Brown is the right man

December 27, 2006

Dear Sir,

Please let me begin by saying that I am not a racially prejudiced person. There are times however, I do get myself into trouble with my own people when I may defend a white person. If that white person is right, I will defend that right, because God is on the side of right and I am afraid to go up against God. I am not suggesting that all white people are mischief-makers, however, history has shown us that white people in general dominate that mentality.

There are two prevailing attitudes that exist today. One is white superiority and the other is black inferiority. In order for peace to come between these races, attitudes have to change. White people have to stop thinking they have to rule the world and have people of colour serve them and black people have to stop thinking they have to be validated by white people and look towards white people for approval. This time in politics parallels the time when The Workers Association invited Dr. E. F. Gordon to speak for them to the powers that be. Dr. Ewart Brown is the voice we as people need for now. He is the right man, for the right job, at the right time. Power by nature does not surrender, you have to take it and then ask God to guide you and do right by all regardless of race, creed or colour. History has shown that that hasn't happened.

Dr. Brown is a wide awake man and when there is a hiss he will and should shoot it down. The hiss I speak about is the way a devil speaks. The devil (who by the way comes in all colours) or mischief-maker, would not come out and say something, he would just suggest it and wait for it to grow. That hiss is like a cancer and has to be treated. Sometimes treatment is painful and medicine has a bad taste, but what good is a doctor if he is concerned about the taste of the medicine and not the cure. Why should you fire at me and when I return fire you tell me to turn the other cheek? That's slave teaching. The law of justice is you reap that which you sow. No, I am not suggesting that black people put white people into slavery. What I am saying is black people need to get out of this "go alone in order to get along" mentality and white people need to get out of that white skin is superior mindset. The superior man is the one who is aligned with God's will.

SAYEED RAMADAN

Smith's Parish

P.s. Mr. Vesey talking about gaining trust. Given your history for the last 400 years it is we who should be watching you to see whether or not you deserve our trust.

Sustainable questions

January 2, 2006

Dear Sir,

Can someone please tell me just what does "Sustainable Development" mean in Bermuda? Because no definition I have read, appears to have anything remotely applicable to what Bermuda's definition is. The standard definition for the rest of the world is "meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs." Bermuda is just not getting it.

This Government and developers want to destroy one of the only large tracts of land left in Bermuda for a hotel. Yet another Special Development Order is going to be given for this new development, so Government is promoting this. Why? There are already three new hotels supposedly in the works, the new one in Par-la-Ville car park; one on the former Golden Hind property and one on the former Banana beach property. At least these would be built on already developed areas and would, therefore, fit in somewhat with sustainable development. But why do we need to plough up virgin land for another hotel just down the road? What about other existing plants? Lantana, Club Med, both stunning locations in less congested parts of the Island. Recycling these properties would be good sustainable development.

Who is going to staff all these new hotels? Certainly not Bermudians. Just take a look in any of the restaurants in town and the hotel restaurants all over the Island, you are lucky to see one Bermudian staff member. There are Italians, Eastern Europeans, Asians, Indians, to name a few nationalities, but certainly very few Bermudians staff in the hotels are just the same, fewer and fewer Bermudians. Simply put, Bermudians just do not want to work in the service industry, besides, even if they did, there are just not enough Bermudians to staff all these properties.

So, I ask again, who is going to staff these four new proposed hotels? Foreigners, that's who. Hundreds of them, maybe thousands. They can't all be housed in staff accommodation, a large percentage of them are going to need apartments. They will be in the lower income bracket and they will need cheap housing, competing against half of the Bermudian population. This is going to mean developing more and more land for housing. How many more vehicles will be on the road? What about the strain on the healthcare system, the hospital and God forbid if they need a dentist. What about the strain on the education system. Hundreds of them passing through TCD and you think its a nightmare now? How on earth is South Shore Road going to cope with all the additional traffic of three huge hotels within half a mile of each other. What about the extra power that Belco is going to have to generate? More pollution. What about the trash and sewage? Where is all that going to go?

Can someone please tell me how sustainable this is? Its madness. Its insane. Its certainly not "meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs". The new definition for sustainable development in Bermuda should read: meeting the needs of the greedy, ignorant, short sighted, selfish, power hungry, self projecting few, whilst completely compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Forget our children and grandchildren, there will be nothing left in Bermuda for you but a polluted, concrete jungle with a few beaches that will probably be private, with access rights owned by some foreign corporation and be off limits to you anyway. Bermuda, please wake up and smell what is left of the roses and make this Government stop paying lip service to what real sustainable development means.

