'Dangerous situation'

February 8, 2005

Dear Sir,

Relative to the letter by Gavin Shorto of February 2, 2005, I can verify that his account is accurate, as I lived in Rosemont Ave. and was present throughout the proceedings at Belco, trying to film the situation and in fact saw Mr. Shorto in the midst of the melee ? a very dangerous situation, but he remained throughout reporting.

The purpose of this letter is to recall an incident that remains in my memory to this very day.

The account that Dr. Barbara Ball went to the aid of P.c. Ivan Davies was not what I observed.

I recall that Ivan was lying on the ground his head resting in a two foot circle of blood, as his skull had been crushed by a golf club I think.

And I thought he was dead.

There was a picture in showing Dr. Ball standing near P.c. Davies waving her arms and this photo cane be accessed in the archives of .

The actual person who rushed out with a first aid box was an employee of Belco, a Mrs. Emily Moss, possibly the wife of the Postmaster General Moss.

Amazingly this lady paid no attention to her personal safety and rendered what aid she could before all the ambulances came to take the Police who had been felled by an assortment of weapons and as many were personal friends I wanted to assist putting them into the ambulances but was told I could not as it might expand the violence.

I did not think that the outstanding bravery of Mrs. Moss has ever been formally acknowledged, to the best of my knowledge which is too bad as I and everyone there were very impressed at this courageous humanitarian act.

There is no doubt in my mind that the decision to order the few Police to disarm the picketers was wrong but that was not the fault of the Police but the fault of the Bermudian Inspector from Somerset who gave the order, the Police obeyed and mayhem resulted. That trouble was predictable one could point to the fact that all the weapons were brought in the first place, and I had thought that it was those weapons, not the stolen police truncheons that were ordered to be removed.

When the police riot squad arrived headed by Inspector Doyle (not Boyle) they confronted a hostile crowd assembled at the Serpentine Road entrance and were ordered to disperse and when they did not the order was given to fire the tear gas, where upon the crowd ran up towards the Green Lantern Restaurant.

Tear gas is usually fired at the feet of a crowd to avoid doing injury. If the tear gas was aimed at the group at entrance to Rosemont Ave. that would have included me as that is where I was standing.

Jim Gardner's legacy

February 7, 2005

Dear Sir,

Please allow me the opportunity to thank the numerous anonymous friends of the late James V. Gardner who contributed so generously to the Anglican Cathedral Organ Fund in his memory, following his recent death.

Jim played a significant part in the life of the Cathedral, apart from being a regular member with his family, he acted as consultant architect to the Cathedral Vestry for a number of years.

Efforts to restore and improve the 60-year-old instrument are continuing, with the hope for someday also erecting the organ screen which was never built when the present instrument was installed in 1936.

We are grateful to the family of Jim Gardner and the many friends who responded to their request to donate to the Fund in lieu of flowers. It is our hope that with such support, the Cathedral will boast a fine instrument befitting this beautiful and historic place of worship.

Taking us for granted

February 3, 2005

Dear Sir,

Lt. Col. David Burch's article in today's makes one wonder! He is saying that those against Independence are making a "universal declaration" that they do not trust themselves or their fellow Bermudians.

I am afraid that Lt. Col. Burch has the bull by the tail. The Bermudians that he is referring to, have made this "universal declarations" do trust themselves ? it is the Government that they do not trust, otherwise, they would all be for Independence.

Lt. Col. Burch and the Government are not giving Bermudians credit in their judgment as to what is better for themselves and their homeland. Apparently, they can see that Independence at this time is not in their, or Bermuda's, best interest.

We supposedly live in a democratic society, so why is it that because some, or I should say many, do not want, or have no interest in Independence at this time, simply because of the state of affairs in this country, and because they have lost faith and trust in the current Government, that Lt. Col. Burch thinks this is wrong?

Bermudians are not so stupid that they do not think about what has transpired since this Government has been in power.

A person has to be a complete idiot not to see through the scandals and cover-ups and unethical conduct that has plagued the PLP Government almost since day one of its tenure. The PLP are making the same mistake that the old UBP made, and that is, taking the people for granted. People get tired of nonsense, and when people get tired, they get irritable and react in an irritable manner.

