tribune242 editorial
IT IS a tragedy when a politician, so anxious to win an election, panders to the base emotions of an electorate. And in doing so ignores the damaging consequences that his divisive message could have, not only on this generation, but on many generations to come.
Apparently Mr Branville McCartney is so anxious to become the next prime minister of this country that he is willing to use the sorry plight of illegal Haitians, and their Bahamian-born children to pander to the fears of voting Bahamians. Such a campaign of hatred will not only split this community, but will eventually build up such an emotional force that when it breaks in years to come this nation's way of life would be completely destroyed.
One would have thought that the mass killing that targeted young teenagers in Norway these past few days would have been a sufficient tragedy to send a warning signal of what can happen when suspicion and division is built up in a community. Such an atmosphere can inspire one madman to destroy a nation's whole way of life.
Seventy-six people -- most of them teenagers -- were killed in Oslo last week because of one man's fear that Islam threatened Europe's Christian culture. Anders Hering Breivik, himself a young man, was against his country's "multiculturalism," which he believed enabled "the ongoing Islamic colonisation of Europe." And so he wrote a 1,500 page treaties on his beliefs, pleaded not guilty to committing any crime, and almost gloated over the killings, because as a self-proclaimed Christian nationalist he believed it his duty to recreate a Knights Templar in Europe to fight a holy war against Islam.
This bizarre behaviour is usually the end game in an atmosphere of hate and suspicion that can send evil sparks flying in a madman's fevered brain. One only has to read history to understand the underlying racial hatred that has sparked centuries of unrest and most of this world's wars.
Mr McCartney, founder of the Democratic National Alliance (DNA), which he promises will be the next government, says that he will fight to change the country's constitution so that children born here to illegal immigrants will not be eligible for citizenship. If elected he will push for a referendum to carry out his plans.
Under the constitution, persons who are born in the Bahamas to illegal immigrants have the right to apply for citizenship between their 18th and 19th birthdays.
We agree with former PLP cabinet minister George Smith who accused Mr McCartney of "trying to pander to the xenophobia of many Bahamians who want to blame some of our social ills on people who by virtue of their circumstances find themselves in the Bahamas illegally."
And warned Mr Smith: "Political leaders should never pander to ignorance and people who are motivated by fear and this is probably what Mr McCartney... is doing."
We agree with Mr Smith. We also agree with retired Anglican Archbishop Drexel Gomez who sees Mr McCartney's "final solution" for Haitian children as "inhumane."
"I cannot understand anyone who is going to seek leadership in this country who is not going to deal with the situation in a humanitarian way," said the Archbishop.
And it is true what the Archbishop says. This country does owe much to immigrants. Many immigrants -- teachers, policemen, doctors and nurses -- helped build the Bahamas. Many of them came as immigrants from other Caribbean islands -- and never forget: our first black member of parliament was a Haitian.
As the Archbishop pointed out these children up to the age of 18 have known no other home.
They speak our language, they belong to our culture, their friends are Bahamian. As far as they are concerned they are also Bahamian. At the age of 18 are they to be thrown into a world that they do not know, because of the myopic prejudice of Bahamians who just a few generations before were also foreigners in a foreign land? Many of the forebears of our present Bahamians were not even born here, yet they became one with us -- flesh of the same flesh -- and put much effort into the building of this nation. What none of us must forget is at some stage or another -- and this includes Mr McCartney -- our forebears were strangers in a foreign land. Today we are all Bahamians. Were our forebears more humane than we are today?
Yes, the Haitian question is a troubling one, but Mr McCartney's solution lacks humanity. It is not the right way to go, and if through this election he builds up an even greater foreign phobia, future generations will not bless his name for lighting a spark that allowed hatred to spiral out of control.
July 29, 2011
tribune242 editorial
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Friday, July 29, 2011
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Scrap metal exports banned for 90 days
Scrap metal and copper exports banned
Guardian Staff Reporter
thenassauguardian
chester@nasguard.com
Widespread copper thefts, and the theft of other metals, prompted the government yesterday to issue an order banning scrap metal exports for 90 days and the export of copper permanently.
This comes after government agencies, foreign investors and private citizens in The Bahamas all became victims over the past few years of thieves who took copper wire from job sites, homes and businesses to sell as scrap.
