glynch, <b> Which European leaders were involved on the Haiti issue and called for this compromise?</b>
Which European leaders were involved on the Haiti issue and called for this compromise? Mango, I wish I could treat this as a sincere request that I do some research for you. However, I really think that you have a tendency to try to discredit liberal posters you disagree with by micro fact disputing. You just don't do this with conservatives who suport your own biases. Also as I showed above "roughly one year" is almost two years. Here is one article that talks of European efforts shortly before the coup. I still maintain by your obsessive attempt to fault find on minor matters you tend to miss the forest for the trees. I might be inclined to do more reserach for you on European efforts to reach a compromise before the coup if you would explain exactly why you have focused on this one fact and how it will change your thinking beyond the Bush line on Haiti and the need to overthrow its democratic government. link
I've always wondered that about Glynch. And lemme guess your response, Glynch..... "Dissent is patriotism! Don't question my patriotism!" But you never have anything good to say about anything this country does! Is that simple dissent or maybe that is more like disloyalty?
1) The situation in Haiti has been very <i>fluid</i> over the past several weeks. The directions and efforts by the international community in regards to Haiti were also very <i>fluid</i> over the past several weeks. 2) The article you quoted seemed to be full of America bashing, yet what I know about the issue doesn't seem to warrant that: <hr color=red> <a HREF="http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,8885673%255E1702,00.html">Aristide kidnap claim 'inappropriate'</a> <i> <b>....De Villepin, in his statement, stressed his country -- which was the first international power to call for Aristide's departure - was in Haiti for democratic purposes. France "plans to defend the most important human right - that of personal security for each individual," he said. </b> "This right, which requires the disarmament of uncontrolled elements, will only be ensured by economic and social development, to which our country means to offer a notable contribution," de Villepin said. He said there was an immediate need for "the restoration of essential services and the urgent distribution of humanitarian aid". </i> <hr color=red> <a HREF="http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A6952-2004Feb25?language=printer">France Urges Global Police Force for Haiti</a> <i>..............The Bush administration and the French, who have disagreed bitterly at the United Nations in recent times, both favor a political solution. The French have gone further in suggesting publicly that Aristide should resign, while U.S. officials have been working around the idea of him finishing his term. "It is up to him to accept the consequences while respecting the rule of law," de Villepin said. "It is his decision. It is his responsibility. Everyone sees quite well that a new page must be opened in Haiti's history.".........</i> <hr color=red> 3) I searched through the core part of the article you quoted and looked for "<b>France</b>". NEW YORK – If the circumstances weren't so calamitous, the US-orchestrated removal of former President Jean-Bertrand Aristide from Haiti would be farcical. According to Mr. Aristide, US officials in Port-au-Prince told him that rebels were on the way to the presidential residence and that he and his family were unlikely to survive unless they immediately boarded an American-chartered plane standing by to take them to exile. The US made it clear, he said, that it would provide no protection for him at the official residence, despite the ease with which this could have been arranged. Indeed, says Aristide's lawyer, the US blocked reinforcement of Aristide's own security detail and refused him entry to the airplane until he signed a letter of resignation. Then Aristide was denied access to a phone for nearly 24 hours and knew nothing of his destination until he was summarily deposited in the Central African Republic. But this Keystone Kops coup has apparently not worked entirely according to plan: Aristide used a cellphone to notify the world that he was forcibly removed from Haiti. The US dismisses Aristide's charges as ridiculous. Secretary of State Colin Powell's official version of the events is a blanket denial based on the government's word alone. In essence, Washington is telling us not to look back, only forward. This stonewalling brings to mind Groucho Marx's old line, "Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?" There are several tragedies in this surrealistic episode. The first is the apparent incapacity of the US to speak honestly about such matters as toppling governments. Instead, it brushes aside crucial questions: Did the US summarily deny military protection to Aristide? Did the US supply weapons to the rebels, who showed up in Haiti last month with sophisticated equipment that last year reportedly had been taken by the US military to the Dominican Republic, next door to Haiti? Why did the US abandon the call of European and Caribbean leaders for a political compromise, a compromise that Aristide had already accepted? Most important, did the US bankroll a coup in Haiti, a scenario that, based on the evidence, seems likely? Only someone ignorant of American history and of the administrations of the elder and younger George Bushes would dismiss these questions. The US has repeatedly sponsored coups and uprisings in Haiti and in neighboring Caribbean countries. The most recent previous episode in Haiti came in 1991, during the first Bush administration, when thugs on the CIA payroll were among the leaders of paramilitary groups that toppled Aristide after his 1990 election I didn't find "<b>France</b>", yet you seem to give full credence to what the author wrote. There was a previous Haiti thread that we both posted in and I gave citations there in regards to France and the Haiti issue. <a HREF="http://bbs.clutchcity.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=73907">PRESIDENT ARISTIDE SAYS 'I WAS KIDNAPPED'</a> You posted an article by Jeffrey Sachs of the Earth Institute at Columbia University in that thread. <b>03-02-2004 08:49 AM </b> In this thread, the article you quoted is by Jeffrey D. Sachs of the Earth Institute at Columbia University. It seems quite possibly that they are the same person. You had seen my previous mention of France - Haiti, yet you still post more commentary from Jeffrey D. Sachs (Jeffrey Sachs) that doesn't mention France at all. When you post something like that........I feel impelled to respond. 4) In regards to my specific query about the European leaders that were involved, I find no mention of Chancellor Schroeder (Germany) taking a position on Haiti, even though he was in the U.S. and met President Bush in late February. I searched <i>Google</i> looking for offers from Germany in regards to funding, troops, police etc to keep Arisitde in power and have yet to find anything. France is the only European country that I have found particpating in the international effort in Haiti. <hr color=red> <a HREF="http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/L11136519.htm">US to take charge of Haiti force next week -France</a> <i> The United States will take charge next week of an interim multi-national force in Haiti that is charged with restoring order to the Caribbean nation, an official at French military headquarters said on Thursday. U.S., French and Chilean troops are already coordinating operations in Haiti, but as of next week they will be officially organised under U.S. command, with different contingents taking charge of different sectors of the country, press officer Catherine Bellis said. France will contribute between 800 and 1,000 troops to the force, and a Frenchman will be second-in-command, Bellis said. Troops from Canada and Chile would also join the force, which is expected to number less than 5,000 in total. "The Americans will take command at the beginning of next week," Bellis said. The interim force, authorised by the United Nations, is set to last 90 days, after which a longer-term U.N. stabilisation force will take over. The U.N. Security Council approved the deployment of the force to Haiti after President Jean-Bertrand Aristide left the impoverished country on February 29 in the face of an armed rebellion. </i> <hr color=red> It is easy for governmental entities such as the <i>European Union</i> and <i>European Countries</i> to advocate a compromise between the opposing sides in Haiti, but it seems that France is the only European country that actually became involved both Pre and Post Aristide. 5) You termed it <i>micro fact disputing</i>, but I view it as significant that Jeffrey D. Sachs (Jeffrey Sachs) makes no mention of France and you bought in completely to what he wrote. I use <i>Google</i> for other sources when I see a commentary that you have quoted. You seem to be aware that I will do that, yet you still persist in posting commentary articles without checking with other sources.
