Respecting the square

July 3, 2009

Dear Sir,

I am writing this letter to congratulate the Corporation of Hamilton on the completion of the beautiful new Wesley Park on the corner of Wesley and Church Streets.

While it is very pleasing to the eye and it seems what was intended was to brighten up a rather dreary corner of the parking lot it has, unfortunately, already become the new home for a certain group of men who, whether they are homeless or not, should not be allowed to remain there. There are already empty liquor bottles laying around, camouflaged in brown paper bags and burnt out cigarette butts on the ground.

My hope is that seating is not put in this park as it will only become a magnet for the mischievous and this does not leave a wonderful lasting impression on anyone, especially for tourists.

Another concern that I have is that the position of the walk and railings on the Wesley Street side. To actually cross the Zebra crossing, one has to step out onto the road as the wall has been built on either side of a lovely tree and blocks access to the crossing from directly in front of the sidewalk. It is rather difficult to explain without actually seeing it for oneself. I only hope that no one is injured at this junction as a result of such poor planning.

I would like to add one final note … I just took another walk to the Wesley Park at about 4:45 pm to admire the Chesley Trott sculpture and was happy to see that someone from the Corporation of Hamilton has cleaned up the empties and cleaned the cigarettes off the ground and the hang-abouts are not there, for now. I imagine that they will be back later this evening. Who knows! They might also bring along their own seating!

NOT FOR THE PIGEONS

City of Hamilton

Premier’s bad example

June 26, 2009

Dear Sir,

I had the privilege of attending a Primary 6 graduation the other evening and heard an inspirational talk given by an invited speaker. He spoke to the graduates about living honestly, always doing the right thing and striving for excellence.

As I sat and listened, I thought how hard it is for me to reconcile in my mind this encouraging message with what is happening in my own island. I worried that if it is difficult for me as an adult to evaluate a message, look at examples around me and apply it to my life, how difficult it will be for young people to do the same.

I wondered how the Premier can be allowed to get away with what he has done “in the name of humanitarianism” when we lecture our young people constantly about doing the right thing and always telling the truth.

I am sure these same graduates hear the adults in their lives talking about the serious situation that the Premier’s actions, in going against the Constitution, has caused our Island and yet they are bombarded with the message about living honestly. If the leader of the country cannot abide by rules and does this in a secrecy, how are the young people going to make decisions in their lives with such an example before them.

SAD FOR THE YOUTH

Devonshire

He broke the silence

June 26, 2009

Dear Sir,

I attended the rally today at the House of Assembly. As the crowd was led through a minute of silence and a prayer, I noticed that on the balcony Zane DeSilva talked throughout the whole minute of silence and prayer. One does not have to bow ones head for silence and prayer but should show respect and be silent.

RESPECT

Pembroke

We need answers

June 24, 2009

Dear Sir,

If there was one good thing to say about ‘Dubya’ Bush, it was that with all the criticism and bad press he received during his presidency, never once did he stoop so low as to start calling his opponents names. He always stepped up to the podium, and no matter what his rhetoric, he recognised the fact that America was a great place and its people also, because having a difference of opinion, was what a democracy was about.

However, as we all know, that for all of his talk, all was not functioning democratically under his leadership.

That problem which America created, has now become a problem which Bermuda is debating.

Why? If we are to believe initial explanation, the Premier was reading the Washington Post and was so touched by the story of the Gitmo four, that he just had to reach out and touch someone, namely the President of the United States, to offer his assistance.

This in itself makes the particular article in question, required reading.

This man who had no sympathy when he displaced his own Bermudians in the New York tourism office, closed the seniors clinic ... this man was so touched, as to spring into action to save these people. Surely, that piece of journalism should be shared and read by all. I for one would love to have a read.

As we get caught up in all of the controversy, I have noticed that other questions arise.

My first is initial reaction by some, to the protest. I have to wonder, what was the mindset of those who only saw a colour issue. As a black person who attended, that was the furthest from my mind. However, as the issue was raised I have my own questions — if every time a white person has an issue or a complaint and it is dismissed or ignored under the cloak that it is racial, when do they get to air their concerns? Or do they ever get to be heard or will they only be heard if they are in agreement with a black majority or have the same complaint as a person of colour?

However, this is not the issue of the day. The issue is, that for some reason, these four men in particular, were supposedly trying to escape oppression in their own home country by fleeing to a war country and were picked up by Pakistani bounty hunters, handed over to the Americans after a fee was paid, accused of certain terrorists acts, allegedly cleared, jailed for eight years, freed and although they were cleared not invited to stay in the offending country, were rejected by several other countries, and by a stroke of luck and incredible journalistic prose, caught the eye of our honourable Premier and smuggled to Bermuda.

