Sentence was unfair

July 18, 2007

Dear Sir,

While reading your "wonderful" newspaper I couldn't help but "spit" out some of my morning coffee reading the story "Samurai sword wielded in gang violence, court hears". After visually blocking out most of the story my mind seemed to focus on the words "Fairylands," "Samurai sword attack," "who wants to get chopped," "didn't see them as threat to society" and finally "she handed Chase Burgess 12 months for wounding with intent, six months for unlawful wounding and three months for going armed in public, all suspended," and what immediately came to mind were several high profile cases which were plastered for several days, I may add, to the front page of The Royal Gazette.

Not recalling this case ever reaching The Royal Gazette before yesterday's court decision, I called up several of my friends to ask if they had heard of the story before today. Three of them could not recall and one could recall but remembered the story only appearing very small and imbedded in the pages of your newspaper. So I ask the question, is there a systematic attempt by your newspaper to shield well-to-do families in Bermuda?

Often times I hear through your newspaper, at work and in the streets of this island that black people's stories of racism, favouritism and out right bias against them are simply 'figments of their imagination' or perhaps stories of folklore like that of the "40 Thieves" group that once ruled over this land. Well, here is a modern day example of what black Bermudians have been screaming (black rage I suspect you would call it) about for centuries. How does an incident, as serious as this one, not warrant an outcry from the public as much as the St. George's massacre and the CedarBridge Academy gang fighting? According to Mr. Lindo, witnessing a young man pointing and then swinging a Samurai sword at him states "does a lot of damage to your emotions."

I am certainly not implying blame should be directed squarely on your newspaper business but in fact Justice Simmons should also share in the blame. A biased judgment in favour of the defendant in this case only serves to fuel the racial divide among the tens of thousands of law abiding citizens of this island. I can more than guarantee you that the suspended sentence will not go down lightly in the black communities of Bermuda . I can hear the voices loud and clear from the bottom of Wellington Slip to the top of Beacon Hill .

I can vividly recall last summer people in the community discussing, with concern, about police officers patrolling summer camp grounds to 'confiscate' any persons in possession of knives even if they were being used to cut watermelon. That, at the time, I thought was a bit excessive and harsh yet Bermudian people made alternative arrangements before heading out of the house, so they could help tackle the larger problem of gang violence and potential injury/dismemberment to their children. Now, we have a case appear before the courts for what the law was drafted to punish yet the court system, through their decision, chooses to turn the other cheek and show compassion/forgiveness toward one of the son's of the "Captains of Industry!"

What concerns me is that a group of people in Bermuda who have the greatest ability to improve the racial divide, produce results that call into question who this island is truly 'set up' for. Please, my fellow citizens of Bermuda, let's challenge and ask questions of our leaders, whether it be in the halls of justice or on the steps of Parliament or even on the pages of the daily newspapers as to why things in 2007 remain so very similar to yesteryear.

ACTIVE PARTICIPANT

Hamilton Parish

P.s. Bermuda is dying for a Michael Moore styled investigative journalist! One who isn't scared to ask the tough questions and create balance among chaos

Editor's Note: The Royal Gazette first covered this case in Magistrates' Court when the accused first appeared on June 6, 2007 and there were three subsequent stories when the accused appeared in Supreme Court arraignments. The last arraignments appearance occurred on May 1, 2007, when the three accused pleaded guilty to the charges. At that time, July 17's sentencing date was set. The sentencing was the first occasion on which the full facts of the case were read out, beyond the actual charges. When the full facts of the case were known and the sentence was made, the story was on Page 1, along with a picture of the man convicted of the most serious charge. The story had added news value because the sentence, as the judge admitted, was likely to be controversial and is now being in fact being appealed, as we reported on Page 1 of the July 19 newspaper. It is hard to see, on that basis, how this newspaper attempted to "shield well-to-do families in Bermuda", if in fact the families of the accused are. Had this newspaper wished to "shield" them, the story would indeed have been placed on a back page of the newspaper, or not published at all, rather than put it on Page 1.