The thefts became so frequent and costly that the government found it necessary to make an executive order to temporarily amend the Export Control Act to stop the export of scrap metal and copper.
The new regulation on the export of scrap metal, which came into force yesterday, states: “No person shall for a period of 90 days from the coming into force of these regulations export any scrap metal from The Bahamas to any place outside The Bahamas.”
And, with regard to copper exports, it prohibits “any person from exporting any copper from The Bahamas to any place outside The Bahamas.”
In a statement released by the Cabinet Office yesterday, the government insisted that the measures were taken because of the crippling effect copper thefts and thefts of other metals have had on businesses, government utilities and private citizens.
On Monday thieves left the Department of Agriculture’s Gladstone Road Farm and the Department of Fisheries’ Gladstone Road lab complex without power to critical machines, and without air conditioning in some buildings. A large number of power cords and copper air condition tubing were stolen.
Over the past year a number of other government agencies have been robbed of copper tubing and wire, including the Bahamas Broadcasting Corporation and the Water and Sewerage Corporation.
The measures taken by the government yesterday will likely hurt legitimate scrap metal exporters during the duration of the embargo.
The government also announced in its release that better measure to police the industry will be discussed.
“The government is assessing the scrap metal industry and will engage with various stakeholders and legitimate businesses with a view to better regulating and monitoring the industry,” the government said.
Jamaica also announced yesterday that it would implement similar scrap metal prohibitions as have now been enacted in The Bahamas.
Jul 28, 2011
thenassauguardian
Guardian Staff Reporter
thenassauguardian
chester@nasguard.com
Widespread copper thefts, and the theft of other metals, prompted the government yesterday to issue an order banning scrap metal exports for 90 days and the export of copper permanently.
This comes after government agencies, foreign investors and private citizens in The Bahamas all became victims over the past few years of thieves who took copper wire from job sites, homes and businesses to sell as scrap.
The thefts became so frequent and costly that the government found it necessary to make an executive order to temporarily amend the Export Control Act to stop the export of scrap metal and copper.
The new regulation on the export of scrap metal, which came into force yesterday, states: “No person shall for a period of 90 days from the coming into force of these regulations export any scrap metal from The Bahamas to any place outside The Bahamas.”
And, with regard to copper exports, it prohibits “any person from exporting any copper from The Bahamas to any place outside The Bahamas.”
In a statement released by the Cabinet Office yesterday, the government insisted that the measures were taken because of the crippling effect copper thefts and thefts of other metals have had on businesses, government utilities and private citizens.
On Monday thieves left the Department of Agriculture’s Gladstone Road Farm and the Department of Fisheries’ Gladstone Road lab complex without power to critical machines, and without air conditioning in some buildings. A large number of power cords and copper air condition tubing were stolen.
Over the past year a number of other government agencies have been robbed of copper tubing and wire, including the Bahamas Broadcasting Corporation and the Water and Sewerage Corporation.
The measures taken by the government yesterday will likely hurt legitimate scrap metal exporters during the duration of the embargo.
The government also announced in its release that better measure to police the industry will be discussed.
“The government is assessing the scrap metal industry and will engage with various stakeholders and legitimate businesses with a view to better regulating and monitoring the industry,” the government said.
Jamaica also announced yesterday that it would implement similar scrap metal prohibitions as have now been enacted in The Bahamas.
Jul 28, 2011
thenassauguardian
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Hubert Ingraham and Perry Christie are nearing the end of their respective political careers... It is unlikely that either will run again as leader of their party [FNM ... PLP] beyond the upcoming general election
Political retirement with dignity
thenassauguardian editorial
The Bahamas is a new independent democracy. Having just recently celebrated 38 years going it alone, our traditions, though rooted in the British system, are still evolving.
One tradition that has not really developed yet is what to do with our leaders when they retire from frontline politics.
We have only had one prime minister permanently retire thus far. Sir Lynden Pindling bowed out in 1997 after his Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) suffered an overwhelming defeat to Hubert Ingraham and the Free National Movement (FNM). This was the second consecutive time Ingraham beat Sir Lynden in a general election.