I would like to know how did Col. Burch come to the conclusion that racism plays a part in people not wanting Independence at this point? Is he calling the 85 percent to 90 percent of blacks that have signed these petitions racist? If he is, then he is way off base. I, being a petitioner, am amazed at the response of the number of people, and I mean blacks who are for and against Independence, willing to sign, to exercise their right to have a say in the process of this country. These people cannot be called racist because they want a democratic process so that they can have a say as to what goes on in their country.

When Lt. Col. Burch talks about scare tactics of the UBP, he is looking for excuses to further his own cause. He refuses to see that people are now thinking for themselves. People are tired of the fast-talking, pull-the-wool-over-your-eyes type of politician that dished out promises that were never kept over the years. But, unfortunately, we do still have poor uneducated souls who still have to be told to "sit or stand"!

On another note, with the Premier's poll rating at 32 percent, can you see a bank CEO performing at 32 percent and holding his job? I don't think so! He would be out of the door in the blink of an eye. Nobody could hold on to a position with such a low rating, but here we have the Premier, the leader of the country, holding tight to his Premiership with this deplorable low rating ? and Mr. Scott Simmons, spokesperson for the PLP stating today on one of the talk shows, that the Party is behind the Premier! Wonders never cease. The honourable thing for the Premier to do would be to resign ? but then I forgot! No one in the PLP resigns, that is, with the exception of Renee Webb, who did do the "honourable" thing.

Diatribe doesn't help

February 4, 2005

Dear Sir,

Lt. Col. David Burch's aggressive diatribe on the subject of Independence, reported on the front page of your valued newspaper on February 3, was neither constructive nor helpful with respect to basic principles of individual rights, democracy and of the right to free expression.

As a start, perhaps Lt. Col. Burch should look up the Dictionary's definition of "Petition", "Referendum", and "Democracy", and read the most important legal statements ever made on the subjects of freedom and individual rights laid out in the United States' Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights.

The Collins English Dictionary defines "Petition" as: "a written document signed by a large number of people demanding some form of action from a government or other authority."

The Chambers Dictionary defines "Referendum" as: "the principle or practice of submitting a question directly to the vote of the entire electorate" and "Democracy" as "a form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people collectively, and is administered by them or by officers appointed by; the common people; a state of society characterised by recognition of equality of rights and privileges for all people."

"The contest for ages has been to rescue liberty from the grasp of executive power" (Daniel Webster). "Government is not reason; it is not eloquence; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master" (George Washington).

Under Independence, it is vital for the sake of citizens' freedoms and rights that the power structure of Government have checks, balances, financial limitations, and a strict separation of powers, to reduce the excesses of power-hungry and spendthrift politicians.

Under Independence, accountability, transparency, an independent Judiciary and a non-political Police Force to maintain law and order become essential if the seeds of dictatorship are to be quashed.

Under Independence, because of the danger of Government becoming too powerful and squashing individual freedoms, there should be enshrined in the Constitution a legal citizens' Right of Petition leading to a binding and conclusive Referendum on major issues. "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance", said Thomas Jefferson.

It should be obvious that a Petition signed by the people leading to a Referendum is the purest form of democracy. Col. Burch is against this expression of free will in Bermuda.

He brands it as racist and strives, thus, to promote racial tension as a political weapon. He must think Bermudians are stupid not to see through his obvious one-sided ploy.

He even goes so far as to say that a General Election is the only way to go so that "elected" politicians, not the people themselves, can make all the decisions. He forgets that Government is the employee of the people: and it is the majority of the people whose direct vote should always be the final word.

Mr. Burch was quoted as saying that the International Business community should "butt out" of the discussion on Independence, in spite of the fact that its views were requested by Government in the first place.

The International Business community is the bread and butter of Bermuda's economy. His language was impolite, unconstructive and completely against the interests of Bermudians and Bermuda's future.

Whether Bermudians want Independence, with all its obvious inherent risks, or not, the issue should be decided not by politicians but by the people themselves by way of a free-choice YES or NO Referendum.