Respect is earned

July 12, 2007

Dear Sir,

As a simple Bermudian citizen and not the Premier's Press Secretary I do not agree why Bermuda has to follow other country 's protocol especially America. Is George Bush really the best example if you are trying to be a good leader of your country? Is he a President who listens to his people? Is he a President who has a clear grasp of the facts? When the UBP was in Government I don't recall the requirement that reporters had to stand when the Premier entered the room. No. Mr. Jones, it really does not bear repeating as you stated. You are overly enthralled with the American political system and its relationship with the press.

When the PLP came into power it was made a decree that reporters and others had to stand when the Premier and Cabinet Ministers entered the room. Just because in America this is done, do we now have to do it? I remember a Bermuda when a Premier was much closer to being a citizen when he rode into town on his own auxiliary bike. He was not chauffeured everywhere in a swanky Government car. There were no chief of staff, body guards, a Press Secretary standing up expert, a religious moralist anti- gay tourism campaign manager and a race division consultant.

I actually think that the style of past Bermudian Premiers were an example to the world. Let us lead the way and not allow American style politics be our example.

Some schools in the world insist that students stand up whenever a teacher enters the classroom ,and some schools allow the students to remain seated. This practice of showing respect is greatly exaggerated.

A teacher or Premier does not receive more or less respect if individuals stand or remain seated when they enter the room. One gains respect by their exemplary conduct which would inspire others. Mr. Press Secretary , Bermuda would be better served if you concentrated on weightier issues than about standing up.

I find it ironic that our Premier ,who appears to want to sever ties with Great Britain, is now asking, the Privy Council, the highest court in Britain to rule against the decision of his own land and the Court of Appeal, which was made up entirely of judges of Caribbean descent. Can you Mr. Glenn Jones, Press Secretary to the Premier, write about that?

Standing up for all reporters and good citizens.

JUNIPERUS BERMUDIANA

Sandys

Vote no on Southlands

July 27, 2007

Dear Sir,

Let's have a referendum on Southlands! My vote is no!

Don't cement up our beautiful shoreline for the sake of a handful of "Bermudian" management positions whilst selling our remaining resources to expatriates who will be filling 60 percent or more of the remaining menial jobs Bermudians do not want to do.

Government, please stop selling this as a job growth opportunity. We are not that stupid! If you wanted to create jobs, in the last eight years you would have concentrated efforts on developing hotel properties around Bermuda and even a few hundred yards from the Southlands development that remain derelict.

Environment Minister, please, hold your head high and look back on your accomplishments years from now by setting the most important precedent for Bermuda and what little resources we have left. This is what we, the people, have elected you to do¿preserve not exploit.

Bermudians are voting "No". Listen.

CONCERNED

Southampton

Dumping on the Base

July 11, 2007

Dear Sir,

I have to comment on the recent stories relating to the supposed polluting of the environment at the US Air Force Base during the 1960s.

I cannot honestly remember Mr. Slater nor do I know what his agenda is. If he is truly sick, I wish him well.

My recollection of the times is not to prove one thing or the other. I will write this, during the 1950s and 1960s, several departments handled the supplies brought into the base. Commissary supplies were handled by their personnel, the Base exchange supplies were transported from the docks by jitneys and trucks from the motor pool, likewise, liquor and related products were delivered to the class VI store, none of the above handled petroleum products or insecticides.

If my memory serves me correctly, the majority of oils and gases were contracted from Esso. If for some reason, a shortage occurred in the petroleum area, replacements were brought in via a cargo plane and delivered to the motor pool or sent to one of the warehouses.

There were two foremen of warehouses at the time. I was one of them and the other person (now deceased) was from St. George's. Apart from the above categories, we literally handled all other supplies used in the maintenance of the base proper and the repair of aircraft. The two of us liaised with one other when bulk items, i.e. paint, sheet metal and lumber and bags of asbestos were delivered to us by flat bed trailers and unloaded and stored by us in appropriate areas, from one end of the base to Coopers Island and Gate 3.

When a priority shipment of paint thinner, insecticide and Hydraulic fluid came in via military transport, they were clearly marked with diamond shaped decals or marked as flammable and stored accordingly. US warehouse personnel seemingly never contracted anything injurious to our health. Of course Agent Orange could have been shipped clandestinely.

My recollection of disposal methods are as such, the combustible debris was picked up from all over the base, taken to Cooper's Island, and dumped in a pit on the shoreline facing St. David's, this included household waste and debris from the various warehouses including the Commissary and Base Exchange.

