1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

God Bless America! Best E-Mail Ever Received

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by LadyEagle, Feb 21, 2003.

  1. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Oh, you must mean like showing Love. Love your Enemies. Like the food and water being given to the people of Iraq (Muslims) from Americans.

    And the food being shipped from the US to the people of Iraq - enough to feed the whole country, which is en route right now.

    And the medical treatment we are giving them and gestures of human kindness.

    The freedom we are giving them, too - ridding their country of a cancerous evil and liberating them.

    Yes, that is just what Jesus would have us do. I'm glad we are doing the right thing in Iraq. I'm glad to have had the privilege to be born in the Greatest Nation on the Face of the Earth - even with all her faults, America is a wonderful Nation and I'd rather live here than anywhere else. I feel honored and privileged to have been born here. "America, America, God shed His grace on thee."

    I love this country. If you don't, then I'm sure most airlines offer one way tickets to somewhere you can love.

    Your constant barage of anti-American rhetoric is getting on my last nerve, BTW.

    Would you be willing to lay down your life for America? Would you be willing to lay down your life for another so they could be free? I would. And so would our troops.
     
  2. just-want-peace

    just-want-peace Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2002
    Messages:
    7,727
    Likes Received:
    873
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Or, put another way, as per this email;

     
  3. Anthro

    Anthro New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    0
    The U.S. bringing in food is of course a good thing, but it is not love, as Biblically defined. Love is only when one does something that goes against and is is seperate from their personal interests. Bringing in food to Iraqis can hardly be considered as going against and seperate from U.S. interests in the region. Furthest thing from it.
     
  4. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Anthro, you make me tired. [​IMG]

    If what you said is true, the US would just carpet bomb and kill everyone, occupy Iraq (making it the 51st state) and keep all the oil.

    However, we don't need Iraqi oil. According to Arab TV and the Arab street, the US is hated in the region and volunteers are going from every Arab country to fight the coalition. Doesn't look like the US has done the politically correct thing to win friends in the region to me.

    But we are doing what is right. The Iraqi people are being freed and those old WMDs Saddam doesn't have are turning up. Funny thing.

    In case you haven't noticed, Americans have a history of being benevolent for those less fortunate than we. Any tragedy anywhere in the world, the US is there with our hands out in humanitarian aid.

    Americans wrote the handbook on benevolence to the world. Sometimes I have wondered just where it is written that America is supposed to be the everflowing breast. Nearly every country in the world is the recipient of some form of foreign aid from Americans, either in handouts, grants, technology, commerce, something.

    But we don't complain, we average tax payers. We just keep on giving and giving and giving. Not just with all the many taxes we pay. But private charities and churches, too.

    Yes, we are a benevolent bunch of people. We have blessed many nations of the world. Even though some people on here deny that. Not mentioning any names, of course, Anthro.

    Well, maybe the jihad warriors are flocking to Baghdad to get some of those free MREs we're passing out by the tens of thousands. We make them politically correct now - no pork. If they're smart, they'll wave the white flag and take the MRE.
     
  5. Anthro

    Anthro New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    0
    Your idealism simply needs a healthier dose of reality. Perhaps the following highlighting the case of Haiti will show you another side.

    ----------------------------------

    “I, I Will Make the Economic Revolution”

    Export Factories
    In 1971 when Jean-Claude Duvaliér succeeded his father, François, as “President for Life,” he declared, “My father made the political revolution. I, I will make the economic revolution.” Along with Jean-Claude, USAID undertook a development effort to turn Haiti into what it envisioned as “the Taiwan of the Caribbean.” USAID forecasted “a historic change toward deeper market interdependence” between Haiti and the United States. To accomplish this, it tapped U.S. investors to open assembly plants within Port-au-Prince. The idea was to take advantage of Haiti’s abundant and cheap labor. At the same time, USAID opened the way into Haiti for cheap U.S. agro-exports such as rice and flour, where Haitian agricultural products had been prior protected. As the agro-exports flowed in, a first phase of Haitian peasants had to leave their land, since they could no longer compete in their own local markets with the U.S.-subsidized foodstuffs.

    Some peasant migrants to Port-au-Prince, mostly women, were able to attain the export factories jobs. They received $2.64 per day, though because much of the work was break-neck piecework, many received only about 14 cents per hour. One female factory worker expressed widespread sentiment when she said, “They come here looking for higher profits. For us to do the work it is cheaper because they pay us less; so they make more profits off of us.” Another added, “It is a good thing for him [the factory owner], but we don't benefit from the extra profits. I think they should pay us at least $20 per day. Foreign (U.S., etc.) workers may make $5.00 per hour. Here, we work for a whole day and make $2.64. So they make more profit here than in their own country.” Earlier, USAID-funded studies used to back the U.S.-led “development” effort under Jean Claude wrote, “Women workers tend to be quieter.” The same report noted that Haiti had no requirements for profit sharing, or featherbedding requirements. One U.S. factory owner in Haiti at the time summed up the bargain for foreign business: “Nine-year tax holidays, duty-free exports, no restrictions on the repatriation of capital […] and the foreigner can own his own business 100%.”

    Infrastructure Projects
    On the heels of the export-factory build up in Haiti, USAID and the World Bank funded numerous roads into Haiti’s rural areas, as well as dams and canals in the areas. Most of the workers tapped to build the infrastructures came from among Haiti’s peasantry. In order for the peasants to work building the infrastructures, they temporarily left their lands. Under a “work for food” program, the workers received their pay in U.S. agro-exports. However, when payday arrived, they discovered that they were unable to sell any of the foodstuffs—“This Food NOT to Be Sold,” was emboldened all over the sacks in three languages. The peasants soon became cash-strapped.

