Your mocking title implies agreement with this dubious and utterly unsubstantiated hypothesis.

At least Tagorda has the honesty to phrase this as a question rather than a given, and qualify his remarks by saying "I doubt that Kerry's statements alone are responsible for the surge in violence; the country, after all, has many deep-seated problems." To say the least.

In addition, the link to Kerry's comments was initiated by General Heleno, a UN peacekeeper in Haiti, but he has now recanted his claim.

Still, I could see how the catchy title was hard to pass up on...

Actually, he didn't recant - as anyone reading your own link can see for themselves:

"Heleno avoided returning to the question. "The subject is closed! I've said what I've said", he said.

After the conversation with the BBC, the Foreign Ministry [Itamaraty is the name of the building that houses the Foreign Ministry in Brasilia] released a note with statements by Heleno. "As a soldier I'm absolutely apolitical. I'm sorry my words were misinterpreted and misunderstood. They were taken out of the context in which they were said. I didn't intend to interfere with the internal politics of any member state of the United Nations. My statements were mine and don't reflect the position of Brazil or the United Nations", the message said."

You may agree or disagree with Tagorda - but calling his post "utterly unsubstantiated" is the sort of transparently dishonest spin I've to expect from you - and the reason I've lost all respect FOR you.

The only value your presence here provides is a negative example of left-wing bad faith that I'd be hard pressed to prove on my own without your continuous example.

Not too bright to start riots over the words of someone who's not even been elected yet, especially since the election outcome is so uncertain. But I really doubt the Haitians are that dumb. If something like this happened in response to Kerry being elected on Nov 2, I'd be more inclined to believe the link, but as it is it smells like political spin on the part of Heleno.

Actually I'd doubt it even if it were blamed on something Bush said. Unless the statement was 'I have just authorized the invasion of Haiti, it will take place in the next 24 hours.' or something along those lines, I can't see anyone starting a riot over meaningless press conference ramblings.

My reference to this theory as being dubious and unsubstantiated is not directed at Tagorda alone, since AFAIK he is only one among several (you included) who seem to be propogating the idea.

But to the point, what are the "recent reports" (note plural) that you are referring to here? One man's comments, which he has since partially retracted by saying "They were taken out of context..." and "I didn't intend to interfere with the internal politics of any member state of the United Nations"? Doesn't sound like he is standing by what he said. But nevertheless they have been propogated as The U.N. blames John Kerry for the deaths of 50 Haitians by your Right wing brethren.

Do these multiple references to the same comment count for individual reports on the topic in your mind?

And then there's your title sarcastically referring to Kerry as "Mr. Diplomacy".

Don't think people aren't on to your game, dude.

But who is being dishonest here, really?

Perhaps "recant" is not the exactly correct term, I'll agree with that, but to base your diatribe against me on that alone is rather weak I'd say.

You sure hate it when someone points out your biases, though, don't you Joe? Might I suggest you take a deep breath and count to 10 before launching into a counter-attack every time I point this out. Or just admit it and get on with your work.

Joe,

There has been no linkage provided by anyone including Heleno. All he did was express his opinion with no substantiation. It doesn't even rise to the level of hearsay.

Consider what Heleno said three days before his remark about Kerry to the same news agency that :

[Reporter] We have a news agency report here from Washington, USA, which says that the United States accuse supporters of the deposed president of Haiti, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, of using violence to destabilize the government and obstruct the work of the international troops to restore order in the country. At the moment, are the Brazilian troops redoubling their efforts in relation to this security issue? [Gen Heleno] That is correct, we have established some strongholds in strategic locations throughout the city, with small-scale patrols and light patrols who are able to take rapid action. It is not possible to define whether these groups are Chimeres, who are the supporters of ex-President Aristide, who were armed at that time. It is difficult to say who is a Chimere and who is a bandit, but the actions of these small groups end up causing the population to live in fear.[my emphasis]

So three days before Heleno makes his remarks he can't even be sure who is commiting these acts. Haiti has a literacy rate of slightly over 50%. The infrastructure for their basic needs has been devastated, to say nothing of the communications infrastructure. What evidence other than Heleno's comment is there that something Kerry said seven months ago has even been heard by most Haitians?

Heleno is frustrated, his command is understaffed, he's been through a few hurricanes (which don't exist in Brazil) and he's seen misery in Haiti that he would probably not see nearly as widespread. He was angry and blew off some steam. Absent anything else that's all there is to this.

Nice, Joe. Thought you were done making a fool of yourself after the last French fake-quote fiasco.

Apparently not.

Yeah, Joe, Brazilian Generals get so frustrated by their first hurricanes that they lash out at the man who might be the next President of the United States utterly without any foundation for the comment or any consideration for what its impact might be on Brazil or his career. He could just as easily have popped off at Bush or Ashcroft.

Riiight.

Where's your proof? Where's the linkage? It's just one man's opinion vented in a moment of frustration.

Again, it doesn't rise to the level of hearsay.

Ce chien ne chassera pas.