has it never occurred to you that both jean dominique and kiben could have been machivelian spawns, used as means to a particular end. have you ever heard of killing two birds with one stone? can't the assassination of kiben be interpreted in terms of its immediate effect, that is the almost predictable turn-about of the canibal army? does one need to be a genius to know that the removal of kiben's heart would give the appearance of him being a victim of a satanic rite? and who is rumored to have engaged in satanic rites as evidenced by rumors of "tibebe nan pilon"? do you get what i am leading to? is it so inconceivable that the killings were done by some rogue elements of the opposition? you need to understand that many elements in the vocal opposition were not necessarily patriots fighting for a better haiti.
it is very probable that such killings were purposedly done for a particualar well-thought-out end that is the rebellion of the gonaivians, which is historically linked to almost every popular toppeling of every haitian government.
i have never said any insulting thing against mr baker.
it is not in my nature to disrespect and assassinate other people's character for political reasons..
i analyze people's motivation from a psychological point of view.
for instance, baker's business was not affected by the haitian crisis because its products are not sold in the local market, and his subcontracts from the american textile industry were never reduced due to the political crisis preceeding mr aristid's forced removal.
in other words, while the tax-exemption for merchants in the croix-bossale district may be justified, but one cannot justify tax-exemption to mr baker's unaffected industrial complex.
thus, it is unethical for him not to refuse the tax-exemption in a country that is in desperate need of internal revenues.
i have told you that i do not engage in such trivial things unless the writer is deliberately undermining the intelligence of the haitian populace.
one cannot claim that GNB was a popular movement, and contradict it by saying that the people are blind for choosing preval.
if that is the case, then GNB was never a popular movement, and thus its demands were illegitimate, and represented nothing more than a destabilizing force.
contradiction is the worse of logical fallacies.
i would not attack you personally.
i do not believe that most gnbists were bad individuals.
i am a lavalas supporter but i have always respected gerard gourges, gerard pierre charles, manigat and even hubert deronceray.
these individuals have a history of activism.
but when someone all of a sudden becomes social champion, i tend to use my healthy skepticism particularly when they are benefiting from tax-exemption and multi-million-dollar contracts.