    As the infrastructures came in, the value of the lands around them rose. Soon, foreign agro-businesses arrived onto the scene. The mostly absentee elite Haitian land “owners” saw an opportunity in the businesses’ arrival, and kicked the cash-strapped peasants off their lands to rent the lands for high-tech export crop production. This caused a second phase of peasant migration into Port-au-Prince slums. While watching from the thick of it, Ben Dupuy observed, “The ironic part is that these foreign capitalist companies say they are coming to Haiti to solve our unemployment problems, when in fact, it is those very companies that are causing our unemployment problems to increase, and the Haitian government gives them every possible incentive.”

    “Swine Aid”
    Surrounding the time of the USAID infrastructure (“work for food”) projects, the agency also took up a project to “modernize” Haiti’s “pork industry” with improved methods and an improved breed of pigs. The breed of pig that existed before the effort, the kochon kreyol (“Creole pig”), was sometimes simply called “black pig” in Haiti because of the animal’s color. Creole pigs developed on the island centuries ago by crossing imported Spanish pigs with wild boars then indigenous to Haiti. The breeding, and the pigs’ adapting for literal centuries to the extreme Haitian environment caused the animals to evolve as an extremely hardy, though ironically docile animal that required no housing, and scant additions of water and food-garbage to their diet. Of the unique though typically skinny black animals, Bernard Diederich summarized, “Over a period of 500 years, the black pig had become a lean and degenerate scavenger. It was perfectly adapted to the most miserable of raising conditions in the world, and could go two to three days without food.”

    What was actually going on behind the “modernization” project was that an outbreak of African swine fever occurred several years earlier, in 1978, in Haiti’s neighboring Dominican Republic. A year later, the malady was in Haiti. Knowing that no vaccine existed for African swine fever, the multi-billion dollar U.S. Pork industry and other multinational corporations began petitioning U.S. government officials concerning the outbreak. The pork industry’s fear was that if the virus reached the U.S., it would decimate their entire industry.

    The U.S. apparently agreed. Motivated by the threat of decreased tax revenues and food options for American consumers should the pork industry’s fear be realized, the U.S undertook a massive program with the consent of the Dominican Republic and Haitian governments to kill all pigs on Hispainiola and replace them with U.S. bred ones. The Programme pour l’Eradication de la Peste Porcine Africaine et pour le Developpment de l'Elvage ’Porcin (PEPPADEP), known as “Swine Aid” to most Haitians, was carried out in Haiti throughout the early 1980s. PEPPADEP was administered by USAID, and carried out by technicians from Mexico, Canada, and the Dominican Republic with the cooperation of numerous Haitian actors who saw a quick opportunity.

    Haitians who lost pigs did not receive replacement pigs, called kochon blan-s (“foreign white pigs”) by most Haitians, outright. USAID placed stipulations upon those who could receive the new, fat white pigs. Recipients had to demonstrate first that they had the capital to maintain the pigs. One peasant farmer affected by PEPPADEP informed me that those in his community had to purchase the new pigs. A pigpen also had to be constructed, featuring a concrete floor and a tin roof. Anthropologist Jennie Smith informs that the pigpen requirement alone was sufficient to bar most peasants from receiving a replacement pig or pigs, and that the reply of one particular Haitian peasant was typical of the majority who walked away empty-handed. “My own family does not live under a tin roof,” the peasant exclaimed. When peasant cooperatives based upon age-old cultural practices of Haiti peasants pooled resources and appealed for permission to own one or numerous of the new pigs communally, USAID swept away their requests with one word: “communism.”

    To make matters worse, those who did receive one of the Iowan bred pigs found that they required frequent veterinarian care and, as Smith notes, “turned their noses up at the garbage that was once the Creole pig’s mainstay.” As it turned out, keeping the animals alive required expensive wheat-based and vitamin-enriched feed—food that, incidentally, recent imports of U.S.-based corporations made available. Physician-anthropologist Paul Farmer notes that it required from $120 to $250 per year to maintain one of the new pigs, amounts that exceeded the annual income of most Haitian peasants. Not surprising, most of the Iowan pigs quickly succumbed to the harsh Haitian environment, and some of the ones that did survive turned to attacking and eating infants and toddlers to get their caloric intake, something the Creole pig had almost never done.

    For Haiti’s peasants, the loss of their Creole pigs represented far more than just a loss of much-needed protein. In the immediate aftermath of PEPPADEP, one Haitian peasant man told Grassroots International, a U.S.-based NGO that works in Haiti, “All of our needs were taken care of by the pigs. Now people are cutting down all the trees to make charcoal to sell. You can already see the difference [in the landscape].”

    As the peasant’s words indicate, the pigs were enormously important economically to Haitian peasants. Diederich again summarizes, "With no banking system available to him, the peasant relied on hog production as a bank account to meet his most pressing obligations: baptism, health care, schooling, funerals, religious ceremonies, and protection against urban-based loan sharks who would grab his land at the first opportunity."

    Thus, as Jennie Smith points out, in the world of the Haitian peasant, PEPPADEP translated into The Great Haitian Stock Market Crash of the Early 1980s. With the “bank accounts” of peasants now “liquidated,” school attendance dropped in half, since peasant parents could no longer afford to pay for fees, uniforms, and supplies. Malnutrition began to climb. Migration to urban slums accelerated as a new stream of peasants embarked to cheche lavi [“search out a living”]. Grassroots International charges that the exodus of peasants into the urban areas coincided far too conveniently with the factory build up in Port-au-Prince. Thousands braved the seas as “boat people.”

