Whenever a baby is born it usually loses weight before it gains and in growing it sometimes stumbles, but it's another thing when someone attempts to kill or destroy the baby while it is young. Such is the case in the language used by Sen. Maxwell Burgess in his attempt to frame Bermuda with a so-called "Banana Republic'' in order to shake the confidence and support of the Progressive Labour Party Government. Like they say Mr. Editor, `every knock is a boost'.

So with Mr. Burgess in the Senate, it serves as a reminder as to why we dumped him. So to Mr. Burgess, keep on knocking.

SAYEED RAMADAN Smith's Parish Woe to Baxter, Britain February 16, 1999 Dear Sir, I have just finished reading a letter to the Editor by Royce Baxter entitled, "A view of Britain''.

In this letter, you can hear the frustrations and pain of Royce Baxter for what was once a mighty empire. If the author of this letter stopped for one moment and took a closer look at the situation Britain finds itself in today, then Royce Baxter would realise that history is only repeating itself.

Ever since time began, empires have risen and empires have fallen -- it is only a natural process. No one can rule forever, and now, "Rule Britannia'', the once "mighty empire'', is falling. We must remember that everything is born to die. Nothing is forever. The conqueror eventually becomes the conquered. So I say to Royce Baxter of Burwash, East Sussex, UK, do not despair as this is all in the natural scheme of things -- but, Royce Baxter, before closing, there is one thing I would like to know. "How in the world can you possibly live in such a terrible country where, and I use some of your quotes, "The dissolution of Britain continues''. "Where the Union flag is to be replaced by stars, the Union itself, i.e. Scotland and Wales, by Devolution,'' "The Monarchy by "Cool Britannia''. "The Lords by bureaucrats: families by legislation and bureaucrats: Westminster by Brussels: the indigenous Brits by a "multiethnic multicultural nonelitist society spearheaded by "Race Relations Industry'' boosted by the deplorable BBC, which like the Press is directed by foreigners towards mindless youth,'' (I had to end quotes -- there are just too many) and to top it off, even the weather is the pits!'' Then I read your letter again and I say to myself, "Royce Baxter of Burwash, East Sussex, UK has got to be kidding, otherwise, if things were that bad in ye olde Britty, Royce Baxter would have committed harakiri by now!'' PAT FERGUSON Warwick Rev. Smith's comments February 18, 1999 Dear Sir, Cynically, one should believe nothing of what one hears and perhaps half of what one reads. Therefore, I found it incredible when I read Rev. Goodwin Smith's comments in your newspaper on Monday. Could he, the new chairman of the Human Rights' Commission (I notice he is so "liberated'' that he called himself the chairperson) be so bigoted as to endorse recriminalising homosexuality? Dr. Stubbs had the courage to sponsor a bill decriminalising homosexuality in 1993. It was the last contribution to this Island by a gifted man.

Unbelievably it was voted on as a vote of conscience rather than one of the usual party political farce where the opposition opposes for the sake of opposing, obstruction or embarrassment. For any individual to have waged a campaign against this atavistic ignorance would have been narrow-minded in the extreme. To consider reintroducing the illegality of homosexuality would be staggeringly narrow-minded. What games are being played here? Is this politically motivated and to what purpose? Reverend Smith is the Chairman of the Human Rights' Commission -- who chose him? Bigotry and prejudice all fly in the face of human decency let along human rights. Perhaps Reverend Smith can now relate to the narrow-minded bigotry of a racist for they too justify their twisted thoughts. In fact, I think justification of the enslavement of blacks can be extrapolated from "The'' Bible. Is it from the same good book that Reverend Smith draws his enlightenment? SANDERS FRITH-BROWN Warwick `Pathetic' UBP February 22, 1999 Dear Sir, The reaction of the opposition UBP to the Budget was really quite pathetic but somehow typifies how the UBP is struggling with the meaning of being an opposition party in the house. Many of them were quoted to claim that the budget was a UBP budget. With the arrogance that has come to characterise that side of the House, they would like the general public to believe that they have a monopoly on monetary and economic policy. Soon they will be trying to take credit for Bermuda's pink sand and scenic beauty! The UBP did not lose the election because they were unable to make sound economic decisions, in fact, many can argue that they have set Bermuda on a firm foundation. They lost because they failed to understand that a country's economic success must be tempered with some level of social justice and equity. This simple idea still eludes many in the UBP. It would be rather naive to think that the present government would radically shift economic policies, that for the most part, have proved beneficial to Bermuda. Why should they re-invent the wheel? Some of us understand that it will take a while before we can see a clear stamp of the PLP Government. We are willing to wait and place our support behind a Government who understand that one judges a country not solely on its economic performance but also on its ability to ensure that the well-being of the average person is central to its mandate. I am one of the those people who is deeply delighted that Bermuda has waved a firm goodbye to assumed white privilege and the blacks who lingered around the loot to lick up crumbs.

