US training of Haitian Rebels in Dominican Republic

[Lambada]

Porfio

I don't think there is much point in showing him proof, beyond what you have already. When HE was asked for proof that he had visited a Dominican jail (on a different thread) he went strangely quiet. So I don't know that proof per se is really a particularly important matter to him.

 

[Tony C]

I don't think there is much point in showing him proof, beyond what you have already. When HE was asked for proof that he had visited a Dominican jail (on a different thread) he went strangely quiet. So I don't know that proof per se is really a particularly important matter to him.

What Proof?
A photo of one gun and 2 statements by people who can be considered, at best, unreliable and, at worst, lying murderers with a political agenda?

As for the prison thread I gave a 1st hand account and stand by it. You on the other hand just told a story that you heard from a family member.

 

[Lambada]

Wrong!

What Proof?
A photo of one gun and 2 statements by people who can be considered, at best, unreliable and, at worst, lying murderers with a political agenda?

As for the prison thread I gave a 1st hand account and stand by it. You on the other hand just told a story that you heard from a family member.

I was inside that prison on 30 separate occasions. Try reading. Now let's NOT hijack the original thread. The points Porfio makes are well worth making - and certainly thinking people should be asking the sorts of questions he & others are asking. I guess the conclusions one comes to are an individual matter. Personally, I don't find it that surprising that the U.S. had some involvement in all of this, but then I'm not American & I don't live there so I don't feel the need to defend U.S. policy towards the Caribbean.

 

[Texas Bill]

If I am reading all these posts correctly, the following allegations are being made:

1) US troops are/have been the trainers of the insurgents in the Haitian "problem". I use "problem" for a want of a better word. Don't wish to call a spade a bloody shovel when it might well be a spoon!

1a) That these "trainers" were US Special Forces based in the Dominican Republic and conducted all training from there with the aid of the Dominican Armed Forces. (edited to comply with Chirimoya's comment)

2) The "problem" was financed by organizations within the US borders.

3) The US supplied all the arms and ammunition used in the "invasion" and subsequent takeover of Haiti.

4) Aristides "claims" "kidnapping" by US forces and that they swooped him out of the country.

5) Aristides was the "Democratically" elected head of the Haitian government.

6) No other country was "involved" in the Haitian "problem" and in no way rendered assistance to the "rebels".

7) Aristides was in no way at fault in events leading up to his overthrow.

8) The US "was disenchanted" with Aristides and took steps to dipose him.

Big question--- Am I correct in my summation? Have I left anything out? If so, will all of you interject those items of interest overlooked?

I'd like to have this thread back on track without it becoming an exercise in egotism, machismo, and/or other such "isms"


Waiting---waiting---waiting

Texas Bill

 

[Chirimoya]

Texas Bill, you left out the alleged Dominican connection, the only reason this thread is allowed to remain here.

Chiri

 

[Texas Bill]

Texas Bill, you left out the alleged Dominican connection, the only reason this thread is allowed to remain here.

Chiri

Thanks. Note item 1a.

Texas Bill

 

[Chirimoya]

If I am reading all these posts correctly, the following allegations are being made:

1) US troops are/have been the trainers of the insurgents in the Haitian "problem". I use "problem" for a want of a better word. Don't wish to call a spade a bloody shovel when it might well be a spoon!

2) The "problem" was financed by organizations within the US borders.

3) The US supplied all the arms and ammunition used in the "invasion" and subsequent takeover of Haiti.

Yes, these allegations have been made by some participants in this thread.

4) Aristides "claims" "kidnapping" by US forces and that they swooped him out of the country.

That's right, this is what Aristide claims. It is generally held to be a face-saving exercise, although many observers I have spoken to in Haiti concede that he at the very least was 'hyped' out of office by the media coverage which invoked images of insurgents closing in on the capital while in reality small numbers of armed rebels had taken over several key towns and cities. If a gun was held to Aristide's head, it was a metaphorical one.

5) Aristides was the "Democratically" elected head of the Haitian government.