Bulk debris from building sites was dumped in an area facing Castle Harbour. To accelerate the burning of these sites, used engine oil and JP4 was sprayed on them and fire was applied. Most times the Base fire department was in attendance. When one site or the other was full or stayed smoky for too long, heavy equipment from the motor pool was used to bulldoze it over, and a lot of it went into the ocean.

There were times the army detachment used their equipment to cover the burned waste and yes oil was dumped on the Island, we were told that it was used aircraft hydraulic fluid and oil from the numerous vehicle oil changes at the motor pool. I knew everyone who worked the warehouses at that time. Military and civilian personnel were very close, and perhaps some word would have gotten around that someone died a less than natural death even years later.

During the 1990s, it was reported that a sum of US$50 million was awarded to OHM Corp of NJ of which $33.5 million was for Bermuda alone, the base was to close in 1993. In concert with my fellow workers, a proposal was thrown out where we thought it would do the most good, we would act as consultants for a fee. By this time, I had retired from the Base after 20 years plus.

Some three to six months after that proposal was thrown out there, I received a call from a member of the public who bluntly asked me, why I was trying to get rich at Bermuda's expense? In fact the money was not coming from Bermuda and we felt that our knowledge was worth six figures. I know why our proposal was not accepted, the human mind does not come cheap.

E. RATTERAY

Warwick

Promise can't be kept

July 10, 2007

Dear Sir,

We know that a party platform is the document that tells the voter what a party promises to do if elected to office. My mother and many other seniors would have received a letter dated June 25, 2007 from the UBP. Covered were health care, rest home improvements, cost of living and personal safety.

Under personal safety, this promise is made, "A United Bermuda Party Government will take immediate steps to increase Police visibility and presence on the streets of Hamilton and in every parish, daytime and night time, seven days a week". Is this a promise to deploy police officers?

Yesterday, I called Dunkley Regime chairman, Mr. Shawn Crockwell, on his cell phone and asked him two questions:

Question A: Who wrote this June 25, 3007 letter?

Answer A: It was a joint effort.

Question B: Is it your promise that as Government you will increase police visibility and presence on the streets of Hamilton and in every parish, daytime and night time, seven days a week?

Answer B: That is exactly what it said, and that is our promise.

We believe that the Dunkley Regime have heard a cry from some Bermudians for a greater police presence on the streets. In response, the Dunkley Regime has promised that if elected they will increase police presence on the streets of Bermuda.

The process of sending Police officers into the streets is called deployment.

Under our constitution, the Commissioner of Police, not the political leaders, has the authority to deploy police officers.

When Mr. Crockwell called the David Lopes' early morning show on July 9, 2007, he said that we can't expect the Police to do things that are outside of their control.

We say that no one should expect the Dunkley Regime to increase police visibility or presence, because this is outside of their control or ability. Mr. Shawn Crockwell knows that, in principle, the Dunkley Regime have made a promise that the party chairman knows they will not be able to perform or to keep. They call it politics.

A rose by any other name is still a rose.

Dishonesty, untruthfulness, lies, corruption, disingenuousness, manipulation of seniors, or just plain wickedness, which is it?

On 1340 ZBM Radio yesterday morning, I heard Patricia Gordon-Pamplin say this: "There are things we cannot do as opposition, but once we become the government we will be able to deliver."

The statement she makes is a true one, but it does not apply to deployment. As the Opposition, the Dunkley Regime has no responsibility to provide resources to the Police service so that they can do their job. This will change if they become the government. When the UBP Opposition desires a police presence they must ask the police hierarchy for it. As Government this would not change.

Friends of mine, don't let Patricia Gordon-Pamplin and her crew deceive you into thinking that a vote for that crowd is a vote to empower the Dunkley Regime to increase police visibility and presence on the streets of Bermuda. That is just not true.

If you don't believe me, ask Commissioner George Jackson or Julian Hall.

How can the Dunkley Regime promise us that if we vote for them they will put more police on the streets if they have no control over the police? They are a bunch of dreamers and they better wake up.

This is a sad day. The UBP are the same people who want to expel the PLP government from office because of mere allegations of unethical behaviour. In light of their corrupt behaviour this is absolute rubbish.

EUGENE N. BRANGMAN

Sandys