I agree 100% with Benz. Haiti's development rests with Haitian leaders; if they can work in a bipartisan manner for the benefit of Haiti, the Haitian population will benefit and Haiti will move forward. Yes Bush/Clinton Embassy do have interest in Haiti but we can use that to our advantage to a certain extent; We just have to be selfless and smart about it. PUT HAITI and HER INTEREST FIRST. FORGET IDEOLOY!!!
Haiti's future does not depend on Bill Clinton. If Haiti's leaders have a solid agenda of development, it does not matter if he's there or not.
BENZ, get back to reality.
They can have all the solid agenda their little heart desire......but with Bill Clinton and the International holding the purse and the guns, it is the later's agenda which will take precedence.
Leaders with solid agenda is not for failed or occupied states.
and I like the "haiti's leaders" part...that's funny.
TERMINATING FORMAL PROCEDURE.......MARTELLY NAMED BY DECREE HIS FRIEND LAMOTHE TO BE HAITI'S NEXT PRIME MINISTER........DID HE EVEN NEED THE VOTE OF THE PARLIAMENT? SOME SAY NO!
Presidential Decree Names Lamothe Haiti Prime Minister
Saturday, 05 May 2012 10:24
PORT-AU-PRINCE , Haiti (defend.ht) - The head of state of Haiti, Michel Martelly, issued a presidential decree on Friday, following the ratification meetings on April 10 and May 3 by the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies, making the citizen Laurent Lamothe Salvador, Prime Minister of Haiti .
Here is what is written in the Presidential Order
Given the ratification on April 10 and May 3, 2012 respectively by the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies, the choice of president, Laurent Lamothe Salvador, as Prime Minister, in accordance with the constitution;
Whereas appoint the Prime Minister:
Article 1. - The citizen Laurent Lamothe Salvador was appointed Prime Minister.
Article 2. - A certified copy of this Order will be returned to the person.
Article 3. - This Order shall be published and executed for the purposes of law.
Given at the National Palace in Port-au-Prince, May 4, 2012, the 209th Year of Independence.
For those who accused Clinton of SABOTAGE in the past......what will be the result for Haiti whenever this Clinton governorship ends.
What will become of the current FAILED/NGO republic?????
Haiti's future does not depend on Bill Clinton. If Haiti's leaders have a solid agenda of development, it does not matter if he's there or not. In spite of that, I think his name and influence can be used to help.
But Bill Clinton is first and foremost an opportunist just like any other politician.
Personally I don't believe he has any ill will towards Haiti or Haitian people. In fact it may make him look good if there is some progress.
I stick to my opinion that the Haitian rice growers were purposely sabotaged when Clinton was in office. Not out of ill will but his backers wanted it done. So f&^%$ it. He did it. Didn't matter much to him.
Clinton doesn't have ill will towards Haiti. I agree.
Haiti is simply a money making machine for his foundation.
It's business, and like any CEO, he seeks to protect his nest egg.
To have a solid agenda for the future, WILL RUN directly counter to the NGO platform.
It is infrastructure vs Aid The Poor.
So Haiti is hamstrung, they must pursue an Aid The Poor path, and that means no infrastructure unless the Democrat's can be removed from power.
If you remove them, then USACE could enter Haiti en masse and real development begin.
But it always goes back to Washington DC.
Do not forget, that USACE had developed a comprehensive infrastructure plan for PauP by April of 2010.
But Obama pulled them all out before it cold be implemented.
It's not the Haitian leaders plan that matters, but whether you want to follow an Aid The Poor (Democrat Party) plan or an Infrastructure (USACE / Republican) plan.
I strongly vote the latter and 99% of the diaspora strongly supports the former.
Your position on "rice" has no bases in fact.
Imported rice has allowed Haitians to eat more if it than any other Caribbean nation.
Haiti's future does not depend on Bill Clinton. If Haiti's leaders have a solid agenda of development, it does not matter if he's there or not.
BENZ, get back to reality.
They can have all the solid agenda their little heart desire......but with Bill Clinton and the International holding the purse and the guns, it is the later's agenda which will take precedence.
Leaders with solid agenda is not for failed or occupied states.
and I like the "haiti's leaders" part...that's funny.
International community is not monolithic. Bill Clinton is not the only person in the world with money.
There have been other failed states. Look at Rwanda and how they took their development seriously.
There have been other failed states. Look at Rwanda and how they took their development seriously.
Rwanda was not a failed state. Rwanda had an ethnic dispute/war/massacre. Once that is settled......the country moves on.
You are confusing a country going thru a temporary crisis with a failed state.
Haiti is a failed state because it is stuck in a fail position......no government...no money....no resources....and no way out.
That is why it is under foreign stewardship.
Rwanda was not a failed state but Haiti is??? You can have your own opinion but not your own facts. Haiti is not in a good position but was NEVER in the position of Rwanda in 1994. Hard to tell if you're serious or joking...
There have been other failed states. Look at Rwanda and how they took their development seriously.
Rwanda was not a failed state. Rwanda had an ethnic dispute/war/massacre. Once that is settled......the country moves on.
You are confusing a country going thru a temporary crisis with a failed state.
Haiti is a failed state because it is stuck in a fail position......no government...no money....no resources....and no way out.
That is why it is under foreign stewardship.
Rwanda was not a failed state but Haiti is??? You can have your own opinion but not your own facts. Haiti is not in a good position but was NEVER in the position of Rwanda in 1994. Hard to tell if you're serious or joking...
I thought I clearly stated that the difference is between a country going thru a crisis as with Rwanda.......as opposed to a country in perpetual crisis where the state is powerless and has no way to get out of the hole...as in haiti.
Rwanda has internal resources and can be nursed back...................haiti does not have these resources and will have to remain a welfare/failed state.
The international agrees and that is why it is there running things....trying to keep the haitians from doing even more damage.
There have been other failed states. Look at Rwanda and how they took their development seriously.
Rwanda was not a failed state. Rwanda had an ethnic dispute/war/massacre. Once that is settled......the country moves on.
You are confusing a country going thru a temporary crisis with a failed state.
Haiti is a failed state because it is stuck in a fail position......no government...no money....no resources....and no way out.
That is why it is under foreign stewardship.
Rwanda was not a failed state but Haiti is??? You can have your own opinion but not your own facts. Haiti is not in a good position but was NEVER in the position of Rwanda in 1994. Hard to tell if you're serious or joking...
I thought I clearly stated that the difference is between a country going thru a crisis as with Rwanda.......as opposed to a country in perpetual crisis where the state is powerless and has no way to get out of the hole...as in haiti.
Rwanda has internal resources and can be nursed back...................haiti does not have these resources and will have to remain a welfare/failed state.
The international agrees and that is why it is there running things....trying to keep the haitians from doing even more damage.
Rwanda is a landlocked country with very few natural resources. You are making your own facts now. No one predicted that Rwanda would be on the road to development. And Rwanda was in much worse shape than Haiti ever was.
