End the smoke & mirrors

March 27, 2006

Dear Sir,

Please allow me space in your newspaper to express an opinion on the propaganda currently being spewed out ad nauseam by those who seek to promote the Bermuda Regiment. It was Goebbels, the P.R. instrument of the vicious Nazi regime, who once said: ?Tell a lie big enough and often enough and eventually it will become the truth.? It would appear that the Regiment supporters subscribe to this philosophy judging from the amount of time and effort they have expended in an effort to mislead the Bermudian public into believing that the current corrupt system of conscription actually has some merit.

Yet when one considers the abuses, inconsistencies and contradictions involved any logically thinking individual will not be swayed by the ?smoke and mirrors? display. Take for example the tremendous reports given on the recent camp in Jamaica. It would seem that the two-week camp was an overwhelming success judging from the information which the public received via the electronic and written media.

Yet it depends on what perspective a person is looking from which determines their opinion. See if the Premier is staying in a plush hotel while the conscripts are sleeping in bushes there will be a difference of opinion. If the Premier is wining and dining in the best of restaurants while the conscripts are eating cold food out of cans there will be a difference of opinion. If the Premier can come and go as he pleases while the conscripts are literally in a prison away from home there will be a difference of opinion. If the Premier enjoys a rather healthy salary which will increase by an astronomical 80 percent taking it to $200,000 while the conscripts are paid a meagre $2.65 an hour there will be a difference of opinion. So you see it basically comes down to a matter of perspective.

And to continue on that vein another contradiction emerges when it comes to drug testing. How is it that Parliamentarians refuse to pass legislation requiring them to be randomly drug tested but conscripts can be randomly tested? This is but another example of an individuals basic human rights being violated by this autocratic institution. And more relevantly, it resulted in a young man being incarcerated in a notorious prison which houses murderers and rapists simply because he failed a drug test. That this could happen to a young Bermudian man in 2006 is unconscionable. Then of course there is the dirty pipe water incident allegedly resulting in a physical assault. But hey it was a great camp according to all reports.

Yet strangely enough the Premier never himself volunteered for the Bermuda Regiment. As a matter of fact not one present parliamentarian ever volunteered for the Regiment. That?s right. Not one. Furthermore out of the few who were conscripted, not one ever lasted the three years. This means that every time a parliamentarian jumps on the bandwagon highlighting the benefits of the local conscription system, they do so not from experience or conviction but rather because they feel it is politically expedient.

How pathetically self-serving and opportunistic. It would appear that they are for the Regiment as long as someone else or someone else?s children do the actual service (sounds a little like George W.). This syndrome is most evident in our Premier who, according to the March 27, 2006 issue of said, ?parents could do very well by having their young people join the Regiment?. Just one question for the Honourable Premier who no doubt likes to lead from the front: ?When did you take your daughter to Warwick camp to enjoy the benefits you so often speak of??

Premier Scott served in the 1950s in a precursor to the Regiment, The Cadet Corps, which covered significantly more military and arms training than today?s counterparts.

A note of sympathy

April 25, 2006

Dear Sir,

On behalf of the Board of Directors and the staff of The Centre on Philanthropy, I would like to express our most sincere sympathy at the death of Mr. David Barber. There cannot be many men or women in Bermuda whose lives have not been touched, either directly or indirectly, by Mr. Barber?s selfless philanthropy. He made his donations to the non-profit organisations in his adopted land wisely and carefully, knowing that they would provide support, encouragement, solace and a safe harbour to so many of the island?s residents.

He often made it possible for many of these organizations to continue to function. Following the death of his beloved wife Mary, his only request in giving was to have her name attached to the gift. Mr. Barber?s philanthropy was testament to his belief in Bermuda and in the island?s people. While many are the richer for his beneficence, we are all the poorer for his passing.