No-one has come out as a champion of Aristide in this debate, although there are well-founded fears, based on the tacit support for the rebels' human rights abuses and a general pessimism arising from Haiti's tragic history that what replaces him will be no better.

6) No other country was "involved" in the Haitian "problem" and in no way rendered assistance to the "rebels".

Unknown quantity on both sides. The US and other members of the international community have come out in support of the new government, pledging to help rebuild Haiti. The support Aristide is receiving from South Africa and Caricom (who have refused to recognise the new government) hints that he has friends elsewhere.

7) Aristides was in no way at fault in events leading up to his overthrow.

See (5).

8) The US "was disenchanted" with Aristides and took steps to dipose him.

See (1), (2) and (3).

Big question--- Am I correct in my summation? Have I left anything out? If so, will all of you interject those items of interest overlooked?

I'd like to have this thread back on track without it becoming an exercise in egotism, machismo, and/or other such "isms"


Waiting---waiting---waiting

Texas Bill

Hope this is helpful in summing up the debate. If you ask me, I think the thread has exhausted its possibilities, that is, until we have PROOF of US/Dominican involvement one way or the other.

I suggest the thread is kept open, because it is just a matter of time.

Chiri

 

[Tony C]

If I am reading all these posts correctly, the following allegations are being made:

1) US troops are/have been the trainers of the insurgents in the Haitian "problem". I use "problem" for a want of a better word. Don't wish to call a spade a bloody shovel when it might well be a spoon!

No proof

1a) That these "trainers" were US Special Forces based in the Dominican Republic and conducted all training from there with the aid of the Dominican Armed Forces. (edited to comply with Chirimoya's comment)

No proof

2) The "problem" was financed by organizations within the US borders.

True. it was mainly financed by Haitians in the US

3) The US supplied all the arms and ammunition used in the "invasion" and subsequent takeover of Haiti.

No proof at all

4) Aristides "claims" "kidnapping" by US forces and that they swooped him out of the country.

No proof

5) Aristides was the "Democratically" elected head of the Haitian government.

Not so. It is well documented that Aristide and his people stole the election.

6) No other country was "involved" in the Haitian "problem" and in no way rendered assistance to the "rebels".

No proof exists to despute that

7) Aristides was in no way at fault in events leading up to his overthrow.

Aristide turned into another tin-horned Dictator. His Supporters attack oposition group members, Murdered reporters ect. His heavy handed tactics turned the populace against him. It is his fault that he is not still there

8) The US "was disenchanted" with Aristides and took steps to dipose him.

No arguement that the US was disenchanted. But there is no proof that they did nothing more than lend support to opposition parties seeking democratic reform. As they do in dozens of other countries around the world.

 

[Texas Bill]

Chiri & Tony---

You BOTH have either missed the intent of my posting or, are deliberately ignoring that posting.

The posting was an attempt to get the GERMAIN questions back on the table so that they could be discussed and added to. Do either of you have anything additional to add?

Once the points of discussion are identified and categorized, we can then review the answers and/or comments more intelligently and not use a shotgun method of answering, such as: Referencing 1. 1a. 2 and 3 above; or, by "no proof" commentary.

Let's start being specific in the answers so as to avoid confusion and/or skewing the answers out of contex.

Texas Bill

 

[Chirimoya]

I believe we both answered your question: there is plenty to say about the situation in Haiti, but that falls outside the forum rules.

There isn't much to add that is DR-related - for the time being, anyway.

Chiri

 

[Tony C]

Here is an intresting article.
http://miaminewtimes.com/issues/current/feature.html/1/index.html

The Miami New Times is a left leaning paper that has also tried to link the US to the Haitian Rebels. Their Sugar Coating of Aristide's oppressive regime is laughable at best. Despite what was the author's best effort still no Link to the U.S. or the D.R.

 

[ltsnyder]

Tony, I'd like to thank you for the article . . . .