Smuggled, because for some reason this alleged act of humanitarism had to be kept a secret. Yet once they got here there has been a non-stop parading of these individuals enjoying our island.

Enjoying our island while we, who live here, have been once again asked to be understanding and trustful, because by their own admission, they are not terrorists.

Back in their own homeland, their families, whom they left behind while fleeing are held and will not be able to leave because of them.

These men get a free pass here while many who have worked hard and paid their dues are rejected and turned away. Who are these men really? Why do they deserve such a heads-up and our complete and unquestionable embracing.

What happens if Britain in its effort to find out the truth, uncovers something very questionable about the four.

The same way Dr. Brown snubbed Britain, it would be expected that Britain will do everything in its power to show Dr. Brown that what he did was absolutely careless, so of course their whole investigation will be more thorough than any done before.

Back to the problem at hand. If the whole problem is that it was not our problem to begin with.

To the Muslim community — had these men not been Muslims, would you care as much?

If you as a Muslim community want to help and fight for a cause, I suggest you read about the woman in Saudi Arabia who are constantly tortured, electrocuted and strung up by their feet for crimes of disobedience or opposition. Women who are beheaded, killed, kept in seclusion for disobeying husbands. Second-class citizens because of their gender. Read any of Jean Sassons books on Saudi Arabia and read of people who are truly deserving of humanitarian assistance.

Not four questionable men who fled leaving their families behind.

To everyone as a whole, let commonsense prevail. Dale Butler cannot be the only one who got it, on the hill.

Dr. Brown has been given many opportunities to show himself a man of the people. He has failed. A good leader is one who encourages inclusiveness and unity. A good leader also welcomes criticism as he realises that no man is infallible and we as individuals can learn from each other.

We do not need to blindly follow anyone. As individual thinkers we need to make up our own minds and know that we have the right to know the truth and the right to question what appears to make us uncomfortable.

For this we do not deserve to be ridiculed or called names.

For this, all we really need is answers...

RESPLICE FINEM

Pembroke

Murders in perspective

July 13, 2009

Dear Sir,

Thinking about recent events in Bermuda led me to wonder how bad violent crime in Bermuda had actually become over the years. I also wondered how the homicide rate in Bermuda compared with other countries. When I was growing up in Mangrove Bay in the 1950s and ‘60s, it seemed that murder and other violent crime was rare (although I have no data to support this possibly rose-tinted-spectacles assumption). One murder in a year, I think, would have been big news.

In this decade so far, between 2001 and 2008, the average number of murders (including manslaughter) a year has been precisely three (ranging from one in 2006 to five in 2008). (Bermuda crime statistics are available at www.bermudapoliceservice.bm/content/crime-statistics-archive. The site has no statistics related to drug crime, but these do appear in the Annual Reports, albeit not as up to date as the web site statistics.)

On the other hand, the Bermuda population has increased by almost 75 percent since 1950: from 37,400 in 1950, 42,640 in 1960, just under 53,000 in 1970, to around 65,000 today. Crime would naturally be expected to increase at least in part for demographic reasons.

The murder (homicide) rate in Bermuda is still, statistically, towards the low end of the scale compared with other countries, as the following table of selected countries indicates:

Homicide Rate per 100,000 Population (most recent data)

Iraq 89

Jamaica 49

South Africa 39

USA 5.8

Scotland 2.6

UK 2.0

Canada 1.8

France 1.6

BERMUDA 1.6

Belgium 1.5

England/Wales 1.4

(Statistics source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate)

The biggest increase in crime since the early 2000s in Bermuda has been for burglary, particularly from the home. This is probably consistent with, first, an increase in the number of relatively affluent households, and secondly, a growing inclination for the have-nots’ at the bottom-feeding depths of society to acquire money and property from the increasing number of ‘haves’ by ill-gotten means.

GWELLY ON THE BEAT

London, UK

Stop using our history

June 12, 2009

Dear Sir,

It appears from recent news, both in The Royal Gazette and the Mid-Ocean News, that the majority of the work that went into reconnecting the Natives of St. David’s Island to the New England Natives was done by St. Clair (Brinky) Tucker, who claims to be the “coordinator” and is publicly taking credit for it.

One article stated: “It was Tall Oak who collaborated with Brinky and others in instituting the Reconnection of islanders in Bermuda with cousins in New England, and the big reconnect festivals.” This is incorrect. Brinky had very little to do with the Reconnection. St. David’s Islanders worked, and he stepped forward to take the credit.