    To make matters still worse, some veterinarians felt that Creole pigs were immune to African swine fever. Though the disease typically kills 99% of domestic pigs, because of the Creole pig’s genetic background and its long adaptation to such poor living conditions, markedly few ever died of the disease. Even so, except for a few Creole pigs whose owners stashed them away, PEPPADEP operatives killed every pig in Haiti.

    Haitian peasants who did receive new pigs did not receive compensation that fit the Creole pigs’ actual value. Even though Haitian peasants routinely ate Creole pigs, the animal was somewhat of a national treasure and symbol to most Haitian peasants. Sentiments flowed from many Haitian peasants toward the Creole Pig, not unlike how some Americans may feel toward their national bird, the Bald Eagle.

    Haitian peasants with whom Smith has worked see PEPPADEP as a larger life-lesson. She informs, “All too clear to them is an analogy between themselves, the skinny, black, ‘degenerated,’ but hearty, beasts doomed to martyrdom—ostensibly in the name of progress but actually in the interest of another breed: a fat, white, manicured, foreign breed from the north.” Another Haitian peasant decried to Smith, PEPPADEP “allowed them to come in and take our market. Now, they come back and make money selling us hot dogs!” Quoting a Haitian economist, Diederich provides another summary. “The real loss to the peasant is incalculable.” The peasant economy “is reeling from the impact of being without pigs. A whole way of life has been destroyed in this survival economy. This is the worst calamity to ever befall the peasant.” The same economist placed the nominal value of the destroyed Creole pigs at $600 million. The whole PEPPADEP program had $23 million backing it.

    A Break with the Past

    After colonization, and a successful slave revolt that only led to enforced semi-feudalism; after Haitian experiences during the U.S. Occupation that reinforced semi-feudalism; after more than twenty years of François Duvaliér and his reign of terror; after the USAID-led “development” efforts during Jean-Claude Duvaliér, the majority of Haitians did indeed feel they needed to break with their past. Only, it was not at all the type of break that Harrison would have liked to see.

    “Pull the Tree Out by its Roots”
    As protests rose against Jean Claude Duvalier, it became untenable for the U.S. to support him any longer. After his fall in 1986, Haiti-wide protests grew as a transitional government took power. Meanwhile, masses of popular Haitians blanketed their country conducting a dechouke. From a Haitian-Creole word meaning “pull the tree out by its roots (lest it grow back)” , popular Haitians intent on democracy in Haiti sought to “uproot” the dysfunction of Duvalierism from their country, in the hopes it would never rear its head again.

    In dechouke, popular Haitians physically demolished anything they could associate with Duvalierism, including whatever they could associate with the Duvaliérs’ paramilitary squad known as the Tonton Macoutes [“Uncle Boogiemen”]. Popular Haitians stripped buildings to the walls, and burned their contents to a flame. They killed numerous of the most notorious macoutes, as other macoutes fled abroad or went into hiding.

    “Flood Tide”
    Meanwhile, OAS-mediated elections drew close. At the same time, the U.S. began an advocacy campaign to bring free-market neo-liberalism to post-Duvaliér Haiti. The U.S. argued that Haiti’s deliverance from past economic deprivation lay in adopting free trade policies, with domestic production oriented toward exports. Backing the U.S. plan was presidential candidate Marc Brazin, a former World Bank official. As things would later come out, Brazin was not only U.S.-backed, but U.S.-funded as well. But for now, a loop was about to be thrown into U.S. plans for Haiti.

    Intensely popular among the Haitian poor (most of Haiti) because of his bold radio sermons that shook the Haitian status-quo, Liberation Theologian and Roman Catholic priest Jean Bertrand Aristide entered the presidential race at the eleventh hour. Funded largely by a progressive Haitian businessman of Palestinian descent who later would be murdered for his support right in the midst of a Eucharist celebration, Aristide centered his campaign on the slogan Lavalas (“Flash flood” or, “Flood Rise”). Aristide envisioned his mass of supporters as themselves being that “flash flood,” who would “raise” up to “flush away” the old Haitian order and bring social justice and democracy to the country.

    Aristide promised to take on entrenched corruption, abolish the Haitian military, and carry out moderate land reform and wealth redistribution. Paying special attention to Article One of the 1987 Haitian Constitution, which states Haiti to be a “cooperatist” Republic, Aristide based his development model for Haiti on a document, La Chance qui Passé, prepared by a coalition of Canadian diaspora Haitians and Haitians. Sociologist Alex Dupuy argues that La Chance “was essentially a moderate version of social democracy” that “appeared quite moderate” to most popular Haitians. However, to entrenched Haitian elites, La Chance represented a deep affront to their long-protected interest.

    In a race of eleven candidates, Aristide won a 68% victory. U.S.-hopeful Marc Brazin came in second with 15% of the vote. The Organization of American States, who mediated the elections, declared the unchallenged results legitimate. Not a year into his presidency, a coup financed by Haitian elites and carried out by neo-Duvaliérists in the country overthrew Aristide. Not surprising, a military junta took power.

