On Tue, 15 Jun 2004 13:39:15 -0500, Dan Minette
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gary Denton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Killer Bs Discussion" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 2004 12:03 PM
> Subject: Re: Request for Proposals
<snip>
> > Panama is better, the family of a former dictator still runs the
> > country but they hold elections.
> >
> > I haven't noticed any changes toward right dictatorships under Bush 1
> > and Bush 2 except for turning against the former US supported
> > creations that went too far - Noriega and Saddam.
> 
> Why don't the data convince you? Are you arguing that its coincidence that
> there are far fewer military dictatorships in Latin America now than before
> the Cold War ended?  Right now, Haiti is the one I can think of....which is
> what you cover below...which I can get to.

We are talking about  Bush 1, Clinton, Bush 2.  I see no indication
that the Bush's were interested in overturning dictatorships except
for Panama and Iraq.  The rise of democratic governments worldwide has
been seen as a consequence of fewer conflicts, the rise of the
information age, the increasing scrutiny of bank accounts, and the
refusal of other countries to offer safe havens.

Why do you think increasing American military power has anything to do
with the decline of Latin American dictatorships?

> I won't argue with your claim about Noriaga, but I don't see the
> justification for your claim about Hussein. Andrew Paul made the same
> claim,  and I responded as follows:
> 
> "I would very much appreciate help in understanding how the US set up the
> Bathe party...or how we ensured Hussein rose in it."
> 
> I didn't see an answer from him on this.  If you could enlighten me on
> this,
> 
Always glad to help.

Saddam made a name for himself in 1959, when he led a six-man team to
assassinate Gen. Abdul Karim Kassem. Kassem had come to power the year
before, leading a coup against the puppet rulers of Iraq put in place
by the British colonialists. The murder plot failed, and Saddam fled
to Egypt, where he reportedly made contact with the CIA and helped
Washington's attempts to get involved in Iraq.

Kassem's 1958 coup put an end to a British-backed dictatorship. At
first, the U.S. government supported Kassem until he started buying
arms from the USSR -- and threatening to invade the small oil kingdom
of Kuwait, sound familiar?.

The U.S. aligned itself with Kassem's opponents, including the Baath
Party.  The CIA set up a command center in Kuwait to direct the
opposition. In 1963, the conspirators toppled Kassem--who was
machine-gunned to death and his bullet-riddled body displayed on Iraqi
television.

"Almost certainly a gain for our side," Robert Komer, a National
Security Council aide, wrote to President John F. Kennedy.

Using lists of suspected Communists and other leftists provided by the
CIA, the Baathists massacred an estimated 5,000 people--jailing and
torturing thousands more. Five years later, the U.S. reportedly backed
yet another coup that brought Gen. Ahmed Hassan al-Bakr to
power--along with al-Bakr's right-hand man, Saddam Hussein.

> > Bush 2 has even brought back all the old 'cold warriors' that Bush 1
> > ignored and has put heavy pressure, including removing one, against
> > the Americas governments not supportive enough of GOP positions.
> 
> >From what I read, Aristide was corrupt, lost popular support at home, and
> the US refused to use its military to support him.
> 
> > The Organization of American States is not happy with Bush 2:
> 
> That's fair enough.  I'm not happy with Bush 2, but that doesn't undo my
> claim.
> 
> > (AP) - Despite objections from the United States and Haiti, the
> > Organization of American States opened the way for an investigation
> > into the ouster of Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide.
> >
> > The OAS General Assembly also called for elections in Haiti as soon as
> > possible. But the debate over a probe into the coup went for hours
> > until the body on Tuesday night finally approved a resolution calling
> > Aristide's ouster unconstitutional and allowing an assessment of what
> > occurred.
> 
> Which seems quite reasonable.  I'm not arguing that the US was flawless in
> this; but I can sympathize with the unwillingness to use US troops to stop
> the rebels.
> 
> > Aristide accuses the United States of forcing him from office - a
> > charge Washington denies. A U.S.-supplied jet flew Aristide to the
> > Central African Republic on Feb. 29 as [- US armed] rebels advanced on
> > the Haitian capital of Port-au-Prince, and he is now in asylum in
> > South Africa after spending several weeks in Jamaica.
> 
> Is there any evidence that the US actually supported the coup instead of
> simply refusing to use its troops to fight it?  With all due respect,
> unsubstantiated claims by Aristide is not really evidence.
> 
> Dan M.

Common knowledge is that Aristide's opponents were financed, armed and
supported by the CIA.  The rebels had a long history of extensive CIA
connections. Their arms were current U.S. made and evidence they were
shipped from Florida.  Elements of the US had been very unhappy that
their financed opponent to Aristide had been able to only get about
14% of the vote in the last election. Once the right administration
was in power the CIA would move.