It was very informative, but if that's a leftest paper, how bad can it be? I mean that sounds as if the new government is only in charge on paper. As for where the "Rebel" weapons came from I don't think that article even attepted to cover that issue, so I think we both agree that article would not be expected to show any "proof". Please post morearticles, that article said so much. I had no idea that Aristeed supported the formation of armed gangs in the poor areas to that extream, and I feel many here will find this informative. What I don't understand is why was this not discussed earlier (I beleive it's true). I just never understood how people could talk about corruption and not provide details like that article.

Just to keep this on topic:

I think a lot of corroborating evidence has been presented that the US aided the training of the rebels. If you do find any "Proof" make sure the CIA knows so they can make sure they clean up thier act next time.

Again, and I am totally serious, thank you for the article Tony C, I think that was one of the best posted article on this thread.

-Lee

 

[ltsnyder]

My vote Q1 Q2 Q4 Q5 Q8 are valid as clarified by me.

Q1) US troops are/have been the trainers of the insurgents in the Haitian "problem". I use "problem" for a want of a better word. Don't wish to call a spade a bloody shovel when it might well be a spoon!

A) I would not say troops, I mean the commander might have gone to "school of the Americas" at one point in his life but that was years ago, If you'd bother to read the article you'd see it was US instruments i.e. foundations etcetera that provided the training. Some one correct/clarify my last statement sentence.

Q1a) That these "trainers" were US Special Forces based in the Dominican Republic and conducted all training from there with the aid of the Dominican Armed Forces. (edited to comply with Chirimoya's comment)

A) I defer from answering this question, "US Special Forces" as the trainers is too specific a question for my memory.

Q2) The "problem" was financed by organizations within the US borders.

A) Evidence says at least partially, and should read organizations know as instruments of the US governemnt.

Q3) The US supplied all the arms and ammunition used in the "invasion" and subsequent takeover of Haiti.

A) All the arms? That's a pretty broad statement, please show me the PROOF!

Q4) Aristides "claims" "kidnapping" by US forces and that they swooped him out of the country.

A) If you President one day, and then in Timbuktu the next and only get word out by a snuck cell phone, and only get released to go where you want after a US delegation appears. Well calling a spade a spade, I'd be a little concerned. Many supporting facts here, his US corporate security detail was dismissed by the US government. All evidence is that the US did not want a bloodbath of fighting in the capital (bad for politics) and tried to greese his exit out (with a push too). US side is clear by the fact the the US lands troops to stabilize the situation the moment after Aresteed leaves, and announces new elections.

Q5) Aristides was the "Democratically" elected head of the Haitian government.

A) Yep as far as I know he won by a landslide, but there was a lot of curruption, but no one seems to think curruption accounted for the win.

Q6) No other country was "involved" in the Haitian "problem" and in no way rendered assistance to the "rebels".

a) That is a very broad statement, you'll need to show me the PROOF there.

Q7) Aristides was in no way at fault in events leading up to his overthrow.

a) Now I know beyond a doubt that you are an Aristeed supporter, Show me the proof.

Q8) The US "was disenchanted" with Aristides and took steps to dipose him.

A) There is stong evidence of that, even I think Tony C would agree with that statement.

-Lee

 

[Chirimoya]

Lee, Texas Bill was summing up some of the points put forward in the course of the debate. He did not mean he agreed with all of them, and I think it is pretty obvious that he is not an Aristide supporter.

BTW

Haitian PM Gerard Latortue is coming to SD to pay a visit to the President later this week, I hear.

Sounds like one of Aesop's fables: "The Hippo and the Tortoise".

Chiri

 

[Tony C]

As for where the "Rebel" weapons came from I don't think that article even attepted to cover that issue, so I think we both agree that article would not be expected to show any "proof". Just to keep this on topic:

I spoke with the author. he went down to Haiti expressly to search for a link between the US and the rebels. If he had found any he would have been screaming and ranting against the US. Not Finding any he wrote that article.

I think a lot of corroborating evidence has been presented that the US aided the training of the rebels. If you do find any "Proof" make sure the CIA knows so they can make sure they clean up thier act next time.