    “Breaking” the Break with the Past

    Coup d’Etat
    As Aristide took exile in the U.S., junta operatives, many of them former macoutes who had now come out of hiding, conducted well-organized massacres throughout Haiti against the popular movements that brought Aristide to power. Done with the intent to demobilize and demoralize them, upwards of 6,000 were killed or maimed, and their bodies of the dead dumped in mass graves. During the military junta’s reign between 1991 and 1994, Marc Brazin showed up as the de facto Prime Minister of Haiti between 1992 and 1993. While at the post, Brazin took steps to realize his initial plans, including a signed agreement with the U.S.-controlled Rice Corporation of Haiti to renew rice imports into the country. While the cheap U.S.-subsidized rice did help the needs of some slum-dwellers in Port- au-Prince, it caused yet another exodus of Haitian peasant farmers into those same slums.

    Politique de Doublure
    The U.S. returned Aristide to power in 1994 during a U.S. intervention. Before doing so, however, the U.S. placed preconditions upon his return. Perforce, Aristide adopted standard neo-liberalism and an accompanying aid package for it, just as the U.S. and their candidate Marc Brazin wanted for Haiti prior. All the typical preconditions came attached to the aid package, most notably a structural adjustment program that privatized Haitian-held industries, and opened up the country to foreign investment, ownership, and expropriation of profits.

    While the majority of Haitians were elated to “have their Papa back,” few could miss the new change. Aristide’s stances against neo-liberalism were greatly responsible for his initial election to power. The Haitian majority had deeply wanted to break away from their past. They had seen the best hope for that in Aristide and his development policy, which combined some neo-liberal elements with socialism and intense grassroots, participatory democracy. Now those hopes appeared dashed.

    Contention and Crisis

    Resistance and Creativity
    The “breaking” of the Haitian break with their past over development forms thus began a significant start to the current contentions in Haiti. Haitians perceive the development form they worked to bring about as endogenous, stemming from their consent, and directed toward their best interests. The other they perceive as non-endogenous, coerced upon them, and subversive to the very democratic revolution they gave so much to bring about. Aristide, as well as Rene Preval who held the Presidency during 1995-2000, could no longer carry out the perceived interests of the Haitian popular movements as before. Neo-liberalism tied to Northern power tied Haiti’s hands. In the midst of Preval’s term, he began to buck certain elements of neo-liberalism and the international aid regimes' structural adjustment packages, in response to popular demands. As he did so, the U.S. the same year led an international aid embargo upon Haiti. As Aristide entered again into office in 2000, he entered into a dual foreign policy of resistance and creativity that has sought to adopt neo-liberalism on some points and reject it for more participatory and nationalistic approaches on others.

    Funding Destabilization
    From the onset of the aid embargo, rising militancy and social organization occurred among the Haitian popular movements throughout Haiti. While the embargo remains to this day, Haiti has staged as a one-party dominated political system, with Aristide’s Fanmi Lavalas party at the fore. Fearing the outcomes of this, the U.S. has channeled millions into Haiti to fund conservative NGOs and a coalition of opposition parties, the Democratic Convergence. Convergence operatives are mostly former Duvalierists friendly to standard neo-liberalism who, most worrying to popular Haitians, advocate for the return of the Haitian Army in the name of “keeping order.” Best estimates indicate that the Convergence holds about 10% of support from Haitians, not surprisingly from primarily elite sector Haitians and neo-Duvalierists in the country. Most popular level Haitians see the Convergence as simply playing the system in Duvalierist fashion with the end-intent of re-entrenching themselves within Haitian State apparati, including the military, so they skim an extra living or two or more off the top.

    After mid-term elections in Haiti in 2002, Fanmi Lavalas retained a strong majority. In defiance of the OAS who oversaw the elections, and every objective observer, the U.S. declared several senate races flawed. To try to appease the charges, each Senator in question resigned, and the Senate called for new elections to fill their seats. In response, the Convergence has forwarded an ever-evolving list of demands, saying that until their demands are met, they will not participate in elections—a move that most in Haiti feel has no other aim but to wear down the Haitian popular movements under the poverty of the embargo, and turn Haiti into a U.S. client-State again.

    “Live Free or Die”
    All the while, the level of social and militant organization among Haiti’s popular movements has increased. In the name of George Bush, Jr.’s, “War on Terror,” the U.S. has placed troops along the Haitian-Dominican border. One immersion-journalist living in Haiti has made astute connections between the two and has tentatively asserted that the U.S. is quietly funding “Haitian Contras,” based in part on reported incursions of Haitians crossing into bastions of armed, rural peasantry in Haiti from the Dominican border.

    Because of the long experiences of Haitians with development from colonial and neo-colonial powers, and because of the U.S.’s current funding of destabilizing elements within Haiti, many in the country feel the country is on the brink of civil war. With the identity-giving message embedded in the consciousnesses of most Haitians, "Live Free or Die," which stems from the same call during the Haitian Revolution, the outcome could stand to be hard. As George Friemoth of the Marin Interfaith Task Force on Central America, a San Francisco-based NGO, observed after a grassroots-oriented trip to Haiti, "The Haitian people are angry--very angry--with the US for interfering in their transition to democracy. They are angry with the international community for promising aid and not delivering it. They are angry with their president and the government for making so many concessions and not meeting their many needs. They are angry at the Convergence for feeding into their greatest fear by advocating the return of the Haitian Army and setting the stage for the two coup attempts in July and December 2001, that required massive public mobilizations in the streets, not without some violence. They are extremely frustrated with the slow progress being made to improve their lives and realize democracy. Despite seemingly insurmountable obstacles they appear committed to defend their democracy at all costs."

    ----------------------------------

    Anthro holds copyright.

    [ April 08, 2003, 02:51 PM: Message edited by: Anthro ]
     
  6. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Anthro, does that mean you made it up?

    I notice you provide no sources, no footnotes, no documentation, and that is the reason for my suspicion. Anybody can make up anything, but can you source it?

