I write to express my concern with regard to your headline on Thursday March 16 -- "Court hears of `horror' sex attack on two expat women''.

Since when do we identify victims as expat or local? Since when does anyone care whether the two women attacked were non-Bermudian? I am certain that we do care that they were attacked. Would you have written "two black/white women were attacked'? I think not.

Could the reason that you print such detail be that your newspaper chooses to fan the flames of division in our community? DISGUSTED NON-EXPAT Who to hate? March 20, 2000 Dear Sir, Once wealth is evenly distributed amongst those deemed worthy of the distribution, what then? A fresh plan.

One plan might be to create more wealth. That would certainly be a good plan.

That would ensure there is more wealth to be distributed amongst those that deserve it. Good idea! Placating people who no longer deserve it is nevertheless a concern. They don't seem to go away. What can be done with them? Problem.

Reorganise them. What a pain. They are so annoying. Why don't they just go away? Perhaps if there's enough hate, they will go away anyway. Hate them collectively. Have rallies! Good plan.

Normality is knowing who to hate. As long as you know who the enemy is, there is something to fight for. Keep up the fight, more money. Good plan.

Take any group of five people and split them into two. It doesn't work! You need fractions. There is no way to split any group, club, association, society, or establishment, into two. So why try? It's so we know, without doubt, who to hate. You know whom to hate, don't you? Hate them together and defeat them. Living off other people that way; serves them right. Run them right out of town. Good plan.

OK, they're gone.

Who do we hate now? What's the plan? Any ideas? STUART LUNN City of Hamilton Kids deserve better March 21, 2000 Dear Sir, I, as a parent of children at St. George's Prep School, am very concerned about the situation that has been bought to the attention of the press in the last couple of days.

I am not claiming St. George's Prep is any better than the other East End Schools, but the education they are providing children there works and is producing results.

My son is in one of the present two primary one classes and is already reading, writing, counting to 50, telling the time and doing simple additions (thanks to great teachers).

I would like to see as many other parents that wish to, have the opportunity of such a great start for their child. If 28 sets of parents made the decision to apply to the Prep, why deny them the right to want what they feel is best for their child.

Thirteen parents applied to East End Primary, so it only seems logical to allocate the class to meet the demands of the parents. I, as a parent, feel I am capable of judging what suits my child's needs as I am sure these other parents are.

How dare the Education Minister downplay the results that the school is attaining. This is an insult to our dedicated teachers and to our children also. Why put these children through literacy tests if no attention is paid to the results? If the school has got the equation right and produces well educated, well behaved students with good moral, social and racial values, in my opinion they should be encouraged and supported by the Government -- not restricted and cut back.

We, as parents, need to fight to get the best start for Bermuda's next generation and I feel that St. George's Prep School can and is providing this.

Don't let out children be used a political pawns. They deserve better than this from their "peoples'' Government.

J. BURROWS St. George's An arrogant assumption March 20, 2000 Dear Sir, I write in reference to the letter signed "An Average Bermudian'' contained in your March 17 issue.

To that gentleman, your attempt to help people grasp the various issues in the ongoing ex-pat/Bermudian debate was a good one, but you've done yourself a disservice with one clearly subjective opinion that cannot be substantiated and thus has no place in the exchange of perspectives.

To wit, in your fourth paragraph you state that "...expatriates who come to our country are not those who would be flying high in their own countries. We attract an average type of person...'' Where do you get off casting negative opinions of anyone's career aspirations or potential. Further, do you not realise that you've also insulted Bermudians? As you raise your highbrow to that, anyone could infer from your comments that an "average'' expat is still better than any Bermudian. Now that is not true.

People are recruited and then invited to work in Bermuda because there is a need for a skill and experience set. I can only speak of management level individuals (though perhaps you speak of everyone), but everyone I know and work with made a conscious decision to step out of satisfying career paths to spend a few years in Bermuda.

Not everyone has a primary objective of being a "high-flyer'' -- most of us have been there, and we don't need it, not because we can't do it but because we choose not to.

Further, most of us enjoyed a much fuller lifestyle where we were -- homes we owned for instance. Your comments suggesting we improved our lifestyle have little basis in fact other than possibly being true for the small percentage of ex-pats whose companies pay for all of their expenses of living here.

Maybe that is at the root of your anger on that point -- we have a choice! When we leave here we can return to our native country or for many of us, go to other countries where our skills and experience are valued and for which we get in return a wonderful place to be with a family (though it will be tough to top Bermuda). Do you envy that? Until Bermuda doesn't need our experience and skills because it has developed its own globally enlightened job force, there will be expats here.

Don't get hung up on comparing Bermudians to expats -- we don't compare ourselves to you. Your attention should be focused on the education of Bermudians.

For the amount of money poured into tourism (good luck), Bermuda could be sending a couple of hundred of its bright young people on full scholarships to overseas schools and helping them get work experience overseas that complements their education until such time that they're ready to take on the challenges of working for Bermuda.

And don't get me started on the lack of trade/vocational training for young and old -- talk about where Bermuda should be completely self-sufficient! Good luck Bermuda, and to you, Mr. Average Bermudian. The majority of we expats will continue to help develop and coach our Bermudian colleagues to take over when we leave but please, don't collectively bash us anymore.