Sir Lynden, however, was suffering from terminal cancer during that last campaign in 1997. He died a few years later on August 26, 2000. So in the case of the only prime minister of an independent Bahamas to retire, there was no real retirement, as he was in a battle for his life when he went away, a battle he sadly did not win.
Ingraham and current PLP leader Perry Christie are nearing the end of their respective political careers. It is unlikely that either will run again as leader beyond this general election.
Both entered the House of Assembly in 1977. The former law partners each have won a seat in each election since. Christie also served a term as a senator from 1972 before becoming a member of Parliament.
When one of these men loses the next general election, he should not be discarded. The United States has a beautiful bi-partisan tradition. When the new president is elected and an issue of national importance arises, former presidents are called into service.
Former Democratic president Jimmy Carter has embarked upon many missions, under Democratic and Republican presidents, to free Americans held by hostile regimes.
President George W. Bush called upon his father, former President George H.W. Bush, and former President Bill Clinton after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Bush Sr. and Clinton raised money for the recovery cause.
After the Haiti earthquake in 2010, President Barack Obama called on Clinton and Bush Jr., the president he succeeded, to lead fundraising efforts.
This tradition in the United States demonstrates great political maturity. It also is smart. Former leaders have great connections, capacity and lots of unused energy once retired.
Here in The Bahamas there are many initiatives a former prime minister could lead. Education reform, gambling reform, the Haitian migration issue, tax reform, reform of the criminal justice system and health care reform are just a few of the areas a former prime minister could focus on, developing a plan for the country to address the issue under study.
For this to happen, however, that former politician would have to learn to be apolitical and able to make a contribution divorced from partisanism. The prime minister who asks the former prime minister to lead a national initiative would also have to be mature enough to set aside whatever hostilities he might have had with that politician when he was still active.
We should not relegate our retired politicians to the rubbish heap. They still have much to contribute after they officially retire. We will soon get to the point when one of our great leaders says goodbye. We hope the winner reaches out to the loser and starts a tradition of mutual respect and continued service.
Jul 27, 2011
thenassauguardian editorial
thenassauguardian editorial
The Bahamas is a new independent democracy. Having just recently celebrated 38 years going it alone, our traditions, though rooted in the British system, are still evolving.
One tradition that has not really developed yet is what to do with our leaders when they retire from frontline politics.
We have only had one prime minister permanently retire thus far. Sir Lynden Pindling bowed out in 1997 after his Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) suffered an overwhelming defeat to Hubert Ingraham and the Free National Movement (FNM). This was the second consecutive time Ingraham beat Sir Lynden in a general election.
Sir Lynden, however, was suffering from terminal cancer during that last campaign in 1997. He died a few years later on August 26, 2000. So in the case of the only prime minister of an independent Bahamas to retire, there was no real retirement, as he was in a battle for his life when he went away, a battle he sadly did not win.
Ingraham and current PLP leader Perry Christie are nearing the end of their respective political careers. It is unlikely that either will run again as leader beyond this general election.
Both entered the House of Assembly in 1977. The former law partners each have won a seat in each election since. Christie also served a term as a senator from 1972 before becoming a member of Parliament.
When one of these men loses the next general election, he should not be discarded. The United States has a beautiful bi-partisan tradition. When the new president is elected and an issue of national importance arises, former presidents are called into service.
Former Democratic president Jimmy Carter has embarked upon many missions, under Democratic and Republican presidents, to free Americans held by hostile regimes.
President George W. Bush called upon his father, former President George H.W. Bush, and former President Bill Clinton after Hurricane Katrina in 2005. Bush Sr. and Clinton raised money for the recovery cause.
After the Haiti earthquake in 2010, President Barack Obama called on Clinton and Bush Jr., the president he succeeded, to lead fundraising efforts.
This tradition in the United States demonstrates great political maturity. It also is smart. Former leaders have great connections, capacity and lots of unused energy once retired.
Here in The Bahamas there are many initiatives a former prime minister could lead. Education reform, gambling reform, the Haitian migration issue, tax reform, reform of the criminal justice system and health care reform are just a few of the areas a former prime minister could focus on, developing a plan for the country to address the issue under study.
For this to happen, however, that former politician would have to learn to be apolitical and able to make a contribution divorced from partisanism. The prime minister who asks the former prime minister to lead a national initiative would also have to be mature enough to set aside whatever hostilities he might have had with that politician when he was still active.