Can we see this "corroborating evidence"? You make that statement like it is a fact. So far we have only seen a couple of unsupported statements made by people with an agenda.

 

[Texas Bill]

Lee, Texas Bill was summing up some of the points put forward in the course of the debate. He did not mean he agreed with all of them, and I think it is pretty obvious that he is not an Aristide supporter.

BTW

Haitian PM Gerard Latortue is coming to SD to pay a visit to the President later this week, I hear.

Sounds like one of Aesop's fables: "The Hippo and the Tortoise".

Chiri

Chiri;

Thank you for your commets. I was, in fact, trying to place the germain questions on the table in summation. Evidently Lee didn't read the post very well, or misinterpreted my post altogether. Not his fault, just as many others have read and responded. May I'd better try to be more specific in the future.

Texas Bill

 

[ltsnyder]

As all statements are a matter of opion . . .

Chiri;

Thank you for your commets. I was, in fact, trying to place the germain questions on the table in summation. Evidently Lee didn't read the post very well, or misinterpreted my post altogether. Not his fault, just as many others have read and responded. May I'd better try to be more specific in the future.

Texas Bill

I was clarifying what Bill said and pointing out what the Gemain questions actually were. Sorry I had to spell it out for you. If I question a question, he should state who said it. Does that make sense to you TBill? Think about it.

-Lee

 

[Texas Bill]

Lee;

Let's not get into a battle of symantics here. I appreciate your answers, relative the sumations I attempted. They were not intended to elicit responses per se, but rather a restatement of the points and questions thus far on the table. That's all they were.

Your points are well taken. This is merely a clarification.

Texas Bill

 

[CES]

- Haiti Politics Come Stateside -

Africana.com web site

By Natalie Hopkinson

Only a handful of people can say for sure whether Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was jacked up or ?escorted? out of his realm via U.S. military motorcade a few weeks ago, but that hasn?t stopped knees from jerking on both sides. To paraphrase our Dubya, it seems you?re either for Aristide or you?re against him. The former Catholic priest is the kind of populist lightening rod who evokes nothing in between. It's too bad the reality is so much messier and more human than that.

<font size=1>- snip -</font>

Instead of examining the reasons why, he and other panelists aimed their fire for the bigger, juicier target. ?We cannot be sucked into a debate about [Aristide?s] policies,? he thundered. ?It cannot be tolerated that a president of a country is removed.? Still, those Aristide policies helped contribute to the uprising that likely would have left the Haitian president dead or deposed even without the U.S. interference. (Although as Aristide?s attorney Brian Concannon reported from the panel, there is evidence that the U.S. may have helped to fan dissent by allowing rebel leaders to train openly in the Dominican Republic and funneling $20,000 worth of U.S. firearms to the rebels via the Dominican Republic.)

<font size=1>- snip -</font>

Kurtzer?s comments were among the most tempered of the panel, which may have something to do with his day job as a staff assistant in the office of U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler ? a Democrat who happens to represent the good people of Boca Raton. (Kurtzer said he was not expressing Wexler?s views.) During interviews with Haitians, Kurtzer said he encountered widespread dissatisfaction with Aristide?s administration ? but even more outrage that the U.S. stripped them of the opportunity to evict Aristide legitimately. . .

<font size=1>First published: April 21, 2004

About the Author

Natalie Hopkinson is a staff writer for the Washington Post

? 1999-2003 Africana.com Inc.</font>

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . CES

 

[Criss Colon]

George Bush may be the BEST President the United States has ever had!!!!!!!

His leadership in the Hatian Problem will go down in history as a brilliant move! What he has done in Afghanistan,and Iraq will change the history of that region for all time!!! GOD BLESS YOU GEoRGE BUSH! See the moderatores are not allowing you to have a debate about Haiti and the US involvment,They Just Don't MODERATE! Now be sure and "PM" them to wake them up!!! CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC
Republican Party Forever!! FOUR MORE YEARS!! GO GEORGE BUSH! His father visited the DR! Now thats DR RELATED!! CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC