Pay up on pensions

August 31, 2005

Dear Sir,

This is in reference to those companies who have failed paying people?s pensions that are required by the Government.

They (all) should be charged with stealing (well, that?s what it is). And someone should be held accountable. Let me correct myself: ?They all should be held accountable.?

Stealing is stealing no matter who has done it. Them poor folks who one day when retirement is at hand, find out their contributions were never made and they aren?t entitled to a pension are victims of theft.

Some lawyer should file a class action law suit. What do you lot think? Thieves, that?s just what they are.

Independence illogic

August 29, 2005

Dear Sir

In the arguments made for independence, one stands out as irrefutable. This is the logical argument. It is presented in the following way: ?Independence is the logical next step?. I have heard this statement often enough to begin to wonder what it means. So I opened the OED (the dictionary of our oppressor, I admit) and looked up this adjective ?logical? which justifies this ?next step?. Here we are with ?logic? : 1. reasoning conducted or assessed according to strict principals of validity ? a particular system or codification of this ? the ability to reason correctly ? (the logic of) the course of action following as a necessary consequence of -.

This would seem to indicate that a ?a next step? justified by logic is to be ?assessed according to strict principals of validity?. But when I hear the phrase in question I don?t hear the principals of validity. I am simply left with the statement that independence is logical. Its proof is therefore: 1. A secret (unlikely).

2. The opposite ? obvious and known to everyone. I think that 2 is probably correct ( although who can say) . In the absence of the proof ? I have not heard one elucidated yet ? this is the one conclusion we can grasp.

But under these terms what is meant by logic is the exact opposite of logic. The logical truth of independence that the statement indicates is drawn from a generalised feeling of the speaker that he or she feels they share with everyone, and therefore the rigorous test of logic is not necessary. It has been assumed, from a presumed general acclamation, that the logical test will be positive because the conclusion is obvious to all.

But it is in fact only obvious to the speaker. There is no general acclamation that independence is logical. In fact the polls show the opposite. So not only is the logical proposition uncertain, but the speaker?s grasp of generally accepted truths or common sense, is also uncertain and faulty. All this can assumed safely, I think, before one addresses the implication that the speaker?s understanding of logic is also uncertain.

This phrase in question is freighted with more indications of the nature of the speaker. In a society where intelligence is the last great mystery, to be unintelligent is the greatest degradation of all. It implies that whatever you may be or want or do, those who are more intelligent, are better able to handle your life, and judge you, than you are and they should do so, instead of you. Society will grandly accede all respect to what it calls intelligence as if it were acting from a code of high morality. This trend is a stubborn little misery-maker which we will not get rid of for a century or more, I am sure, we are all so delighted with it; we think it very egalitarian and fair.

The swiftest way to humiliate anyone is to say they are stupid and we do it all the time. One way is to say ?It?s logical?, usually with some pregnant pause or meaningful glance. The glance or pause is for the listener to ruin their reputation by saying ?How is it logical?? The more intelligent logician does not stop to explain (and thus ruin his or her reputation), he or she proceeds directly to another subject. The proof, again, is known to all, in our nation of intellects. If you don?t know, you are not in the tribe of the knowing. So it is with the ?logical next step?. If you don?t get it, you never will. But all this of course is not logic. It is a solipsistic or tribal distinction as most statements of higher or lower intelligence are.

So when someone tells you that as a member of the Bermudian voting population, you do not understand independence and need to be educated, ( as we have all been told for the last couple of years ) and that those very educators believe wholly and fully that independence is the ?next logical step?, remember that whether they are right or wrong, they think you are stupid and they have decided that they are going to sell you something. Remember that when they tell you 2 +2 = 5.

