connection nor any relevant information concerning Jean 
Dominique's assasination. The latter being Judge Gassant's attempt to 
further polarize and politicize the issue in an attempt to cast aspersions 
and otherwise, "cast a dark pall" upon leaders in the popular
organizations. 
No wonder he does not want to continue, a witchhunt by any other name is 
still a witchhunt! The end result of which has been to add ammunition to 
Reporters Without Borders for whom we are not sure whince they receive
their 
orders. A single issue organization that appeared overnight on the Haitian 
political scene whose only result has been to add further confusion to an 
already difficult situation. I hope we have reached the 15th second of
their 
self-generated fame.

kp
____________________

This is the kind of dangerous nonsense we can read any day of the 
week in defence of all manner of dubious regimes around the world.  
We heard it from the Duvaliers, from Cedras and co. and now... from 
you. And your firm assertion that "nor does Rene Civil or Paul Raymond 
have any connection nor any relevant information concerning Jean 
Dominique's assasination" is interesting.  Just about the only people 
I know of who'd maintain these two don't have any information about 
the case are... Civil and Raymond themselves.  


> I try not to confuse ideology with honest attempts to interpret history. 

That just isn't evident at all from your posts. 


> If you operate from the assumption that poor illiterate people are not 
> smart enough to defend their own interests than you will never 
> understand what is really going on on in Haiti. 

"Poor, illiterate people" anywhere are as smart as anyone else 
when it comes to realising that things are going badly because 
of the inaction of the authorities to produce the goods or because 
of the reappearance of corruption and macoutism, which is sadly 
what is happening.  The job of those paid to (or who choose to)
defend a regime is to blame someone else for all that.


> From my perspective it is the people who try to portray Aristide 
> as the puppet master and Lavalas as some mafia organization 
> who are the real "conspiracy theorists".

I wonder what you have to say to all those radical leaders, 
intellectuals and organisers (of all classes and colours) who 
fought to help Aristide to power and who have now deserted 
him in anger and disappointment.  Are they be consigned to the
dustbin of history too for "adding confusion," as you say RSF
has been doing with its call for Jean Dominique's murder to
be promptly investigated?  Perhaps Jean Dominique himself
even "added confusion" by getting himself killed...


> What do you make of the Convergence's their calling the 
> attempted coups of July 28 and December 17 "staged" events 
> by Lavalas? Of course you would never consider those 
> "conspiracy theories"

"Deye mon gin mon" means many Haitians are inclined never
to take anything political at face value.  That's unfortunate.  But 
beyond this, there are plenty of questions to be asked about 
those two episodes.


> or label them such given that they orginate from such "true 
> democrats" with a broad base of support in Haiti.

Whoa, Neddy!  I've consistently referred to Convergence as a
hodge-podge of neo-Duvalierist fraudsters and opportunists 
allied with some good and honest people (And don't
quote my description without the second part).  You could 
describe the Lavalas regime in the same terms.  The trick is 
to get the good people in each camp to take charge.  But that 
hasn't really happened so far, what with Gourgue's disgusting 
call for the army to be re-established, and the rampages of 
Lavalas goons (regretted of course _after_ the fact, as any 
skilled political operator knows how to do).  The tragic thing is, 
Kevin, that you are speaking for the baddies in all this.  


> I stand by my dismissal of any positive role played by RSF. 

That remark doesn't deserve comment.


        Greg Chamberlain