Inequality before the law

February 3, 2010

Dear Sir,

The renewed debate about Bermuda's Human Rights Act presents an opportunity to reflect on the words of Bayard Rustin. Rustin, Martin Luther King Jr.'s mentor, wrote:

"(T) he job of the gay community is not to deal with extremists who would castigate us or put us on an island and drop an H-bomb on us. "The fact of the matter is that there is a small percentage of people in America who understand the true nature of the homosexual community. There is another small percentage who will never understand us. Our job is not to get those people who dislike us to love us. Nor was our aim in the civil rights movement to get prejudiced white people to love us. Our aim was to try to create the kind of America, legislatively, morally, and psychologically, such that even though some whites continued to hate us, they could not openly manifest that hate. That's our job today: to control the extent to which people can publicly manifest antigay sentiment."

Rustin was writing 30 years ago in the United States. Today in Bermuda, people can publicly manifest anti-gay sentiment without fear of legal sanction. That inequality before the law is intolerable. It is time to fix the Human Rights Act.

ANDREW SIMONS

Pembroke

Yes, Haiti matters

February 8, 2010

Dear Sir,

The time was 1 p.m. on Sunday January 24 and I was at the Miami airport heading back home to Bermuda after 12 days of back-breaking humanitarian work in Haiti. I had not slept or bathed for 36 hours and so I decided to use the Admiral Club at the airport to take a shower, get some decent food and to gather my thoughts. On my way to the Admiral Club I picked up the recent Newsweek January 25 edition to read. It caught my attention because it had a special feature on Haiti on the front page. I had been disconnected with the world during the time spent in Haiti; except for sporadic cell phone usage, there was no connection whatsoever with the outside world. So this was going to be an opportunity to catch up on the world's response to this massive humanitarian catastrophe.

The first article by John Meacham, "When Soft Heart Makes Smart Policy", was a compelling piece in support of humanitarian intervention. There was another article by Lisa Miller titled "Does God Hate Haiti"... this was a shocking title, I suppose knowingly so to attract the readers.

Then another one by US President Barack Obama himself "Why Haiti Matters" and one more by former US President Bill Clinton, calling for everyday people to participate in the reconstruction efforts. I was anxious to read them as I was sure to find great analysis and philosophical input; however, it was the pictures that got to me first. Having been there in person seeing the sheer devastation and broken human spirit, I was able to face all of it with an enduring heart and a determination to help save what could be saved. Through it all I did not cry, but now that I was away from it all and looking at the pictures, I found it hard to hold back my tears.

Why? I asked myself. Why Haiti and why Port au Prince of all places? Had this happened anywhere else in the country, the impact would have been significantly less both in terms of physical damage and human casualties, but Port Au Prince, a city of 4,000,000 people? This was a perfect surgical strike by Mother Nature. A surgical strike with laser-like precision aimed at crippling the country for good, by decapitating all three branches of government (The National Palace, the Judicial Palace and the Legislative Palace) as well as many other important buildings, including the "La Direction Generale Des Impots" IRS building and the Ministry of Finance.

An hour later, I had read all four articles. The second piece 'Does God Hate Haiti' was not as shocking as I had assumed. The author was mainly answering a more insidious statement from Pat Robertson, an American evangelist, who stated days after the earthquake that the Haitians made a deal with the devil to win their independence from France and that God's wrath is on them. These sorts of statements can hardly be shocking to anyone who pays attention to Pat Robertson. After all, this is the same man who blamed the Katrina debacle to the sins of homosexuals in the city of New Orleans. I thought that the author did a wonderful job exploring the age old question of the appearance of God's indifference to human suffering, especially the innocents: the weak and already suffering people of Haiti. If one believes in God, one must justify one's faith through the prism of our own inability to know his master plan for the universe. Those who don't believe in the presence of such a supreme being will see in this disaster yet another confirmation of their atheistic belief. Whatever your theological persuasion or spiritual denomination, we may never be able to answer these great philosophical questions, at least not in my lifetime. However, outside of the spiritual and theological realms exist more tangible, more quantifiable questions regarding human suffering and disasters:

1) What should we do when they occur?

2) How do we prevent and prepare for them, knowing there will be more of them in the future?

3) How much of this human suffering, especially in Haiti, is the results of greed, exploitation and pervasive social injustices?

These are more useful debates because within them lies our ability to cope, to overcome and prevent other disasters like these in the future. It is up to us to think them through and define our own role in the making of a more equitable world for humanity.

We can start with a simple exercise of trying to understand the historical wrongs inflicted on the people of Haiti. Former President Bill Clinton touched on it a little when he mentioned "centuries of neglect" after Haiti's successful revolution of 1804 and Haiti's role in defeating the three major colonial powers of that era (Napoleon's army, the British and the Spanish). Contrary to Pat Robertson's assessment, the Haitians did not defeat Napoleon's army with demons, witchcraft, invisible swords or powerful curses; but with blood, courage, steel and gunpowder. Haitians familiar with the true story know how countless people willingly gave up their lives so that an entire race of people may have a chance to fulfil their God-given destiny in life.

After the revolution of 1804, the revolutionaries of Haiti were not satisfied with liberating just themselves from centuries of servitude but wanted others to taste that freedom as well. For the next twelve years, between 1804 and 1816, they provided financial, military and logistical support to free other South American nations like Venezuela, Columbia, Peru and Bolivia. Simon Bolivar himself (the founder of these nations) made several trips to Haiti to collect guns, ammunition and Haitian freedom fighters to help them fight the Spanish imperial army. For these offences, the colonial powers made sure that Haiti would never become a viable state, for its viability would be a direct treat to their hegemony in the world. What followed was collective punishment through repetitive acts of extortion (dubbed "gunboat diplomacy") that crippled the black republic's economy:

1825: France demanded 90,000,000 Francs, the equivalent of $20,000,000,000 in today's currency, in order to recognise Haiti's independence. The money was paid, with enormous consequences to Haiti's economy... but the recognition never came.

July 1861: Spanish gunboat aggression against Haiti. At issue: Haitian support to Dominican generals Cabral and Sanchez who were resisting attempted Spanish annexation of Dominican Republic. Spanish Admiral Rubalcava collects $200,000 ransom and 21-gun salute from Haitian President Fabre Nicholas Géffrard.

1861-1865: Spain annexes neighbouring Dominican Republic by invitation of its white and mulatto minority: Fearing a return of slavery on the island, Haiti helps anti-Spanish forces to regain Dominican Republic's independence.

1872: German gunboat aggression against Haiti. Commodore Basch collects 3,000 Sterling Pounds from the Haitian government and defames Haitian flag with German excrement.

1877: March: French gunboat aggression against Haiti. At issue: resumption of payments on the 1825 ransom-balance then re-estimated at 20 million Francs. December: Repeat of Spanish gunboat aggression against Haiti. At issue: Suspected Haitian assistance to rebels fighting to abolish slavery in Cuba.

Up until recently, these aggressions continue in the form of coups d'etats, outings and assassinations of many progressive Haitian leaders to make way for dictators and military juntas, the latest of which was the ousting of duly elected President Aristide in 2004. Aristide now lives in exile in South Africa. These historical facts do not exempt the countless leaders of Haiti who have failed to live up to their responsibilities. Many of them were traitors who worked with foreign powers to undermine their own country for personal gains. They have failed to invest in the people, failed to build the infrastructures, failed to provide jobs, health care and education for too long. The history of Haiti's leadership is filled with these vagabonds and incompetents whose names shall be engraved next to traitors, mass murderers, and notorious criminals of the world.

It is in this perspective that Haiti should rebuild and such reconstruction should heal centuries of mistreatments and replace mistrust, anger and frustration with hope, faith and justice. May the world's eyes stay on Haiti for the next decade so that we may continue to hold accountable all those responsible. May God receive the souls of the dead, bring peace to the living and bring justice to a broken people.

WESLY GUITEAU

Ps: I thank you Bermuda for all the help and support you have given so far to the people of Haiti. I am heading back next week to continue our relief efforts.