    Furthermore, I am not going to disagree about America's trade policies. America is operating at a trade deficit and has been for years, importing more than we export. And it isn't President Bush's fault (though he is responsible for Normal Trade Relations for China) - I have always been against NAFTA and other trade policies - I believe all elected officials on the Hill have sold out the American people and are corrupt to the core, barring a couple.

    While the story of the pigs you related is sad, it is not quite as bad as Human Rights violations in China, our main importer, yet all the greedy politicians from both parties jumped on the NTR for China bandwagon and to **** with American workers.

    I find this incredibly hard to believe since President Bush has failed to place US troops along our Canadian or Mexican borders, even after repeatedly being asked to by many Americans, me included, since 09/11.

    PS - You are using up a lot of bandwidth with your lengthy posts. (It would be okay if they were pro-American, but...just kidding. [​IMG] )

    Can you put a link to your creative writings and tease us with a couple of paragraphs of cliff hangers? I'm only pointing this out before the Moderator of this Forum jumps on your case. [​IMG]

    PS: So, where did you do your residency ?

    [ April 08, 2003, 08:37 PM: Message edited by: SheEagle9/11 ]
     
  7. Anthro

    Anthro New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, ya know She Eagle, footnotes aint supported on the Forums here. :D

    But one can check out the following, which I think should cover most of the above:

    If anyone clicks on any links below, they might not open. You have to first remove the period at the end of the URL, and then refresh.

    Abbott, Elizabeth. Haiti: The Duvaliers and Their Legacy. New York: McGraw-Hill Books, 1988.

    Affairs, Council on Hemispheric. By Ignoring Island's Suffering, U.S.'S Frivolous Haiti Policy Invites Approaching Catastrophe. Council on Hemispheric Affairs, 2 June 2002. Accessed 16 Nov. 2002. Available from http://www.coha.org/Press_Releases/02-15-Haiti.htm.

    Collie, Tim. "Gangs: In Haiti's Slums, Protesters Turning to Violence." The Sun-Sentinel, 21 Nov. 2002, 1.

    Deibert, Michael. "Protests Rock Haiti Slum, Block Traffic." Reuters, 26 Sept. 2002.

    ________. "Roadblocks Paralyze Haitian Capital." Reuters, 12 Oct. 2002.

    Diederich, Bernard. "Swine Fever Ironies: The Slaughter of the Haitian Black Pig." Car-ibbean Review 14, no. 1 (1985): 16-17.

    Dupuy, Alex. Haiti in the New World Order: The Limits of the Democratic Revolution. Boulder, 1997.

    Farmer, Paul. The Uses of Haiti. 2nd ed. Monroe: Common Courage Press, 2003.

    Fawzi, Paul Farmer and Mary C. Smith. Unjust Embargo Deepens Haiti's Health Crisis. Boston Globe, 30 Dec. 2002. Accessed. Available from http://www.pih.org/inthenews/021230farmersmithoped.htm.

    Friemoth, George. "Haiti: U.S. Undermines Another Democracy." Marin Interfaith Task Force on Central America Newsletter, Spring 2002.

    International, Grassroots. Pig Parties. Grassroots International, 2001. Accessed 25 April. Available from http://www.grassrootsonline.org/what_pigparty.html.

    Ives, Kim. "This Week in Haiti." Haiti Progress, Sept. 11-17 2002, Vol. 20, No. 26.

    Kernaghan, Charles. Haiti after the Coup: Sweatshop or Real Development? The Na-tional Labor Committee Education Fund in Support of Worker and Human Rights in Central America, Accessed 30 Jan. 2003. Available from http://www.nlcnet.org/Haiticoup.htm.

    Liberation, Mouvement Haïtien de. "Bitter Cane." ed. Mouvement Haïtien de Liberation. New York: The Cinema Guild, 1983.

    Thoughts of a Rhode Islander in Haiti. 2003. Accessed 12 Feb. 2003. Available from http://haiti2002.homestead.com/About_Us.html.

    Miles, Melinda. Report of the Haiti Reborn/Quixote Center Delegation: Investigating the Human Effects of Witheld Humanitarian Aid, January 11-19, 2003. 2003.

    Pina, Kevin. Is the U.S. Funding Haitian "Contras"? The Black Commentator, April 2003. Accessed 3 April 2003. Available from http://www.blackcommentator.com/36/36_guest_commentator.html.

    Publishing, World of Information/Walden. World of Information Business Intelligence Reports, Haiti: World of Information/Walden Publishing, 2001.

    Ridgeway, James, ed. The Haiti Files: Decoding the Crisis. Washington, D.C.: Essential Books, 1994.

    Smith, Jennie M. "Constituents of Lavalas: The Rural Poor." In Haiti's Political Chal-lenges: Actors, Issues, Prospects, 6. Arlington, VA, 2001.

    ________. Where the Hands Are Many: Community Organization and Social Change in Rural Haiti. New York: Cornell University Press, 2002.

    Treger, Jim Ridgeway and Billy. Aiding and Abetting Mayhem. Multinational Monitor, 1994 1994. Accessed March. Available from http://216.239.39.100/search?q=cache:-m0SG8dmHP4C:www.intnet.net/pub/COUNTRIES/Haiti/AIDing.and.Abetting.Mayhem+peppadep+communism&hl=en&ie=UTF-8.

    Trouillot, Michel-Rolph. Haiti, State against Nation: The Origins and Legacy of Duva-lierism. New York: Monthly Review Press, 1990.