The Reconnection did not come about by “coincidence”. The history of the St. David’s Islanders was well researched on both sides, and presented to the Pequots in Connecticut at their community centre with documentation and photos. Five Chiefs from neighbouring tribes were also present. I personally invited them to come to Bermuda. My cousin presented me with Tall Oak’s phone number. She had met him earlier at a Native function in New England. I sent him my documentation, and personally invited him to come to Bermuda. I asked Brinky to house Tall Oak as I knew that he drove to Hamilton daily to work, and could drop Tall Oak at the Archives to do research.

While Tall Oak was in Bermuda, we decided to get a group of St David’s Islanders together to discuss a Reconnection. Brinky assumed the Chair – no one said anything since we were guests in his home. It has remained that way ever since February 22, 2002, and he has claimed to be Native since that date.

The St. David’s Island connection he asserts comes through his grandfather, Charles Griffith. However, Charles was not of Native descent; he was Welsh. Brinky’s family comes through Charles’ first wife. I know because Charles is also my grandfather. Myrtle Lillian Fox, my grandmother, was his second wife. It was Myrtle who carried the Native blood.

I publicly challenge Brinky to demonstrate his Native claims through genealogy, not verbal claims. If you state that you are Pequot/Wampanoag, prove it.

Brinky’s claims of being a St. David’s Islander are also false. In fact, he moved to St. David’s; he was not born there, did not grow up there, and did not attend schools there. How does he presume to speak for us? Brinky walked among us. We shared our history, and he has literally used it as his own.

It was my hard work and research that culminated in writing the programmes for the first Reconnection. I wrote a 47-page booklet explaining St. David’s Island/US Native history, worked with Wayne St. John and Carmen Welch to create the logo for the St. David’s Island Indian Committee, had T-shirts, caps, our flag made and designed/create the St. David’s Island Tapestry and wrote the Libation Ceremony. I suggested a wreath be decorated in honour of our ancestors and placed in Red Hole. I wrote a Proclamation opening our Reconnection Ceremony. I also made a Signature Quilt of our first attendees’ signatures that is now housed at the Carter House.

When it became obvious that the leadership of the committee had been totally usurped by the Tucker’s, one-by-one, the St. David’s Islanders dropped out of the committee, refusing to work with a man who was neither a born St. David’s Islander nor Native. The group has dwindled down to very few St. David’s Islanders and is now called ‘St. David’s Islanders & Native Community’ with membership commencing October 2008, and a 22-page Constitution. So much for a family Reconnection!

To the new committee – STOP using the St. David’s Island history to advance your Native-ness. Do your own research so you can be proud of your individual histories. It is not natural to step into another person’s genealogy and call yourself something you are not.

Our flag and the tapestry are copyrighted and should no longer be used by this new group. The tapestry was created to honor my parents and all St. David’s Islanders. Our Libation Ceremony was written as a programme to honour our elders and those who have passed. Permission has NOT been sought from me for its continued use.

Our ancestors are gone but we are here, still St. David’s Islanders with our history intact. We lived the life. We are not people to be exploited. Those who helped formulate a lasting memory should not be forgotten:

Arthur (Foggo/Fox) Pitcher (Stage/Bleachers)

Carmen (Fox) Welch (Secretary/Fundraiser/Elders Tent)

Maxine (Minors) Welch (Entertainment)

Simmonette (Minors) Andrews (Accommodations)

Beulah L.G. Foggo (Accommodations)

Edward & Dorothy Welch (Transportation)

Veronica Chameau (Publicity)

Christina (Millett) Lugo (Fundraising)

Tania (Minors) Hollis (Entertainment)

Stuart (Minors) Hollis (Publicity/Gombeys)

Anthony A.P. Paynter (Finance)

Harold & Juanita Millett (Dark Bottom Ceremony/Cedar wood)

Ian Pitcher (Bermuda Research/Security)

Eddie Lamb (Bermuda Regiment/Security)

Jean Foggo (Fox) Simon (Researcher-USA & Bermuda/Programs)

Tall Oak (Coordinator/US Natives)

Sue White Eagle Martin (US Research/Signature Quilt)

Allen Richardson (Master of Ceremonies)

Wayne (Minors) St. John (Graphic Artist/Musical Program)

Rev. Dr. Thomas Bauer (Chapel of East/Opening Prayer)

Hon. Mayor Henry Hayward (Proclamation)

Thank you Mr. Editor,

JEAN FOGGO SIMON

6th generation St. David’s Islander

Former Principal Researcher - St. David’s Island Indian Committee