Dear Editor,

  I listen to preachers of the word from several denominations, because over the years I have experienced that a great deal of people who read the same Bible, at some point interpret it differently. I also know that on several occasions I have heard different members of the Anglican church of which I am a member, admit that they 'did not understand it that way until the priest explained it'. I state this to explain that not everybody interprets what is written the same way. I must mention though that I do not think that there are two ways to interpret "The Dutch Caribbean people got to give the Commonwealth of Dominica, St. Kitts and Grenada great respect", after stating that "The Dutch are more involved within the Caribbean nation regions, more than these Dutch Caribbean nations".

  Because of how that letter was written to you by Mr. Bannis, I feel myself obliged to think," Why should my children owe you respect, even though I am the one who is feeding you?" I think that you show them gratitude". It sounds more to me that the writer is being ungrateful. Who worked for years in  Aruba and Curaçao for the LAGO and the Shell? Who worked and are still working in the Dutch Caribbean islands and as they themselves still gratefully say, "All I have in my country, I can thank either Aruba, Curaçao or Sint Maarten for it". There could still be people alive who can know what I will write now.

  When LAGO decided to stop its operation in Aruba, there was a massive layoff of the non-Dutch nationals . There was a process for repatriation. Those women who were married to those employees of British nationality automatically became British and went along with their husbands and their family to their husband’s country of birth to continue their life. To make a long story short, after a while those original Dutch nationality women found themselves obliged to write to the queen of Holland requesting her to grant them back the Dutch nationality in order that they could come back to the Dutch Caribbean islands because of the bad treatment they got from the women in those British islands where their husbands had taken them.

  My Godmother and her husband were from St. Kitts. One month after they repatriated to St. Kitts my God-mother wrote my mother asking her to look for a place for her to rent, because she would rather live back in Aruba than to  support the kind of treatment she was getting from the Kittitian women who told her that she is living high and mighty, because of the house that she built back in St. Kitts while her husband worked for Lago. I must have seen Mr. Bannis over the years, but because I cannot put a face to the name,

(if that is his correct name), I will state that I do not know Mr. Bannis and whether he is from here or not, it does not matter. But I do not think that any well-thinking native of any country would go against his government for rightly trying to achieve more for the people of their country. I can write a whole lot more about this matter, but at this time the focus should not be on my writing. The term is 'mutual respect' so I believe that whatever the intention is, it should be discussed and not be pushed down our throats.

  When I was a child in my parents’ home, there was no talking back. When I became an adult, I could talk back but with respect. As I got older, the first two still count, but my parents would discuss situations with me, because they respected and valued my opinion. Not everybody will always agree with what I write, but I believe that they will agree with the heading of this letter after reading Mr. Bannis's letter to you on December 15th.

  I am sure that a whole lot of those people who are from the Commonwealth of Dominica, St. Kitts and Grenada do not agree with Mr. Bannis, as he wants to start a native war with the people of the country where they have been residing in peace for so many years, including himself. I might be wrong because like I already stated I cannot put a face to the name, but the way in which his  letter is written, reminds of the saying, "Don't bite the hand that feeds you".

Russell A. Simmons

Dear Editor,

  In last Thursday’s Daily Herald, there was an article regarding the establishment of a noise pollution campaign by the Department of Communications with the assistance of TEATT [Ministry of Tourism, Economic Affairs, Transport and Telecommunication – Ed.]. That is a worthy endeavor. However, in the article it identified many sources of noise, but failed to mention one significant one that not only produces high incidences of noise, but also presents a dangerous condition in the process.

  Airplane noise was overlooked. Jet noise, for the most part, is what it is and there really is no such thing as “whisper” jet noise. The jets use most of the airport runway when taking off to the east, making their turn over the lagoon, or take off to the west straight down the runway over the ocean.

  On the other hand the non-jet STOL (short take-off and landing) commuter prop planes gain altitude quickly and make their turn well before the end of the runway, oftentimes directly over the Simpson Bay commercial and residential community. That take-off pattern not only creates excessive noise, often so loud it sets off car alarms from the vibrations, but it places the residents under the flight path in physical harm’s way, should there be a mechanical failure.

  Wouldn’t it be best to reduce the noise pollution and the danger potential to our residents if the STOL noisy commuter aircraft were to get airborne straight down the runway, gain altitude while approaching the lagoon and then begin their turn towards their destination? By the time they make their turn, they will be higher and following an over-the-water path, reducing noise and the chances of a catastrophe in the making.

  That approach would be beneficial in reducing noise and physical threat at a small cost of some additional fuel.

  It has been over 50 years since we put a man on the moon. You would think we would be able to muffle the prop engine noise to a more tolerable level by now, but I won’t hold my breath waiting for whisper props.