    Watch, Human Rights. Silencing a People: The Destruction of Civil Society in Haiti. New York: Human Rights Watch, 1993.

    Oh, and about the troops--it started with this: http://www.twincities.com/mld/twincities/4597348.htm

    I did internado in the Dominican Republic.

    [ April 09, 2003, 10:29 PM: Message edited by: Anthro ]
     
  8. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
  9. Hardsheller

    Hardsheller Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    2
    Anthro,

    You keep reading that stuff and you'll be well on your way to becoming a flamin' liberal - Political as well as Theological. :eek:
     
  10. Anthro

    Anthro New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    0
    So you have read those books? Interesting.

    And you have lived in Haiti for years and know about stuff there first hand, too? Interesting again!

    And you have expertise on this subject? Outstanding!

    Let's review just a few of the sources.

    Elizabeth Abbott. Yes, she is a PhD historian who married into the family of Duvalier operatives and was granted unprecedented access to the Duvalier family and the Haitian National Palace.

    Council on Hemispheric Affairs. A well respected foreign policy think tank.

    Tim Collie. Sun-Sentinel reporter assigned to Haiti for many years. Sme with Michael Diebert, except Diebert actually lived in Haiti for three years and during his reporting on the country

    Alex Dupuy. French-born sociologist and Haitianist schol for the last decade.

    Paul Farmer. A Harvard professor and physician-anthropologist who has lived in Haiti half-time for about 15 years.

    Kim Ives. Editor of Haiti Progress, a U.S.-based newspaper on Haiatian affairs. Similar with Melinda Miles.

    Kevin Pina. An immersion jounalist with 12 years experience covering Central America. Has lived in ha for the last three years.

    Jennie Smith. Former UNESCO worker, PhD anthropologist, lived in Haiti for around 7 years total.

    Michel-Rolph Trouillot. Haitian schola, PhD anthropology. Prof at U of Chicago

    Human Rights Watch. Nothing needs said.

    Come on, Hardliner. You shame yourself.

    You are being quick to speak and slow to listen (James 1:19), and forming an opinion before you even take a serious look, very little else.

    You have never so much as read seriously on this topic in your life, nor ever lived in Haiti for any serious length of time, nor do you speak a lick of Kreyòl Haïtien, or maybe a few sentances. In short, you have no or the scantest authority to so much as peep on the matter, and you know it, yet you did. Your spouting before truly knowing is a hardline pattern with you it would seem.

    BTW, if one wishes to actually learn about this topic and not just spout, this is an excellent place to start:

    http://www.markuswiener.com/reviews/ltoc.htm

    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1558762302/qid=1050001855/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/102-1777303-1489735?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

    [ April 10, 2003, 03:50 PM: Message edited by: Anthro ]
     
  11. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Anthro, I'm sorry, I just randomly picked one of your sources:

    Per Anthro: Council on Hemispheric Affairs. A well respected foreign policy think tank.

    & went to their web site. It only took about 10 seconds to find this:

    That said all I need to know - the view is from the left, seeming without apology. What a hateful & cruel thing to say about "Bush's White House." Just more Bush-bashing. Disgusting! For a "well respected think tank." :rolleyes:

    Also, you list quite a few academic sources - everyone knows the intellectual elite and acadamia have a socialist ideology. And so does the Black Caucus and so do Democrats.

    These are the people who are so concerned about Haiti, but continue to push for abortion on demand, murder of the unborn, and have made it part of their political platform. :mad:

    If the only sources you can provide are those from the left & none neutral, well, just forget it, you'll never convince me to see things your way. Sorry, you'll have to do better than that. And Human Rights Watch doesn't work either - I've been to their web site a few weeks ago to find out what they were doing about our POWs. No help there, just more America bashing.

    Objectivity would just have to be a criteria to provide a convincing argument. Guess I should have mentioned that earlier. :cool:

    And where did you say you practiced your residency?

    So, okay, nevermind. Nice try. I tried to be open minded to hear your side, but now, Back to my original post. Not that I don't care about the people in Haiti, but you haven't convinced me that the facts and sources as you present them are neutral and unbiased without some other hidden agenda.

    You have to get up PRITTY EARLY! [​IMG] ;)

    God Bless America. Best E-mail I ever received. [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  12. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Anthro, Just out of curiousity, did the Haitian issue come about as a result of NAFTA?

    TTTG (means: Too Tire To Google.) [​IMG]
     
  13. Anthro

    Anthro New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    0
    That is ridiculous. I actually think it is a Satanic lie that has been placed within popular Christian discourse to keep Christians, so many, from becoming educated so they stay marginalized in society. Reference C.S. Lewis's The Screwtape Letters. People in academia are all over the spectrum, from academics in Military Colleges, to Christian Colleges, to State Colleges (which do tend to have a left-leaning bias though there is representation from all sectors), to homosexual-oriented colleges. With the exception of the latter type of college, Christians can be found all over academia--in my experience, I have found strong Christians teaching at some State universities. I know, I have been in academia a long time. And there is much cross-sectoring among Democrats, as well as Republicans.

    An open mind? You read a few paragraphs and--a-ha!--that is from "the left;" so, it is time to close my ears. Oh, dear girl. Ever heard of critically evaluating a piece? I will display this with the very piece below.

    Haiti and NAFTA--nothing about it. The Haitian case is much the result of poor U.S.-policy stemming WAY back since the 1800s, when we would not even extend diplomatic recognition to the country since it was established via a successful slave revolt. Only when we needed Haitian cotton toward the end of the Civil War did we extend the recognition, and we made Frederick Douglass the first U.S. Ambassador to Haiti. The stream of poor policy has only continued to this day, as you will see more in this.