SAD IN PAGET

Dr. Brown was wrong

December 28, 2006

Dear Sir,

I'm sorry but I humbly do not understand why all this energy is put into defending Dr. Brown's actions. Right is right and wrong is wrong. He was wrong. I am a black Bermudian woman and yes, there was slavery and there is racism but that does not justify his behaviour. I understand that slavery and racism may be the spark that lit the flame but our own black government has kept that flame burning. I consider myself a typical black Bermudian woman and I humbly ask of you the following questions:

1. I was sexually abused as a child by a number of men in our community and have spoken to many of women who have suffered the same. This is still happening daily to our children. I'm not saying that it is happening in the black community alone but it is something that the black community refuses to do anything about. Your sons, Your fathers, your uncles, your husbands, are having sex with children! Do you know that statistics show that anywhere from 70 to 90 percent of prisoners both men and women were sexually abused. Now, please somebody tell me what that has to do with white people?

2. My daughter's father is a no show in her life. He constantly makes excuses for his lack of responsibility and this is a common feature in the black community. Many women are like myself and are continuing the tradition of having babies for no account men. What does that have to do with White people?

3. My sister has a very respectable job and makes decent money. Her and my little niece are sharing a room with another woman and her young son, in a three-bedroom house that houses at least five other people. Now what does that have to do with white people?

Whether white people apologise for racism or not — who cares! I don't get what does that have to do with these crucial issues going on daily in the lives of black people? Dr. Gibbons and the like have gotten an upper hand financially because of the family they were born into — again, who cares! Black people voted the PLP government in almost eight years ago and yet they are still using White people as scapegoats. I don't get it!

Please explain what the ultimate goal is for those who say that they are fighting for Equality by constantly bringing up the slavery and racism issue? What does that ultimate goal look like? I thought that is what we voted the PLP in for?

I would think that after eight years with a black government we would be well on our way. So that should tell you something about sincerity of the people we have voted in. Women of Bermuda I implore you to take charge of your lives politically because it seems to me that these black men that we are voting in are putting so much energy into getting even with the white man at your and your children's expense. Slavery was a terrible part of our history and I would rather us spend our energy on the protection and education of our children, teaching them to honour our ancestors with dignity not anger or bitterness (no matter how justified some make think it is). Like this Maya Angelou quote says: "Your crown has been paid for. Put it on your head and wear it."

THESE MEN HAVE GOT TO GO

California

Sensivity training needed

December 30, 2006

Dear Sir,

The debate continues as to whether Minister Derrick Burgess took the appropriate action with regard to the former chef at the Elbow Beach Hotel. In your editorial dated December 27, 2006 you state "Security threats directed towards the Premier are hardly on the order of magnitude of those directed towards, say, the President of the United States". If you believe that the President of the United States is a more important person than the Premier of Bermuda, then you must believe that all men are not created equal. While the President of the United States may be the head of state of a larger country than Bermuda, I do not believe that his life is any more important than that of the Premier of Bermuda. However, I am aware through your editorial comments that you have little respect for the present Premier, Dr. Ewart Brown hence I am not surprised at your statement.

You and others in the community continue to state that the Chef's comments were only meant to be a joke and that those of us who were offended by his "joke" have over-reacted. Maybe you and others who continue to defend Chef Reynolds know him on a personal level and therefore can ascertain that in addition to being a chef, he is also a comedian. However, I, and I'm certain most Bermudians, have never met the chef, therefore we do not know his personality. However, I believe his remarks were offensive and hence his presence in this country is undesirable. In my opinion the fact that he resigned his position rather than make an immediate public apology for his offensive remarks speaks volumes to me.

There are others in the community, in particular, Mark Pettingill and Mr. Wayne Scott who stated on the Shirley Dill Show on Sunday, December 31, 2006 that the chef was not granted due process. According to my dictionary due process means: "An established course for judicial proceedings or other governmental activities designed to safeguard the legal rights of the individual." As I see it, the Chef was given due process in accordance with the Immigration and Protection Act which states: " The Minister, in considering any application for the grant, extension or variation of permission to engage in gainful occupation, shall, subject to any general directions which the Cabinet may from time to time give in respect of the consideration of such applications, take particularly into account (a) the character of the applicant and (b) the protection of local interests."

In this case, because the chef resigned from Elbow Beach, he would have needed a variation of permission to engage in gainful employment. The Act goes on to state that once a guest worker has terminated his employment, the Minister has the right to revoke his work permit immediately and have him removed or deported from Bermuda. Further to the aforementioned, I do not believe that any establishment in Bermuda would have hired the chef taking into account his offensive remarks regarding our Premier.