IVY KUSINGA City of Hamilton Mrs. Young got it wrong February 10, 1999 Dear Sir, Permit me space in your paper to respond to an article which appeared recently on the front page of your paper. The article in question had to do with the so-called attack that was launched by Mrs. Kim Young on the Chief Justice.

Sir, had Mrs. Young had a modicum of knowledge of the law and how it operates or had she sat in the courtroom as I did, she would not have made those asinine comments in your paper. Mrs. Young would have understood that the Chief Justice had a legal burden to discharge. He was summing up the case for the jury and in doing so he had to tell the jury that it was in their 24 hands to decide if the victim's "no'' really meant no. You, Mrs. Young, may want to know how can a jury do this. Simply, they would have seen and heard the victim give her evidence, they would have drawn inferences and most importantly they would have used their collective worldly knowledge of life to decide. This, therefore, Mrs. Young had nothing to do with insensitivity to women's issues by the learned judge. You definitely got it WRONG Mrs. Young.

Sir, there is an important lesson to be learned. For aspirant politicians like Mrs. Young who need to gain political clout in a party whose elegy was written on November 9, 1998, it would be prudent for her to go out and do the spade work herself instead of relying on articles that are written by pseudo-journalists who have yet to acquire the basic skill of reporting accurately.

DAVID BALFOUR Devonshire `Totally out of touch' February 15, 1999 Dear Sir, Referring to the letter to the editor published on 17 February 1999 from Mr.

Beardon, which accuses CARE of having a hidden agenda,. it is strange, indeed, that those who are most concerned about the cellular tower all happen to have children. What could the sinister correlation be? Mr. Beardon is totally out of touch with the case being made by CARE, and unaware of the support that their case has from well respected non-aligned scientists and health professionals. Meanwhile, CARE is fully up to speed on the issues, which Mr. Beardon raised in his letter. He is welcome to contact CARE for technical responses which we shall not take up valuable space in your newspaper to repeat. We addressed these issues, at least in part, in previous Letters to the Editor which you have published over the last couple of weeks.

Perhaps Mr. Beardon would like to get a group together in Warwick in support of the tower, to oppose the several hundred panic-stricken, simple-minded signatories of a petition, which include many of his neighbours. Having been accused of ulterior motives, a logical and fair response would be to raise the question of the motives and business/family connections of the accuser. Just a question.

FOR CARE Warwick The problem with rats February 18, 1999 Dear Sir, We have disgracefully seen that the Government and Ag & Fish are setting fish pots in the bushes to kill off the ducks to control the rat problem, as they think the rats will go away.

This place is next to Aberfeldy Plant Nursery at the National Trust House. We think that when the ducks are all dead the rats will move somewhere else.

There is also a sign there that says rat infestment, don't feed ducks. We think that they should deal with the rat problem not the ducks because they have been there many years.

ASHLEY DAWSON, Age 10 STEPHANIE WHITEHEAD, Age 12 City of Hamilton