Dear Editor,
Not too long ago I wrote a letter to you regarding reckless driving, in which I pointed out the different infringements of the traffic ordinance.
I have written on several occasions that I do not like the phrase “I told you so” because that phrase mostly comes after something negative has occurred. But, if I can recall, I also wrote a letter to you a while back, regarding motorbike riders transporting children on the seat, as well as standing in front of them between the driver and the steering mechanism.
To my surprise not too long ago the judge decided that, when the police (on St. Maarten) publicly go into action, that is not a cause for the lack of police presence nor operations. I condemned that ruling then and will condemn it in the future also because there are other tactical ways for the police to show malcontent. That ruling by the judge tells me that we can function with a minimum. Then why am I reading that the Marechaussee are coming back? Do we need them or not? Or are we strategically strengthening our military presence?
So, If there is not enough police presence to be able to deter that behaviour with motorbike riders, whose behaviour endangers the lives of their children-passengers, whose fault is it?
For as long as I can remember the police have always been understaffed. For years, the behaviour of the people of the Netherlands Antilles guaranteed that it was not necessary for police reinforcement among the islands and history will show that police reinforcement was primarily used when there was a royal visit to the islands and once or twice after a severe hurricane. Not even during Carnival.
But progress brings along people, immigration and migration and that means additional people with diverse behaviour, which calls for increased police surveillance and logically an increase in police numbers. Because of this, we all know about the involvement of the Dutch in policing Sint Maarten. So, since the judge has decided, should not we the citizens get an explanation – so that we can see the bigger picture?
Dear Editor, this did not come from me but someone asked me a few days ago if, after reading my letter to you, if this ruling by the judge is to cover up for the blunder the Dutch made by pulling out their police assistance last year. Because, as I mentioned that it did not come from me, I did not respond because as I always state I have to be able to back up my statements. He called me a coward, but everybody is entitled to an opinion.
We will always need police presence. Our road infrastructure does not permit for too many more cars. That is why I continually reiterate that we need a complete revision of the public transportation system, both with permits, parking and stopping. I have always wanted to know why can’t – or wouldn’t – we ask for help or advice from the Dutch even though it is world-wide known who the Dutch are, when it pertains to traffic and public transportation infrastructure.
By the way, I am aware that Theo was the person to let me use the term “redecorate Philipsburg, especially Front Street”. But just like almost everything else, it was like “hot needle burning up thread.” I have personally checked it out several times, if we drive through Front Street from the beginning to the end, there is not one brick missing.
I was a captain on the police boat, patrolling the waters around St. Maarten, Statia and Saba, and I can safely say that my boat navigated smoother then, than driving through Front Street today. MP Emmnauel was Minister of VROMI [Public Housing, Spatial Planning, Environment and Infrastructure – Ed.] and should have known the ins and outs of the workings of VROMI. Can we ask him to address this situation, if that is not too close to home? I know that there is enough sand and I believe that asphalt is also available. And if we do not care about those drivers of the motorbikes, at least let us protect the children.
Russell A. Simmons
Dear Editor,
Obviously it is, if I listen to a memorial service for two wonderful people who recently passed and to a very-well-known radio personality I recently met at an event on the island.
Wading into religion against pastors and zealots is unwise, I realize. Point, though, is still – to vax or not to vax. Based on how COVID-19 is going, it is becoming a pandemic of the unvaccinated since they are the ones succumbing to the disease.
Moreover, they are the ones making variants possible. In that way their individual decision potentially affects all of us – from going back to masking up, to within soon having the necessity to take booster shots of the same vaccines they desperately are trying to avoid. Tell me (with substantiated proof) which vaccinated person on SXM has died because of the vaccination. Then tell me which vaccinated person on SXM has died of COVID19 and finally tell me what percentage of those that passed unfortunately were un-vaccinated.
Ironically, those who have vaccinated have provided everyone with a little bit of normalcy for a little while. I guess we the vaxxed are our brother’s keeper. Depending on how many “smarter” anti-vaxxers are able to convince friends, family and flocks, this “return to normalcy” may be short-lived. We cannot let that happen.
Michael J. Ferrier
Dear Editor,
I extend my deepest sympathy and condolences to the people of Haiti. The recent assassination of the President of Haiti Jovenel Moïse is a stark reminder of the instability that has plagued the Caribbean island for decades, or might I add, for more than two centuries.
Haiti, while rich in mineral resources and said to be the poorest country in the hemisphere, is rife with turmoil. What is unfortunate is that too many persons look at the island's present condition and neglect to consider the past. The first island to attain its independence after defeating colonial countries such as Spain, England and the last one being France is still paying the price today on the political, social and economic front. The most powerful army at the time led by Napoleon Bonaparte was outwitted by gut and guile.
Haiti, as most of us know, became the first independent country in the Caribbean in 1804 but it did not come without a price. They had to pay their colonizer France. It is said that in 1825 France, with warships ready, sailed to Haiti and demanded that they compensate France for its loss of slaves and its slave colony in exchange for French recognition of Haiti as a sovereign republic. How hypocritical is this? France demanded 150 million francs. This amount is equivalent to $21 billion in today's currency.
Imagine, the same France is today still collecting the infamous French colonial tax from some 13 African countries annually to the tune of some $500 billion yet nothing is being said about this by the international community. This conspiracy continues today. They, the African countries, are forced to keep 50 percent of their foreign exchange reserves in an operation account held at the French treasury (I term this perpetual colonization). As a matter of fact, to paraphrase France's late president Charles de Gaulle who said that if these African countries cease from sending their funds to France, the country will drop to a third world status. And this from a continent where it is said that 40 of the 55 countries are poor.