    This is true. However, not all democrats disagree with current Haitian policy, and not all Republicans agree with it. The author is implying that Democrats are monolithic on the issue, and he ignores the aforesaid Republicans in his analysis.

    The matter on the Bill is 100% true. Will deal with the "steeped in negativity" part below.

    The point on the loan withholding is 100% true. Same with the political polarization that our dear country is funding in Haiti via the IRI, with the exception that the IRI is now a non-profit organization and no longer a formal arm of the Republican Party. (I will deal with the "conspire" part below).

    Part of the U.S. reasoning behind the action is that Haiti has staged as a one-party dominated political system, with Aristide’s Fanmi Lavalas party at the fore. The Party holds the Presidency, and an 80% majority in the legislature, and most local level leaders are Lavalas. The Haitian popular movements are poised to keep a long continuance of this one party dominated system.

    Fearing the outcomes of this, the U.S. has channeled millions through the IRI into a coalition of eleven opposition parties, the Democratic Convergence. In the coalition, there are two well organized parties, as we in the U.S. might understand that. The rest are kind of piecemeal quick throw-together parties.

    While opposition in democracy is excellent on every count, the problem is that most in the Convergence are neo-Duvalierists. What that means is difficult to explain quickly, but Duvalierism is essentially a life and worldview whereby one gains their resources for life by feeding off state apparati.

    Hence, Duvalierist ideology is to entrench one's self into state apparati in most any way you can so you can feed off the sate. If you wonder why Haiti is the way it is today, you can point to the dictator Duvaliér and the Duvalierism he created in Haiti, and find out a HUGE reason why. See Troulliot, State Against Nation.

    Best estimates indicate that the Convergence holds about 10% of support in Haiti--support from other Duvalierists in the country. Most popular level Haitians accurately see the Convergence as simply playing the U.S. in Duvalierist fashion with the end-intent of re-entrenching themselves within Haitian State apparati, including the military, so they feed from the state. Like the Convergence are doing now and want to do even more by gaining power, Duvalierist that they are, Duvaliér skilfully played the U.S. for billions during his 30 plus year reign. He crushed most opposition parties with the tonton macoutes--oh, woops, except for one small one who he conveniently courted, the Haitian Communist Party.

    Why did Duvaliér court them? So he could manipulate the U.S. into giving him billions to not court them further. When money flowed, he stopped. When the money stopped, the courting started again. And he always kept a communist or two in his cabinet just for good measure so as to keep us wondering and tense. He thereby stayed in power at U.S. behest and funding, brutal and murderous dictator though he was.

    Where did most of the money go we gave to Duvaliér? Into his pocket and to fund his para-military terror squad called the tonton macoutes, who squelched opposition (note exception above) to Duvaliér by making blood flow: 100,000 plus lives. A stagnated country for 30+ years, etc. WE and international aid regime loans (that we control) funded the brutality and stagnations (part of which Haitians are still paying back to the tune of multiplied billions), not to mention his son's $2 million wedding (which hit the Guiness Book of World Records the next year) and his Ferrari, and MANY other things I will not get into. What do you think a LOT of Haitians think about us for this?--and yes, they know full well about it. Supporting Duvaliér was a policy carried out by the U.S. based on misassesmsents and misperceptions, which I explain below what I mean by that.

    So, we threw good money after bad then, and we are throwing good money after bad now. Here is one house that we funded through Duvaliér for a tonton macoute, which some from the Haitian popular movements destroyed conducting déchoukaj [uprooting] after the macoute died. Note the graffiti they put on the wall, depicting their thoughts about the macoutes. Not shown is the swimming pool, under which a torture chamber was found:

    http://www.character4success.com/image35.jpg

    http://www.character4success.com/image37.jpg


    http://www.character4success.com/deathtotonton.JPG

    (Beside, where the heck do we get off funding opposition parties in other countries, when that is patently illegal here, as it should be?).

    As far as the piece using the words "conspiring," that is sheer rhetoric. It overstates the case, and impugns wicked motives where they do not exist. While the administration obviously *plans* things, conjuring up the word "conspiracy" to describe it is just plain silly.

    The U.S.-Haiti policy is based not on "conspiracy," but upon MIS-ASSESSMENTS and misperceptions of the Haitian situation, plain and simple. We have a history of that, as history has shown us, but we do not learn very well. We do not go about assessing foreign situations as we should, and rely far too much on our U.S. citizen operatives who hang out, as USAID director in Haiti, Lawrence Harrison did half or more of the time, in the Olofson (elite Haitian hotel), and ground-level information from "assets"--for example, Haitians on ground who themselves see a nice opportunity for themselves in being a U.S. asset. Too often, their loyalty lies not much deeper than what they can get out of the arrangement, and they thereby much tell us what will most keep them AS an asset. MIS-ASSESSMENTS result, often grave ones. Instead, we need loyalist yet, honest and fair brokers--people getting out and living and moving among the people and learning them and what is going on deeply from the ground level. More accurate perceptions and assessments can thereby be made, and better policy can be formed. We do not have this in Haiti, and never have.

    Hence, if I were writing the above quote, it would state

    Or something like that.

    The current mis-assessments over Haiti are, in fact, "steeped in negativity" as the piece points out. Think of the types of information sources we rely on, as I just pointed out. The Bush administration THINKS it is doing right, but because of the mis-assessments, far from it.

    I agree with your take on the moral hypocrisy of the CBC. There is more going on though. The matter is that they have diaspora Haitian constituents who they represent and are responding to. That is what Congressional representatives do. Welcome to politics.