Let me see what I wrote about it:

EVIDENCE OF U.S.- HAITIAN REBEL CONNECTIONS 

Despite the rebels' sordid history, the FRAPH and its leaders have had
troubling connections to the American military and intelligence
services. For instance, Human Rights Watch notes that "FRAPH
reportedly was founded with CIA assistance and 'Toto' Constant, its
director, has repeatedly stated that he received regular CIA
payments." This was corroborated by Knight Ridder which reported that
Constant acknowledged he was on the CIA payroll. The current rebel
leader, Guy Philippe, who is "infamous for human rights abuses," was
trained by the U.S. military. And the NYT reports the rebels' "assault
weapons and crisp camouflage uniforms suggest they have outside
support." The Haitian Army and its National Intelligence Service,
which was disbanded after Aristide returned to power but whose
remnants are part of the rebellion, were agencies "created and
financed by the C.I.A. that committed acts of terror and trafficked in
cocaine." (For more, see Human Rights Watch's new report on the
history of some of the rebel leaders.) - Progress Report

Gary Denton Permalink on 3/1/2004 

LATER:

Christian Science Monitor - 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.

Some of the players in the current round are familiar from the
previous Bush administration. Also key is US Assistant Secretary of
State Roger Noriega - a longtime Aristide-basher - widely thought to
have been central to the departure of Aristide. He'll find it much
harder to engineer the departure of gun-toting rebels.

In 1991, when Congressional Black Caucus members demanded an
investigation into the US role in Aristide's overthrow, the first Bush
administration laughed them off, just as the administration is doing
today in facing new queries from caucus members.

Indeed, those questioning the administration about Haiti are being
smeared as naive and unpatriotic

...Some Haitian Rebel Guns Smuggled From South Florida

Roger Noriega behind Aristide Ouster? 

The departure of Haiti's Jean-Bertrand Aristide is a victory for a
Bush administration hard-liner who has been long dedicated to
Aristide's ouster, U.S. foreign policy analysts say.

That official is Roger Noriega, assistant U.S. secretary of state for
Western Hemisphere affairs, whose influence over U.S. policy toward
Haiti has increased during the past decade as he climbed the
diplomatic ladder in Washington.

"Roger Noriega has been dedicated to ousting Aristide for many, many
years, and now he's in a singularly powerful position to accomplish
it," Robert White, a former U.S. ambassador to El Salvador and
Paraguay, said last week.

Why was Aristide forced from power? 

"Believe it or not, if a vote was taken now, Aristide would get 85 percent."

Thanks to Flagrancy to Reason.

How the US Press Missed the Story

"The fact that the group in charge of Haiti policy today in the State
Department has been literally gunning for Aristide since before his
initial election as a champion of democracy in 1990 has been left all
but unmentioned by the US press."

The modus operandi of Noriega and company is unmistakeable: fund an
opposition, report every clash as repression against the population,
arm pliable thugs and mercenaries in exile, embargo the government,
precipitate acute crisis, play up the discontent of a hungry
population, and then happily leave it to internationalist liberals to
lead the charge for military intervention on humanitarian grounds.

Whiskey Bar on the story.

I doubt whether the media cares enough about Haiti -- or about a
couple of old fascists like Roger Noriega and Otto Reich -- to make a
honest-to-God scandal out of what increasingly looks like a
old-fashioned, U.S.-sponsored coup d'etat, albeit this time with
French and Canadian participation.

I keep having to add to the Haiti posts. Liberal Oasis on four
questions not answered and more Powell betrayals.

Particularly interesting is the Black Commentator piece from last
April, which may have foreshadowed today's events:

A few select members of [Aristide's] Lavalas party recently described
âwhat they view as the first phase of Washington's scheme for Haiti.

They defined its three major concurrent objectives as:

1) to create an opposition force capable of seizing power,

2) demonize Aristide and Lavalas within and without Haiti and,

3) separate the base of Lavalas from the leadership.

One good post among many on Haiti at Body and Soul.

The best way to get to all my links on Hiati is:

http://www.google.com/search?q=site:+elemming2.blogspot.com+Haiti&num=50&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&filter=0

Those don't mention the National Endowment for Democracy, which had
taken over some former CIA duties, by throwing money at opposition
parties and organizations to governments we oppose. They don't fund,
or aren't supposed to fund, armed rebels but supply the PR money and
organization and work to destabilize by legal groups.

Now the one's I pulled and posted above from my posts I think are
pretty common knowledge but the following is truly frightening:

Seven Congressmen Are Zombies! 

Weekly World News - At least seven U.S. congressmen are boot-licking
zombies controlled by Haiti's supersecret AIH intelligence agency, but
here's the clincher:

Nobody can figure out who they are because the living dead -- with
their shuffling gait, wrinkled skin and glassy stares -- are
indistinguishable from all the senior-citizen politicians on Capitol
Hill.

So says the FBI in a frightening internal report that suggests the
House of Representatives "could become a nest of zombies within the
next 10 years . . . and the American public would be none the wiser."

"By definition, zombies have limited mental faculties, no emotion, no
free will, and they are only able to function at the behest of voodoo
priests who control their every move.

Gary Denton  - Who would know? Maru

#1 on google for liberal news digest
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l

Reply via email to