October 22, 2013

Dear Sir,

I would like to take this opportunity to reply to the letter entitled ‘Marshall: Private Hainey was missing his target’ submitted by Larry Marshall Snr to the editor of your newspaper on October 15, 2013.

I do not claim to be an expert on the topic under consideration, but having read the original column ‘Mr Marshall’s views are dated and out of touch’, as well as Mr Marshall’s letter, I am thoroughly shocked by this personal attack on a man that I happen to know personally, and the connotations of racism held within.

Furthermore, I am truly disgusted by how Mr Marshall has miss-interpreted and twisted the words of Mr Hainey to suit and further his own agenda.

The very first paragraph demonstrates adequately how Mr Marshall has skewed Mr Hainey’s words, by arguing that Mr Hainey’s opening statement implies that ‘anyone who has worn a uniform was more of a man than someone who has not. That toughness and courage are defined by a uniform’.

Considering Mr Hainey’s original statement (‘It’s probably a good thing that the first time I’ve gone into combat as a soldier of the Regiment it’s against someone who’s probably never worn a uniform’) this is an extremely far-fetched interpretation, and does not warrant the assumptions made by Mr Marshall about Mr Hainey’s character.

Nor is it in any way fair to state that his ‘thinking is symptomatic of one gravely afflicted with a most debilitating superiority complex which causes him to have an incredibly low perception of Bermudians’ when not a single line of his original article implies such. Mr Marshall is making the most atrocious assumptions based on what he wants to think, rather than reading Mr Hainey’s article objectively.

I would like to present one quote, obtained from Mr Hainey himself: ‘I love Bermuda. I love Bermudians, and I believe they are worth protecting.’ All of us are entitled to our own views regarding the issue of conscription, and the usefulness of the Regiment, and we are also entitled to voice those opinions, but I will not stand for such complete and utter nonsense and falsehoods being written about a man who has dedicated so much of his time to his own community, and who time and time again, has demonstrated that he is a man of outstanding moral integrity.

And to be perfectly honest, I would be far more inclined to believe Mr Hainey’s views on the Regiment, based on his own experiences, than a man who can twist the words of another in such a truly disgusting light, and, who, as Mr Hainey has pointed out, has probably never worn a uniform, and can therefore not be relied upon to bring us an objective and honest view of life in the Regiment, and furthermore spends a great portion of his time encouraging the young men of this country to break the law.

Considering the statements made by Mr Marshall in his letter I would be inclined to wholeheartedly agree that he is extremely out of touch, but with life, and suggest that he might attend an open day at Warwick camp so that he is able to make a more informed judgement on the subject he is speaking of, and might, as a result be taken seriously, rather than considered a laughing stock by those of us who have bothered to read both articles attentively.

Walk a mile in a soldier’s shoes before you make these assumptions, Mr Marshall. I for one am glad that a man such as Mr Raymond Hainey is serving this country, and do not forget, dear sir, that, in your own words one should only take credit for the good, if one takes responsibility for the bad.

I suggest you do your research a little more intently without resorting to twisting another man’s words, and insulting his character so detrimentally, when you do not agree with his statements, which are clearly labelled as ‘personal opinion’, for it is little better than using physical violence to end an argument, and will be given little credence by anyone with a sensible head on their shoulders.

Mrs Simpson, Southampton