    The core matter in the piece, as well as the CBC or Human Rights Watch, is there is no rational reason whatsoever to discount the position of a group on one issue just because they take a position we may not agree with on another issue. And there is no rational reason to throw out the entirety of a piece, just because it uses overstating rhetoric. For mature Christians, such a thing is a displaying of the pinnacle of a closed, even childish, and Satanically influenced mind. For new Christians, sometimes God brings us through a stage where all we "drink" is His "milk," so that is different and acceptable for a season. BTW, there is no such thing on this planet as a completely neutral writing made by a human. If people were completely neutral, they would not give a rip and would not write anything at all, except in the case of doing it for sheer money, which means you are still not neutral because you are writing for someone else who is not. The idea is to know God and the Scriptures, and then realize that the fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge.

    As I show above, I read things critically--everything. If we require complete correlation of all beliefs, positions, and perfect language with someone or group before we interact and take value from what they do or say, or some of the positions they take, we may as well start hiding in Convents again with just our Bibles! [​IMG] Not funny is that Satan has effectively done this with us apart from Convents, as the opening quote of this post displays.

    She Eagle, I would not use any of my time doing all this except for my prayer that your admirable patriotism is not muddled with some very misguided idealism about some things based upon insufficient knowledge about them.

    [ April 11, 2003, 01:27 PM: Message edited by: Anthro ]
     
  14. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    Sorry, Anthro. Got better things to do than critically evaluate a piece from the left. It's basically the same rhetoric we've all heard for years.

    Besides, I've never claimed to have an open mind. [​IMG] At age 50 something, my mind is pretty well made up. And it's still pretty sharp, too, like a steel trap! :D

    And, I appreciate that, Anthro. I truly do, all the time you have put into your argument. But I am wondering if you are putting as much energy into contacting Congressmen and Senators who have the capacity for change? Or are you like me, embittered, and overwhelmed with sadness, that they have all, for many decades and for many Administrations, pretty well sold out the people they were elected to represent?

    I have no idealism except that I know, no matter what policies (either domestic or foreign), that our government has created for lo these many years, the American people are good.

    And just about any average American

    on any average day

    on any average street

    in any average city or town

    across this great land, would give someone in need the shirt off their back no matter what the weather. [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  15. Anthro

    Anthro New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ecc 4:13 Better is a poor and wise youth than an old and foolish king who doesn't know how to receive admonition any more.
     
  16. Hardsheller

    Hardsheller Active Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2002
    Messages:
    3,817
    Likes Received:
    2
    Anthro,

    The beauty of America is that everyone can speak about anything they wish to at anytime they wish to with or without any credentials or with or without any real understanding of the subject of which they speak.

    It's called Freedom of Speech. A basic American Right - something you'd obviously like for us ignorant peons to be denied.

    BTW I'm not the Hardliner I'm the Hardsheller - You are the Hardliner! :D
     
  17. Anthro

    Anthro New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    0
    You continue to shame yourself, and play the fool.

    You are completely wrong in your above assertion.

    The Supreme Court has always held there to be reasonable time, manner, and place and content restrictions upon free speech. Freedom of Speech is not held to be an absolute right, as you state it, nor should it be.

    For examples of time, manner, and place restrictions--and these are extreme examples I use to illustrate my point--you do not have the right yell "FIRE!" within a department store if there is no fire, nor do you have the right to sing your favorite song aloud during traffic court, etc.

    Examples of the content restrictions are that you do not have the right to despense medical or legal or other professional advise, etc., unless you have the properly credentialed knowledge. You cannot slander, or commit libel, or make false charges (e.g., "Freedom of Speech. A basic American Right - something you'd obviously like for us ignorant peons to be denied"), etc.

    Along the lines of these reasonable time, manner, place, and content restrictions, I was under the impression that this was a debate forum, not a spouting off and labeling forum.

    So maybe it would be a good idea to have two new new places for different content and the manner in which it is posted--two new Forums here at BB.

    I would suggest the first new forum be called "The Spouting Off Forum."

    The Spouting Off Forum would be for the folks who seem to be here mostly only to spout off and to express their zeal without knowledge, and who in other ways exhibit Solomon's definition of a fool.

    The second new Forum I suggest we call "The Labeling Forum."

    The Labeling Forum is where each argument lain out is supposedly won by simply attaching a label to it as rapidly as possible, and leaving that with that. It would be like a fun game for some folks whose emotions constrict their minds to thinking in such categories. Losers of the games would be determined by a list of taboo labels, such as "socialist," "anti-American," and the like. Winners would be determined by majority vote. If most on the board agree regarding the label assignments, then they themselves win--sort of like winning by pile-on.

    As for the present Debate Forum, it will be here and for those ready to make their transition from the Spouting Off and Labeling Forums into reasoned, logical, and intelligent debate.

    By following these suggestions, BB would enable posters to better find the place, the Forum, that is most in keeping with the actual content of and manner in which they post.

    [ April 12, 2003, 08:37 PM: Message edited by: Anthro ]
     
  18. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    [​IMG] [​IMG] [​IMG]
     
  19. Anthro

    Anthro New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2003
    Messages:
    311
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pro 9:12 If you are wise, you are wise for yourself. If you mock, you alone will bear it.
     
  20. LadyEagle

    LadyEagle <b>Moderator</b> <img src =/israel.gif>

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Messages:
    22,028
    Likes Received:
    1
    I Cor. 3:[18] Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise.

    [19] For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.

    [20] And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain.
     
Loading...