And, before Bermuda ever goes independent, it needs a completely re-vamped Constitution with new, effective checks and balances, and a Voters' Bill of Rights to ensure that the people's voice can always be heard at any time during the five-year dominance by the few politicians in power.

MICHAEL G. MARSH

Smith's Parish

A false freedom

February 3, 2005

Dear Sir,

I believe your forum offers a wonderful opportunity to debate the pros and cons of Independence and this letter is my modest contribution for your consideration.

The following independent Caribbean countries subject their citizens to currency taxes and controls on outflows: Bahamas, Jamaica, Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago, Dominican Republic and Haiti.

The following "dependent" territories do not have such restrictions on the free flow of capital: Bermuda, Cayman, Turks and Caicos, British Virgin Islands, all of the Dutch Antilles (St. Maarten, Aruba, Curacao), all of the French Antilles (St. Marten, Guadaloupe, Martinique), Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands.

In other words, Caribbean countries which have opted for Independence tend to keep their citizens hostage by preventing them from freely using their money as they see fit.

In practical terms this translates into such things as not being able to send your children to the best US schools despite having the money, not being able to travel freely or reside abroad for an extended period, not being able to seek to the best medical care available, and generally giving up many freedoms which we presently take for granted.

In other words, Independence is a false freedom and is not worth it, unless of course you want to be Bermuda's first Prime Minister (which, incidentally was originally a derogatory term used to describe Sir Robert Walpole, a First Minister).

BORN BERMUDIAN

Pembroke

'They are people too'

February 7, 2004

Dear Sir,

I am glad that Mr. Monkman, the Permanent Secretary for the Ministry of Health, took up my challenge to him to spend a day in a wheelchair. Now he knows the problems that Physically Challenged members of our country must face day after day. These are real problems.

It is a pity that the House of Assembly or the Senate were not in session and he had to meet the Minister or a Senator, as those building are definitely not accessible.

Mr. Editor, I wish Mr. Monkman could also experience the problems faced by the Mentally Challenged persons who have lived in a home with their caregivers for over 20 years. They have put all their trust and faith in these people, only to be torn away from them.

Sir, five clients were taken from Hope Homes when the rest were moved to Lefroy House campus, four of them are dead. Now the Ministry want to move the others? These people are the silent people, but they hurt just like you and me.

To Mr. Monkman, I would like to say, the world of the challenged is no different from the world of the able-bodied people.

If they are treated the way you would like to be treated, then there would not be a problem. You see, "They are people too".

I do look forward to seeing a change in how we treat our people.

YVETTE V. A. SWAN

Warwick

'Couldn't care less'

February 10, 2005

Dear Sir,

It would appear that we were right in assuming that the Police crackdown on traffic offenders which started a few months ago would indeed be just "a flash in the pan" and now there are no Police to be seen anywhere, and the chaos on the roads is just as bad as it ever was.

If you spend a few weeks off the Island the first thing you notice when you come back is just how bad it really is, and by far the worst offenders are those travelling on two wheels. It's got to the point that when they come at you on the offside of the road they look at you like they have a right to be there.

There has to be Police on the roads constantly, and if that can't be down then cameras have to be installed all over the Island.

The penalties for these "couldn't care less" drivers has to be the severest possible, without exception, otherwise things will never get any better, and more lives will be lost.

SEEING IT AS IT IS

Pembroke

A bit high handed?

February 10, 2005

Dear Sir,

Could someone please explain to me how Hamilton Corporation has the power to rent certain spaces in certain car parks to certain individuals, and THEN dictate to those individuals who can and can not park there?

This does seem to be a bit high-handed, and I'm not sure that it's even legal. It's like renting a house from someone, and then having the landlord tell you who you can and can not have living in that house!

This query was brought on by my wife's boss, who rents such a space in a car park close to her office. The boss has to be away on business quite often, but the Hamilton Corporation says that my wife can't park her car in the boss's vacant and otherwise unused spot, for which the boss is paying through the nose on an annual basis?

To paraphrase the vernacular of the day, "That sucks"!