Alleged attack by "chimeres" on Haiti's National University - December 5, 2005: Part One

• Report rights infringement
• published: 06 Jul 2016
• views: 23

Read this account of the incidents this day and compare it to the video: The siege which was witnessed by those at the Fondation Connaissance et Liberté (FOKAL) nearby, who wrote the following of it: "On December 5, 2003,...we were witness to, and at certain times lived, the terror and horror of that day...We saw groups of pro-governmental militia, called chimere or OP (Popular organization), regroup in front of our building, visibly preparing to attack the student demonstration scheduled for that day. We saw their arms displayed, ranging from fire arms, wooden and iron sticks, rocks and other objects capable of hurting and killing. We saw their chiefs, men and women, also armed, equipped with walkie-talkies and cellular phones, organize and give orders to the commandos that were to attack the students. We saw the police, not neutral as has been reported, but acting as accomplices to the militia. On several occasions, during that day of horror and shame, the police opened the way for the chimere’s attack and also covered their backs. We saw children aged between twelve and fifteen, some in school uniforms, used by the lavalas militia to throw rocks and attack the students with fire arms." Or consider this second account full of hyperbole written by short-lived dictator and former military strongman Avril Prosper in his ironically titled book "Justice Versus Politics in Haiti (2001-2004)": "On December 5, 2003, a historical event happened in Haïti that rang the knell of the soiled, rotten, gangrenous, degrading political regime of M. Aristide. Vicious thugs, at his service, having violated the esteemed premises of the University of Human Sciences, had beaten to death several students, wounded professors and even broken the legs of the Dean, Pierre­ Marie Paquiot. These cruel acts had exacerbated the feeling of repulsion that was already smoldering within the population against M. Aristide himself." Does it still ring true given the test of time? More to come.