You also state in the same editorial that "to equate what he (the chef) did with terrorism is ludicrous". It is most unfortunate that in today's world terrorism is only associated with certain ethnic groups and geographical locations. However, according to my dictionary terrorism is defined as "the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature". As I have stated before, I do not know Chef Reynolds personally therefore I do not know his political, religious or ideological leanings. Certainly to suggest that he had put arsenic in the Premier's food is a threat of violence.

Recently it has been brought to the attention of the Bermudian public by Crime Stoppers the fact that there are two Jamaican Nationals who are on the island illegally, that is without a job and without permission to work in Bermuda. Crime Stoppers have asked the Bermudian public if they know where these two men are to report their whereabouts so that they can be deported. I wonder if you, Mr. Editor, and others in the community who have said that the chef should have been given time to settle his affairs, will make the same suggestion to the Minister of Immigration and Labour once these two men have been located. Will you suggest that they be given time to settle their affairs before being deported or do you think that they should be escorted to the airport by Immigration officials immediately after they have been located?

In your final paragraph you write "Instead, Mr. Burgess was attempting to add validity to what was an utter and total overreaction to the stupid actions of a man who was clearly immature and insensitive. But immaturity and insensitivity are the not the same thing as terrorism." It is my opinion that Bermuda needs mature and sensitive guest workers. There are enough immature and insensitive people who have a legitimate right to live and work in Bermuda.

LAVERNE FURBERT

Hamilton Parish

Editor's Note: 1. The Editor had never heard of, let alone met, Mr. Reynolds before this incident. 2. Ms Furbert completely misunderstood the point about the President and the Premier, which relates to their jobs and their value as people. The point was that any US President faces daily threats to his or her life. The Premier of Bermuda does not. But Mr. Furbert also ignored the editorial's caveat — that it only takes one madman to end a life, and as such threats against the Premier must be taken seriously. Ms Furbert believes Mr. Reynolds' comment was a threat, while the editorial stated that it was a joke, and that he had clearly neither committed the act nor intended to, and that's where we differ.

Buyer beware

December 29, 2006

Dear Sir,

I have had so many pleasant experiences shopping in Bermuda that I am always happy to "Buy BDA". Returns are generally no bother, and most of the staff I have dealt with always seem to want to bend over backwards to help. Unfortunately my expectations of good service were completely dashed over the holidays when I found out how aggressively anti-customer some retailers can be. Their sole objective seems to be "sell it and keep it sold".

My lovely and thoughtful spouse bought me a set of speakers as a Christmas present, which she thought I would love. Most often, she's the one returning things I've bought her for Christmas, however in this case the speakers were not suitable for what we had in mind for them. Back I trotted to the electronics retailer with a pristine box, untouched, unopened, unmolested and unused containing said speakers, thinking quite happily I should have no problem returning them and wondering what else I would buy. Boy was I in for a shock.

The clerk's opening salvo was a brusque "We don't take returns of opened items" before she even had checked that the box was unopened. After I protested strongly that it had not been opened, another surly clerk confronted me and helpfully blurted out "how do we know you didn't carefully open it up and then close it again and fix up the tape — I could easily do that if I wanted to!". After considerable discussion it was agreed the packaging was intact. Next, the first clerk snapped, "you won't get a refund, see ... no cash refunds, only a store credit". Fine I thought, whatever, just please let me get this over with.

She offered a credit for the full purchase price of $158. "OK" I said, thinking I could perhaps get a different set of speakers from them that would do the job, although I was now growing impatient as several minutes had passed and I had already had to argue my case. The clerk then took a call from her manager, leaving me standing at the counter for several more minutes. She came back to say she was taking a 15 percent restocking fee off the store credit. This was to add insult to injury!

The cost of returning my unopened gift? $24. And I am forced to use a store credit to buy something else there. Merry Christmas! I write this as a word of warning to the unwary shopper. Some retailers policies will come back to bite you. Check carefully when buying to ensure that returns are dealt with fairly. While the great majority of retailers in Bermuda treat their shoppers like gold, there are the others who will actively try to throw up roadblocks to returning goods you buy from them. My suggestion: If the returns policy is unfair and particularly if it requires you to pay a restocking fee, do not patronise that retailer. Find another who will treat you fairly, even if they might charge a little more. Do not put up with unfair treatment.

LINDSAY MCCANN

Somerset