Dear Editor,

  William Shakespeare coined the phrase “to be hoist with one’s own petard” (in Dutch “wie een kuil graaft voor een ander, valt er zelf in”). I do not understand why that is not in the back of one’s head when plotting for another, because nowadays there are so many phrases and slangs which remind one of the results of such actions, for example “Karma”, “payback is a b**ch”, “what goes around comes around”, etc.

  It was in the news. Miss Daniel knew what she was doing. It was no secret and there was a lot of gloating. From all that I have read, I do not believe that Miss Daniel is a victim, I believe that the board, that she helped to get rid of, is the victim if they choose to accept being the victim. Miss Daniel in my opinion is not a puppet, she was the dagger in someone else’s hand. And if she claims to be a puppet then is she letting us know that she was being used to do, in this case, the dirty work? She is very shortsighted.

  Again, from what I read, if you are the head of a department in GEBE I believe that you should have a level of maturity and education to be able to notice when something is not right. And if you go along with it, and it backfires, don’t try to play the victim.

  It is time for us to speak the truth. If Miss Daniel feels that she is a puppet, then who is the puppeteer? Who is she protecting? Is it so, that now that she has experienced the manipulative ways and viciousness of those who have her on a string that she feels intimidated?

  So what should be the next step? Easy. Get on your knees, look up and be honest. Ask for forgiveness, confront those who you know you have wronged and free up yourself by forgiving those who you feel have wronged you. Romans 12:19 explains the rest. Let your experience be your guide from here going forward and, just like I always say, “Do the right thing.”

  Repeating myself. My father used to ask us when we did something that was not right, “Why is there time enough to do it over and not enough time to do it right the first time?”

  Over the years I have read many proverbs which have been interpreted and translated in the way that they were understood. To be kind is more important than to be right.

  The way life is going nowadays I believe that oftentimes what people need is not a brilliant mind that speaks, but a special heart that listens. Because GEBE is known to be the one of the government-owned companies and that GEBE is the company that constantly bails out the government financially, people are curious about what happens in GEBE. Because of the saying “If it is not broken don’t fix it”, people want to know why are those involved (in this case, the puppeteers) so eager to get rid of the board that was making money for the company and, according to what is said, bring in “shady figures”.

  Which makes me think of another well-known saying, “Birds of a feather flock together.” I have known the meaning of the words “integrity” and “ethical” from the time I was a child because when we did something that was not acceptable the first thing we would say “Ai’n do nothing wrong” and our parents’ answer was always “Even though it might not be wrong, what you did was not nice.” As we grew older that “not nice” was explained to mean “not ethical”. And that people with integrity do the ethical thing.

  When I read about the happenings around GEBE and the airport (money dispute) I am not ready to accept that the puppeteers are people of integrity. I cannot affirm if what was said is true, but MP [Member of Parliament – Ed.] Emmanuel is seen on social media labelling St. Maarten as “da Gangsta Paradise” and again it is about money. Not sufficient evidence or getting off on a technicality does not mean innocent.

  On November 3, 2020, we had an example of when people don’t run their country right, how the voters get rid of them. Do not let that go unobserved when it is our turn.

Russell A. Simmons

Dear Editor,

  This is not coming from me but from the newspaper.

  Receiver decided to use less number plates. In so doing owners of motor vehicles who had bigger numbers the previous year did not get the same number this year, but instead they a smaller number. A decision most probably made in order to cut costs. Bravo.

  What I do not understand, though, is that if the Receiver made that decision, why those vehicle owners, who do not have any kind of influence in that decision-making, have to bear whatever extra costs that decision (change) brings along. There is an ordinance governing the testing of motor vehicles and I do not believe that private entities can make decisions not based on the laws of that ordinance.

  Because of all the different cases of fraud I hope that this incident will not open a can of worms. What also surprises me is that the civil servant at the Receiver’s Office would dismiss this person with “It is not the Receiver’s problem.” I have said it before and I will continue to repeat it whenever necessary: Everything that happens in the country is the responsibility of government, in this case the Receiver.

  Do we really have to accept for government to accept decisions taken by private companies involving the government which negatively affect its citizens? And beside that, should not the Department of Economic Affairs have a say in these kinds of decisions?