Don't disrupt Super Bowl

February 8, 2010

Dear Sir,

As the excitement of the Super Bowl fades, I'm left with a lingering unpleasant sensation, and a bitter taste in my mouth that is unrelated to the hangover. Once again, like irritatingly loud clockwork, the local TV network has pulled a fast one and pre-empted many of the Super Bowl ads for some with a more... local flavour. And I really can't understand why they bother. The local companies that advertise during Super Bowl time do nothing to help their bottom line — in fact, I'm on the verge of cancelling my Northrock service just to spite them, and after seeing 95-year-old toenails four times within two hours I'm definitely never shopping at Lindo's again. The Logic commercials nearly blinded me, the colour scheme was so bad, and then I couldn't properly see the cheerleaders, so I'm thinking of suing them.

In any event, I have to ask this, because I sat last night in a room full of people whose deadened stares whenever the local commercials came on only verified what I was thinking — Why, why, why do the local networks bother to put local commercials on during the Super Bowl (and the Olympics and whatever else)? They are, without exception, awful commercials. I wonder whether the people responsible for making them look at their handiwork and say to themselves "Good job, Team!" and exchange enthusiastic high-fives. I suppose they must, that's what creative types do — they agonise over whether their work is any good.

Well, when it comes to local TV commercials, the answer is no, no they aren't any good. They're terrible. They are the annoying relative whose company you have to put up with three or four times a year at family gatherings, who no one can stand talking to and you, being the kind soul that you are, get stuck hanging out with. They are the very, very bad singer at your church who insists on doing a solo every Sunday, and no one has the heart to tell them they're tone deaf. They make you want to change channels and then smash the remote. They make you not want to buy the products they are advertising, ever. In short, they accomplish the exact opposite of what commercials are meant to accomplish, and as such, they should be canned.

Attention, all local advertisers stop it. Just, stop it. Save your air time for regular TV viewing hours. When it comes to the Super Bowl, which many people view specifically for the commercials stay off the air. Please. You're awful. Really.

PLEASE STOP IT

Somerset

Fish farming would work

February 2, 2010

Dear Sir,

On this evening's (February 2, 2010) BBC edition of World News, I couldn't help taking an extreme interest in a segment referring to fish farming. While viewing that, I couldn't help but think of the prospect/s with possibly fish farming here on the Island, especially with the depletion of certain species, (the groupers are just one). Wouldn't it make sense if we were to utilise the vast waterways we are so fortunate in being blessed with? Here we have an alternative and a means of raising choice fish (and crustaceans) bringing the stocks up and yes, the prices down. Who knows how far this industry can expand, the prospects of jobs etc. etc. We Bermudians must stop standing in our own shadow, "and start it a fresh".

RAYMOND RAY

St. George's

The world has changed

February 1, 2010

Dear Sir,

Bill Cox's description of the Bermuda Democratic Alliance as 'silly' is, first of all, another example of the early UBP'ers. a voice from, and living in, the past... and by past I mean the Jurassic Age... and, second, a man who is so far out of touch with the younger people of Bermuda that the Jurassic Age may be giving him the benefit of the doubt. Look, calling people who want to do something differently is just plain 'silly', Bill. You are doing what most UBP people do, expressing an opinion about the situation as if we are still living in 1963. The world has changed. Politics and not just in Bermuda is very different. And the future is always with younger generations.

Bill, give Kimbo a call and ask him just how many people under 35 are flocking to his Party. And, Bill, maybe you need to talk to some of the BDA leaders and get their story ... you need to see both sides before you offer something people will listen to.

JUST A MODERN NEANDERTHAL

Smith's

A baffling prospect

February 2, 2010

Dear Sir,

I have read with shock the Auditor General's view of this Government's fiscal policy which I believe is overseen by the Finance Minister. What baffles me even more is that this is the same person that some people feel should be the next Premier! How is that possible… if the Finance Minister cannot oversee the fiscal prudence of Bermuda when she is in the position to which that is entrusted then how can she possibly run the entire country….? I think we are in dire trouble and someone, please anyone, needs to get this Government out of the way before disaster befalls us! We have never been in this situation before and I salute Larry Dennis, the former Auditor General, for speaking up as he did when he was in the position. The critics that were calling him a liar and a racist are strangely silent now that the new black Auditor General is saying the same thing. How truly sad. I guess he must have been telling the truth! Please someone help us!

ANONYMOUS

Devonshire