Back to the problem of Haiti. France received the final payment from Haiti in 1893/4 but it is said because the government of the United States funded the acquisition of Haiti's treasury in 1911 in order to receive payments related to indemnity, it took Haiti until 1947 to finalize its payment which is about 122 years. And we wonder why Haiti is still struggling? Can anyone tell us what happened to the some $900 million of the country's funds that were deposited in a Swiss account by former presidents who were protected until their demise by foreign governments? Promised donations after the earthquake never materialized.
Please study Haiti's history and you will discover the continuous outside political, social and economic interference which continues to fuel past and current events and keep the nation of Haiti still hostage. Haiti needs the support of her brothers and sisters of the diaspora, not criticism and ridicule. Thanks to her bravery we are free today.
George Pantophlet
Member of Parliament
"We stand with the Cuban people," US President Joe Biden says in an official White House statement, responding to protests across the Caribbean island country, "and their clarion call for freedom and relief from the tragic grip of the pandemic, and from the decades of repression and economic suffering to which they have been subjected by Cuba’s authoritarian regime."
Cuban President Miguel Diaz-Canel disagrees as to the nature of the protests. "All this discontent, these feelings of dissatisfaction, what is the ultimate cause of all that?" he asks. "It’s the blockade. This is part of the U.S. playbook to destabilize us, to generate chaos, to break our will and spirit."
Diaz-Canel has a point. There's no actual "blockade," but there is an embargo, now yearly 60 years long, under which most trade with Cuba is forbidden to American businesses (and foreign business which operate the US).
The supposed purpose of the embargo has been, simply put, to make life hard enough on the Cuban people that they rise up and overthrow the communist regime. So, when Diaz-Canel blames the embargo for popular discomfort and dissatisfaction, a US claim that he is wrong is essentially an admission that the embargo serves no worthwhile purpose whatsoever. Which seems to be the case.
Six decades of failure to achieve its purpose kind of speaks for itself, don't you think? If Biden really wants to "stand with the Cuban people," there are two easy steps he can take to do so in an honest way.
First, he can ask Congress to lift the embargo and declare a policy of unilateral free trade with Cuba. If Cubans are not going to be permitted to trade with Americans, let the Cuban regime, not the US regime, be the ones to say so – and to pay any price in popularity that comes with the decision.
Second, he can ask Congress to end all restrictions on travel and migration between Cuba and the US. If you are a Cuban who wants to visit or live in America, or vice versa, and if you can find a way to make the journey, the US government will not stand in your way. (again, if the Cuban government does, that is on them).
Will those two things happen? Not likely. Florida's a swing presidential state with a strong lobby and associated Cuban-American voting block that favours economic protectionism in the name of an "anti-communism" that aims to keep Cuba's Communist Party in charge at all costs.
But if he dares risk it, Biden can actually stand up for freedom – in a way that invites the Cuban people to reveal and act on their true preferences, whatever those preferences may be – instead of just mouthing dishonest platitudes.
Thomas L. Knapp
Dear Editor,
While authority figures regularly condemn our youngsters, calling out undesirable behaviour, they seem misguided in how to adequately address these behaviours and empower our youngsters.
In 2011, I created the programme “Get off the Block, Get on the Bus, and Get Busy” (GB3) to try to address the immediate needs of our wandering youth. The programme was praised by a number of people, including subsequent ministers, as a step in the right direction.
Yet today, a decade later, not one person in office has presented a plan to address the empowerment of our young people, especially our young men, in a comprehensive and sustainable manner.
Instead, what we see over the years are a string of ad-hoc measures, a little funding here and there for youth-related programmes, some training here and there for personnel to quickly fill critical vacancies, and a return to yesterday’s models – the exact models that have left so many of our challenges unresolved – to solve today’s problems.
Our lone university, a beacon of hope when it started in 1989, now sits as an “empty shell,” as one local reporter puts it, void of any substantive programmes based on a vision of nation-building.
Meanwhile, the University of Curaçao and foreign institutions are actively competing for our young minds and bodies to fill their empty classes.
We see contractors lining up to bid to build a new “state of the art” prison and discussions about creating military-style training for our youth while the rest of the modern world is seeking to build strong economies through education reform that empowers their people in areas such as literacy, finance, science, and technology.
We complain about the level of violence our youth are exposed to in music videos and video games. Yet those in authority legitimize organized violence by exposing our youth to these European-styled militarized programmes – that, if I may dare add, are part of a historic, institutionalized system, in which the black skin of especially our young men is still seen, and invariably hated, as an enemy for police and soldiers to be threatened by, to criminalize (including to be taught to self-hate), and even to choke or be shot to death.
A quick glance around the world shows that the kind of militarization that is being proposed by our minister of justice for our youth in St. Martin has only served to legitimize organized violence, including increase in armed gang activities, and to further disenfranchise the youth of the countries and territories where they are used.
Our youth do not need militarization.
What they need is to be empowered to expand and reach their full human potential. They deserve to be educated in a system that recognizes their individual gifts and talents and nurtures these talents to create a more empowered nation.
There has to be a bigger vision to equip our youngsters, our future leaders, with the skills and knowledge to compete in a globalized world and to create a sustainable economy where all St. Martin individuals and families will be able to thrive.
To help them, those in authority should be innovating, creating new models, specifically designed to address our unique challenges and to contribute to solutions for our region rather than trying to solve today’s problems with yesterday’s failed solutions.
Rhoda Arrindell, PhD
