Lessons from history

July 12, 2008

Dear Sir,

It is ironic how history seems to keep repeating itself. When will our leaders ever learn?

I am alluding to the story in Saturday, July 12's Report From the House headlined "Dr. Brown defends Tourism Office redundancies".

Paragraph two reads:

Responding to uproar from long-serving Bermudians set to be replaced by Americans, the Premier and Tourism Minister told the House of Assembly: "Compassionately disrupting the lives of a few, in a plan to better serve the masses, is what good political leadership is all about".

Isn't this exactly what was said and done in the name of Tourism over 50 years ago when the forerunner to our modern day Tourism Department decided that they needed Tuckers Town private property to benefit the masses?

I can just hear them saying: "Compassionately disrupting the lives of a few, in a plan to better serve the masses, is what good political leadership is all about". I can only assume that this Premier has not learned the lessons of history.

A PROUD BERMUDIAN

Devonshire

A nasty system

August 5, 2008

Dear Sir,

Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to respond to article written by Mr. Al Seymour entitled "The Case for Conscription".

At the outset it must be stressed that the article was rather sententious, sophomoric and was merely an opinion. As such it lacked substance being based primarily on anecdotal rather than empirical research.

As a consequence there were a number of inaccurate statements made as well as blatant contradictions which are to be expected due to the aforementioned. They will be dealt with accordingly although space does not allow a full rebuttal.

The first contradiction and probably the most obvious is Mr. Seymour's assertion that the issue is made more complex due to politics being inserted. Politics have always been a part of the equation as this present system was imposed upon the people of Bermuda in 1965 by politicians the result being a certain segment of society becoming victims without any recourse. Let's not fool ourselves into believing that conscription just fell out of the sky so to speak.

Then to really illustrate inconsistency the writer ends the article imploring the Government to look at the issue long and hard in an effort to do what is best for the country. If the issue is made more complex by the insertion of politics how will engaging more politicians solve the problem. It would appear that the problem is not politicians being involved but rather politicians being involved who support the abolition of conscription.

The next contradiction concerns discipline. According to Mr. Seymour "discipline has slowly been eased off the stage" and the Bermuda Regiment is the last bastion for the island". What stage would that be? What research was conducted in order to arrive at that conclusion. Oh yeah, several young men who were "turned around" by the Regiment. What about the innumerable amount of others that were victimised to varying degrees? Certainly their opinion matters. What about the many who have been corrupted by being exposed to certain elements unique to the Regiment? (What happens during R and R while overseas )

It is a known fact that what one considers to be discipline another considers to be abuse. Furthermore in a democracy one has the right to live an undisciplined life if that is their choice. This is why citizens can overeat, drink excessively, refuse to bathe, and engage in sexual activity which others would consider inappropriate. That is their choice and as long as they are not breaking any laws who are we to demand that some government institution should step in and discipline them. Is this the same government system that they have been in for the first eighteen years of their lives? And what about parents? Isn't it their duty to instill discipline in their children not the states.

And when you consider that it is a random process of selection that is used it makes this argument even more ridiculous. Why should young men, many of whom are far more disciplined than the officers themselves, or Mr. Seymour for that matter, be subjected to such a hostile environment which exists at Warwick Camp.

They should not be as nothing justifies forced labour or coercion of any kind under any circumstances as it blatantly violates the human rights of those unfortunate enough to be selected. To his credit the writer appears to have enough sense not to argue this point opting instead to dismiss it as irrelevant or not applicable due to Bermuda's size.

Such reasoning is totally irrational as it attempts to justify an oppressive system due to a lack of numbers. In other words young men in Bermuda are not entitled to the same rights as other young men in other jurisdictions because our population does not allow it. That is ludicrous seeing that certain human rights are inalienable and are not contingent on a population reaching a certain numerical criteria in order to insure that it's citizens enjoy those rights.

These are free men who should not be subjected to any governmental "discipline" particularly in light of the fact that it is government itself that needs discipline not a certain percentage of males selected randomly. Certainly the writer is not naive enough to believe that government officials have higher morals and ethics than the general population. Especially in light of recent revelations.

That being the case how can anyone seriously defend a system which "disciplines" only a very small minority of it's population while everyone else enjoys the same human rights enjoyed in other countries. It is foolish to suggest that the answer to the supposed decline of discipline in society is forced labor which allows undisciplined officers to treat citizens like chattel.

The Bermuda Regiment is anything but a disciplined organisation and the evidence to support that assertion can be found throughout Bermuda as literally thousands of young men, and their parents, bear testimony to that fact. How could any right thinking person possibly equate being subjected to profanities, vulgarities, and insults with discipline?