OBJECTIVE REASONING Paget Resistance is patriotic March 23, 2000 Dear Sir, I read with interest the letter written by someone calling himself "The Eight Dwarf'' that appeared in your March 22nd issue.

I applaud the writer and agree that some form of strike by the business community is in order. I disagree, however, with withholding our contribution to (Bermuda) society.

This would disadvantage individual Bermudians who are innocent of the imposition of the harmful work permit restrictions and workplace regulations.

Further, it would hurt us as well.

We live a better life by being in a happier, healthier and enriched society.

Going on strike in the workplace abrogates our responsibility to our clients, shareholders and fellow workers, many of whom are Bermudian.

I can't think of any specific action we can take to effectively protest time limits on work permits and long delays and uncertainty in granting of permits for important employees short of moving jobs off of the Island.

Interfering with the implementation of CURE is another question. I advocate civil disobedience. I encourage all employees to refuse to supply their employers with a racial designation or to be "creative'' in their self-characterisation.

Employers should refuse to submit CURE documents or send them in with sections dealing with race related questions left blank. If enough employees and businesses join this strike, government will be unable to implement the programme.

My company will ignore the CURE filing as of April 1, 2000. If fined, I will refuse to pay. Further I pledge personal funds to reimburse the individual fines of up to $5000 each levied on the first 20 predominantly Bermudian owned companies fined for refusing to file or for filing forms with incomplete or deliberately confusing information.

All they will have to do is let me know that the fine is a financial hardship.

I encourage other ex-pats and Bermudians who care about the future of Bermuda and can afford it to join me in making similar offers.

To cooperate in the implementation of the CURE regulations is to assist in the destruction of the Bermudian miracle. Resistance by Bermudians is a courageous, patriotic act.

Resistance by ex-pats is not only an important step taken in self interest, but also an action taken on behalf of those ambitious, hard working Bermudians and their families who will be the true victims of the collapse of commerce on this Island.

WILLIAM H. WILLIAMS CEO, STW Fixed Income Management Ltd.

Taxing semantics March 28, 2000 Dear Sir, Over the past few weeks, we have read in The Royal Gazette about a so-called "tax loophole'' that is benefiting international insurance companies based in Bermuda.

My understanding is that insurance companies such as Ace and XL are making very little on the insurance premiums that they currently charge US clients.

By repatriating the capital held by their US subsidiaries to their head office in Bermuda they can book any investment income from this capital on the books of their Bermuda subsidiary and thereby avoid paying US taxes on this extra income.

I have some difficulty viewing this activity as a "tax loophole''. It is a legitimate and appropriate business decision made by companies that are not headquartered in the US.

One of the basic tenets of US foreign and economic policy is that capital should be able to move freely from one country to another unhindered by regulation and taxes.

In fact, the International Monetary Fund insists that countries have benefited substantially from this free movement of capital and have managed to minimise taxes in high tax jurisdictions where they have operations.

Often, this tax minimisation occurs using controversial "transfer pricing'' of goods and services and sometimes it involves returning capital to the parent company so investment income can be booked in the US.

What is "good for the goose is surely good for the gander''? If US based companies can use so called "tax loopholes'' to reduce their taxes in other countries, why shouldn't non-US companies use so called "tax loopholes'' to reduce their taxes in the US? Minimisation of the cost of doing business is surely a legitimate goal of all companies operating in a free market environment. One of the largest expenses of companies operating worldwide is taxes.

Taxes are no different than material or labour costs. Each dollar spent in taxes is a dollar lost to the bottom line. If a company such as Nike chooses to move its manufacturing operations to South East Asian countries because of lower labour costs, companies such as Ace and XL have every right to set up shop in Bermuda because of the favourable tax climate.

There is nothing wrong in this; in fact their shareholders should applaud their wisdom. Unfortunately governments seem to believe that they have a "divine right'' to taxation. As the world becomes more international in nature they will discover that such is not the case. Just as companies compete between themselves for business, governments may actually find themselves competing for taxes.

Over the last 20 years, organised labour in the US tried to prevent the movement of manufacturing operations outside of the US by urging the imposition of punitive import duties.

Similarly, we can expect the US government to try to impose taxes on the so-called "inappropriate movements of capital'' from the US. Unfortunately for the US government, if it imposes this tax, it will be held up by every country seeking financial aid as a reason why it should similarly impose capital controls and taxes on the movement of capital across its borders. Now that sounds like chaos! The reason that I am writing is to urge you not to use the terms "tax loophole'' and "tax dodge'' when writing about this issue. This is language that the US is using to pursue its own questionable interests. The fact is, it is neither a loophole nor a dodge but a totally appropriate business action for a company that is not based in the United States.

FAITH, HOPE AND CHARITY City of Hamilton Job loss hits Bermudians March 24, 2000 Dear Sir, One year later. Same insurance company. More redundancies. Can you guess who has been made redundant? Only Bermudians of course. Let's see who they hire to replace them. Any bets it will be more foreigners. Stay tuned.

APPALLED Pembroke