R. Paul Speece

Jacksonville Beach/Simpson Bay

Dear Editor,

  Our status “Upper class and the rest”. Before the question arises let me state it this way: When 70 percent of any population is living just on or below the poverty line then there is no middle class. It is those who have and the rest.

  Because I was busy cleaning up the yard, I did not have time to read the paper. But I got several phone calls and each person had the same question: “Indepenedence for whom?”

  There is a saying that I have heard all over the Caribbean, I do not know about Africa because I have never been there. It is said in several ways but it boils down to “Run ’way from jumbie, end up in coffin”. I do not care much about St. Maarten becoming independent, because I believe that I have a thankful spirit or most probably because of my upbringing in the church.

  I have lived in the Caribbean all my life and because of the kind of work I did I was privileged to hear a whole lot, and I mean a whole lot, of Caribbean people pour out their heart to me (the police). And the reason for leaving their country to immigrate and migrate was almost in every conversation.

  We know how many islands are in the Caribbean and we also know how many different nationalities of foreigners have migrated to St. Maarten Aruba and Curaçao and for what reason, of which we know that the main reason was economic, whether to invest or to seek employment. We also know how many islands in the Caribbean have opted for independence and what we also know is that a whole lot of people from those islands who voted for and received independence for their country have left their independent country and migrated to St. Maarten for economic reasons.

  When I look at the St. Maarten voters list I can see clearly that more than 70% of the voters are not originally from the Netherland Antilles, Holland or Suriname. Let me immediately continue by stating that this is entirely not personal. These are statistical facts and have nothing to do with who has what rights or not. It has to do with “Not rocking the boat and remaining loyal to those who (because of what I know) who in their concept helped them to get a passport.

  It hurts me every time I hear people who have been on St. Maarten for more than 30 years are still saying, “If it was not for ‘such and such’ a person I wouldn’t have my Dutch passport today.” Nobody gives you a passport.

  There are laws, rules and regulations stipulated on how to be able to become a citizen of the country and there are fees attached to that process. No one can help you get a passport, they can assist you with the petition and by explaining to you the process, but they cannot give you a passport. You being here and conducting and behaving yourself in a respectable and responsible manner and abiding by the laws of the land contribute towards you being able to obtain your passport.

  Because I know this is the cause of many people who naturalised Dutch or through marriage and recognition got the Dutch nationality, continue to vote for a certain way, rather than vote to improve the situation, I have questioned them about it. and the majority of them would say, by calling certain politicians’ names, saying “So-and-so helped me so I gave him/her my vote. Me.”

  “Does that make it better?”

  “Maybe not, but it is better than back home.”

  So, my question for those who continue to vue for independence for St. Maarten, what examples do they have to show the people that independence will work for us? What kind of economy, what kind of liveable wage, what about agriculture, what about border control, what about viable police protection?

  In 12 years of Status Aparte toppled a record amount of governments, our people in government continue to put themselves in a position to be investigated for mainly fraud, we have to beg the people to cooperate with the census – yes, the census, which if not the most vital one of the most vital parts of determining what kind of people you have in your country.

  What are we going to do about “under the table transactions”? One of the questions a young St. Maartener asked me not too long ago: “Mister Russell, only Chinese are allowed to have supermarkets on St. Maarten?” I told him to ask his teacher to help him in writing a letter to the department that issues permits in which he can formally ask that question.

  Talking about supermarkets, let me ask this question that I think I have cited before. Why do not the supermarkets give the clients a receipt?

  Who makes spot checks in the supermarkets to see if everything is really kosher in those places of business? Who really works roke? Are those vying for independence ready for a mass exodus? Who is in charge of the control on the food entering St. Maarten? Who are actually the big money (influential) people in St. Maarten?

  Recently – to be exact, it was on Thursday last week – someone said to me, “Mr. Russell, what these independent people thinking? They can’t see that we can’t even find a St. Maartener to put as the president of the Parliament?” I told him the same way he noticed that he should take his time to formulate a nice letter and send it to the editor of the newspaper. It might get published. I also told him it only takes one letter to get him to see how it goes and from there he can continue to publicly voice his opinion in a respectable manner. Hopefully that would manifest itself into more young people getting involved in monitoring what is happening in their country by asking questions about it.

  I hope that I am not stepping on anyone’s toes, but we have to start on the right foot and that is far from what I am seeing now. So, we have to clean up our mess first and I do not mean only the government, I mean every last one of us.

  By the way, I do not believe that the police brass is in the office 24 hours a day. And even during the day, as Christmas is getting closer, more owners are adorning the front of their motor vehicles with what I call “Christmas lights”, which the drivers turn on even during the day.

  On my way home this morning, two drivers almost ran into my car, using their cell phone, while driving. Unless a driver is texting, which I consider utterly stupid or willful, I do not understand why he/she cannot place the phone in the car in such a way that he/she can use the speaker. This kind of behavior also tells me that we are not ready for independence.

  So again, independence for who?

Russell A. Simmons