  Since it was established that the number plates can accommodate a letter and five numbers I have spoken to some influential people and suggested to them to get rid of the P numbers and replace them with M numbers, avoiding at least two cars with the same number. (M-1 up to and including M-99999). I would like for the St. Maarten number plate to remain a collector’s item, so that one M-number should be unique.

  I have several more suggestions concerning number plates, but I will say this: when there are responsible jobs to be carried out, those in government should not employ incompetent friends or friends’ children to do the job. You will never get a “job well done”.

  It has been a few years now that the Receiver’s Office has been juggling with motor vehicle tax.

  Again, I have to remind us that the RST [Kingdom Detective Cooperation Team – Ed.] is very long-winded.

  Now this. I was in a discussion with someone who came to me to ask me if the police can give someone a fine for driving without a driver’s license if the police did not actually see that person driving the car. The old people used to say “circumstances alter cases” so I did not answer. So, the next question to me was, “Can the police decide that your car is parked wrong and after telling you to move it give you a fine for driving without a driver’s license, after telling you to move the car?” I know that you will not go against the police, but that happened not too long ago in the area of the old Summit hotel.

  I did not get into any discussion with that person but I am aware of a whole lot of controversial situations that the police and the public have gotten themselves into and my question is “Who is in charge of the St. Maarten police force?” Nothing hides  nowadays and it is no secret that things are not going right with those who have been chosen to protect and serve. I think it is time for those responsible to get together and do what has to be done to guarantee that the citizens of this country continue to feel themselves policed in the correct manner.

  Too many people are complaining that there is no leadership in the force. And my question remains: Why was Minister Panneflek not appointed Minister of Justice or even before that Head Commissioner, just like they got together and planned for Peter de Witte to come to St. Maarten.

Russell A. Simmons

Dear Editor,

  Parliamentarians asking to merge the PJIAE and PJIAH boards?! So, one company owning assets and operations? How about government making the PJIAH go “Poofff”, take back the ownership of all the assets, and sign an agreement with the PJIAE to operate the lot. Use the money they save by not having to pay Big Money to PJIAH brass, that was not the case when Mr. Joseph Peterson ran a tight ship (alone and for peanuts, I might add) to re-employ some laid off SXM Airport workers in dire need.

  And then the question: What happened to the “We for our locals – Parliamentarians”? Certain locals don’t need defending? Last time I checked Brian Mingo is as local as they come. But he ain’t playin’ ball with the true fleecers, so now he must go?

  (P.S. – Glad I was able to teach Christo a new word in English: “Fleecing”. And before he goes down that old worn-out path again, I do not owe taxes!).

Michael J. Ferrier

Dear Editor,

  In a letter addressed to Prime Minister Rutte in September 2015, former Prime Minister Marcel Gumbs, along with former Prime Ministers Eman of Aruba and Whiteman of Curaçao, questioned whether the Netherlands Antilles were ever decolonized. In the letter, all three Prime Ministers reminded Mr. Rutte that the United Nations had serious doubts about the sincerity of the Dutch State to decolonize these islands and questioned whether the Kingdom Charter had decolonized the islands.

  The honorable Prime Ministers pointed out that the UN General Assembly had warned of the danger of abusing the position of governor to violate the autonomy of the islands. Additionally, the former Prime Ministers pointed out that the Antillian Prime Minister Jonkheer (circa 1955) managed to persuade a skeptical UN General Assembly that the Netherlands Antilles would not hesitate to call on the international community should their rights be violated.

  The UN General Assembly suspicion of the Dutch intentions (at the time the Netherlands had a bad reputation because of its conduct during the war in Indonesia) was reflected in the vote on Resolution 945X of December 15, 1955. The General Assembly adopted two amendments which their sponsors (India and Uruguay) stated were intended to declare that the Netherlands Antilles were not fully self-governing, as well as restricting itself to only Article 73e of the UN Charter while allowing the rest of Article 73 to remain in force. Resolution 945X was adopted with a 28 per cent vote of approval while 43 per cent of the members abstained. It is the lowest score achieved by any nation during the decolonization process. Inge Klinkers, who wrote “De Weg Naar Het Statuut”, states that the UN vote was “a bitter pill” for the Netherlands.

Pro Soualiga Foundation