Traffic solutions

August 31, 2005

Dear Sir,

Rather than discriminate against singles or non-Bermudians, etc (grow up, Bermuda!) here is the way to solve the traffic problems:

1. Prohibit driving into Hamilton on a specified weekday rush hour Monday through Friday, if your private car registration number ends with one of the two numbers prohibited on that day. For example, if your last number is a zero or a one you can?t drive into Hamilton on a Monday, if it is two or three you can?t drive into Hamilton on a Tuesday, and so on. Station Police on the approaches to Hamilton to list those who are breaking the rule for stringent automatic fines.

2. At the same time, introduce car pooling rules for designated rush hours into Hamilton. Requiring even two people per car would make a terrific difference. Again the Police could monitor this on the approaches.

3. As the Colonel has already suggested on television, crack down on cars registered to uninhabited apartments.

4. Impose more stringent justification for commercial vehicles. Too often I see a commercial van used for purposes unconnected to the business for which the van was bought.

From one who has watched the Bermuda traffic steadily worsen,

Help us learn about Dad

August 31, 2005

Dear Sir,

I am writing to you from Alabama. I most recently discovered that my father was born in Pembroke Parish in 1914.

I had always thought that he was born in New York, US. I was born in 1961 in Tennessee, my siblings were born in 1965 and 1966 in Alabama and we were separated from my father in 1967. I barely remember him. Beginning a search for him in early 2002, we found he had only deceased in December, 2001 in Georgia. It was a sad day for my siblings and I. Once we had found his place of death, we began a journey of trying to locate his birth record. After not locating it in New York, we searched on the Ellis Island ship logs and noticed he came into the port of New York on September 15, 1915 with my grandmother Rose, (Whom we never knew) from Hamilton, Bermuda! Even at finding that record we had no clue that our father was not born in the US.

It was only much later and after exhausting all 50 states searching before we thought to check for a birth record in Bermuda! Amazingly so, we called and was given an answer in the same day! He was born in Pembroke Parish on September 3, 1914! So the mystery of his birth was solved. Now my siblings and I hunger for more knowledge of our father.

We know he was born of Francis Verdiguel and Rose Steinberg and we know that they were not married. We know that he worked for the famous play writer Eugene O?Neill who once lived in Paget Parish. He was most likely a servant of sorts as I remember stories being told of him caring for Oona (O?Neill) before she married the silent movie star Charlie Chaplin. We?ve heard he worked on ships. Someone told me he could speak Jamaican.

What we can?t find out is did he grow up in Hamilton? Did he attend school/church there? Are there any early pictures of him anywhere? Can we apply for and receive copies of them? Do we have family and or friends of our father or grandparents living there? We have searched our state?s local libraries and the vast Internet to no success and believe that you may be our only hope. Can you help us?

Our father?s name Victor Steinberg/Verdiguel. We have some photos of him most recent before he died.

Thanks in advance for any consideration you will grant me.

August 29, 2005

Dear Sir,

I write in reference to articles that appeared in your newsaper on Augist 25 and August 29 pertaining to the wood refuse pile at Tynes Bay Waste Treatment Facility.

Shame on the Shadow Minister if Wirks abnd Engineerng, Patricia Gordon-Pamplin, Nurse Wndy West and Elizabeth Every for trying to incite arson at Tynes Bay ?s Contingency Yard again.

They failed to mention before calling for the Minister?s resignation that since the December 26, 2004 fire, the Minister had made improvements to the contingency facility. A 12-foot fence with barbed wire across the top has been installed around the perimeters of the yard, lighting erected, limited wood-waste intake and 24-hour security provided. All of this was done to prevent another Bocing Day escapade.The potential dangers at the Contingency Yard have been mitigated.

Preventive maintenance is essential to any piece of equipment or machinery, so down tiem should be no suprise. And Shadow Minister Pamplin, ae you not aware that Tynes Bay Waste Treatment Facility already runs 24 hours a day, so what will an extra two hours do when there are only 24 hours in a day?

Remember this state-of the-art plant

was commissioned by the United Bermuda PArty government with no contingency plan. The Minister inherited this operation. He and his vry capable staff are doing a commendable job in managng and maintaning it. Keep up the good work, Minister and crew. And pray for the haters.