If that is the case then many rappers are owed an apology seeing that they have been harshly criticised by decent people concerned about the social ramifications of their music. Yet we are to believe that that same filthy language when directed toward young conscripts will make them better citizens. Does Mr. Seymour incorporate this approach in his own dealings with others on a regular basis? If so why not? After all if it is so effective why not expand it into other areas in an effort to make Bermuda a better place.

Conscription is nothing more then a nasty system which allows nasty people to do nasty things to others with impunity. It is nothing more then state sanctioned abuse of power and legalised bullying that has resulted in an untold amount of young men needlessly suffering. What is best for Bermuda is that this most diabolical system be abolished as soon as possible. Then we can talk about discipline and an armed force that the country can be proud of as a people.

LARRY MARSHALL Sr

Devonshire

Thanks to medics

August 6, 2008

Dear Sir,

On Sunday, July 27, my wife was startled at seeing me having a seizure next to her and she had to react immediately.

I wish to extend my sincere gratitude to all who took or are still taking an active role with my gradual recovery/recuperation. This experience is frankly, for anyone, "a traumatic experience" especially when they're not properly medically trained. So I commend the team on duty that morning, of July 2008, when 911 responded. My wife was "walked through" the correct procedure one must take while waiting for an ambulance to arrive.

I would at this time like to take the opportunity to extend my apology to a particular male nurse on duty in the ICU when I started coming around … He had possibly feared for his life. I am sorry sir/nurse. I was not aware that during this time in ICU I had been temporarily paralysed, and while unable to move, I was still making (what I thought) sense of some of the things been spoken about me while sedated.

This is a period, though not responsible, I do feel extremely embarrassed about and I pray that you can find in your heart of hearts a way to forgive me. Once again, thanks to all who have been and are overseeing my recovery.

RAYMOND RAY

St. George's

Letter was wrong

August 7, 2008

Dear Sir,

Once again your letter-writer Pat Ferguson has shown her ignorance (and I mean that in the kindest of terms) of governance, politics in general, and the Westminster system in particular. When I read her latest letter to you dated July 9 and published on August 5, 2008, I thought of the adage "it is better to be quiet and thought of as a fool, then to speak (write) and prove to be one".

In her penultimate paragraph Ms Ferguson writes "The PLP leadership needs to be changed for the survival of the Island's future. In 1998 people voted for a change, but they did not vote for all of the "change" to go in the pockets of the selected few." Maybe in her next epistle to you, she could go into more detail about the "change" that is going into the pockets of a selected few. If Ms Ferguson has evidence that there are a few people pocketing change as a result of policies initiated by the PLP Government she needs to make a report to the Police. Pocketing change that does not belong to the person who is doing the pocketing is considered stealing and certainly the Bermuda Police Service is anxious to put a stop to criminal activity on the island. However, I know, and the rest of Bermuda should know, that Ms Ferguson does not have a shred of evidence of "change going into the pockets of a selected few".

Also in her penultimate paragraph Ms. Ferguson writes "This Government is definitely not about you or me. It is all about themselves and we are only their stepping stones to achieve their goals, which is to get as rich as they possibly can, as fast as they can". Once again, I ask Ms. Ferguson to elaborate and tell us the people how "This Government" can get rich by simply being the Government. Maybe she knows something the rest of us don't know. As I see it, most members of the government, and in this instance I mean Members of Parliament, are/were all hard-working members of the Bermuda community who had already attained "The Bermudian dream" before becoming Members of Parliament. That is to say that majority of PLP MPs already owned their homes and had bank accounts before taking their seat in Parliament. However, there are the odd one or two members who do not lay claim to owning property, although they must have a bank account in which their parliamentary salaries are deposited. I wish Ms Ferguson would have named at least one of the members of Government who has achieved his/her goal by getting rich since the PLP came to power.

In her second paragraph Ms Ferguson writes that she is "surprised at the silence of the Finance Minister, Paula Cox…" . Once again Ms. Ferguson has shown her ignorance of governance and politics. Finance Minister Cox is one of the least silent Members of Parliament. It is the Finance Minister who delivered the Budget Speech in February 2008 on which all other Government initiatives are dependent.

At least once a week, Finance Minister Cox is updating the public on initiatives through her Ministry that will benefit the average Bermudian. However, it is quite apparent that Ms. Ferguson has no understanding of governance or politics, if she did, she would know that no Minister could spend more than is allocated to him/her in the budget. She should also know that Minister Cox is an astute politician and an honest broker and to accuse her of allowing "obscene spending" is an insult to Minister Cox's intelligence and commitment to good governance.

Space does not allow me to comment on Ms Ferguson's letter paragraph by paragraph, but I would like to encourage Ms. Ferguson to widen her circle of friends and acquaintances so that she could have more balanced conversations. I would also like to suggest that she not trust "street talk" as gospel.

LAVERNE FURBERT

Hamilton Parish