We should not relegate our retired politicians to the rubbish heap. They still have much to contribute after they officially retire. We will soon get to the point when one of our great leaders says goodbye. We hope the winner reaches out to the loser and starts a tradition of mutual respect and continued service.
Jul 27, 2011
thenassauguardian editorial
Tuesday, July 26, 2011
George Smith says Branville McCartney is "pandering" to xenophobic fears over illegal immigration in an effort to gain the support of the Bahamian voters' base
Former minister claims Branville 'pandering' to fears over illegal immigration
By TANEKA THOMPSON
Deputy Chief Reporter
tribune242
tthompson@tribunemedia.net
BRANVILLE McCartney is "pandering" to xenophobic fears over illegal immigration in an effort to gain the support of the country's voter base, said former Cabinet Minister George Smith.
His comments came after Mr McCartney said that he will fight to change the country's constitution so that children born here to illegal immigrants will not be eligible for Bahamian citizenship.
Mr McCartney, leader of newly formed third party the Democratic National Alliance, said he will advance a referendum on the issue if he is elected as the country's next prime minister, according to a local daily.
Under the constitution, persons who are born in the Bahamas to illegal immigrants have the right to apply for citizenship between their 18th and 19th birthday.
Mr Smith, a former Cabinet minister in the Pindling administration and one of the framers of the country's constitution, dismissed this as political pandering to illegal immigration fears.
"He's trying to pander to the xenophobia of many Bahamians who want to blame some of our social ills on people who by virtue of their circumstances find themselves in the Bahamas illegally. I think that places like (squatter settlement) Mackey Yard probably also compound it but the Bahamas has to (be) mindful that many of our ancestors have left the Bahamas and settled in other places and in some instances they settle illegally.
". . .But for the grace of God we would be like the Haitians," he added.
Mr Smith, former representative for Exuma, cautioned politicians not to fear monger for political traction.
"Political leaders should never pander to ignorance and people who are motivated by fear and this is probably what Mr McCartney - someone who I am fond of - is doing," said Mr Smith, in response to questions from The Tribune.
Instead, he said politicians should convene a non-partisan task force on constitutional reform after the dust settles from the next general election.
Yesterday Immigration and Deputy Prime Minister Brent Symonette said his former Cabinet colleague's latest stance is surprising. He claimed that this policy was never put forth by Mr McCartney while he served as junior immigration minister.
"When I looked at the newspaper I was amused that Mr McCartney would suggest that having been minister of state (of immigration) for a number of years and never recommended that. I'm following his immigration issues with amusement because I know that his views were not put forward (while he was in office).
"He and I had many discussions and he (was able to) put any proposal up to me and I would consider it and put it forward. I don't recall (that policy) coming from him when he was in office," said Mr Symonette.
Mr McCartney resigned from the Free National Movement earlier this year and left the Ingraham Cabinet last year.
Last week he told The Tribune that he quit as a Cabinet minister because his repeated efforts to address the country's immigration problems were "blocked" by "the man himself," Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham.
July 26, 2011
tribune242
By TANEKA THOMPSON
Deputy Chief Reporter
tribune242
tthompson@tribunemedia.net
BRANVILLE McCartney is "pandering" to xenophobic fears over illegal immigration in an effort to gain the support of the country's voter base, said former Cabinet Minister George Smith.
His comments came after Mr McCartney said that he will fight to change the country's constitution so that children born here to illegal immigrants will not be eligible for Bahamian citizenship.
Mr McCartney, leader of newly formed third party the Democratic National Alliance, said he will advance a referendum on the issue if he is elected as the country's next prime minister, according to a local daily.
Under the constitution, persons who are born in the Bahamas to illegal immigrants have the right to apply for citizenship between their 18th and 19th birthday.
Mr Smith, a former Cabinet minister in the Pindling administration and one of the framers of the country's constitution, dismissed this as political pandering to illegal immigration fears.
"He's trying to pander to the xenophobia of many Bahamians who want to blame some of our social ills on people who by virtue of their circumstances find themselves in the Bahamas illegally. I think that places like (squatter settlement) Mackey Yard probably also compound it but the Bahamas has to (be) mindful that many of our ancestors have left the Bahamas and settled in other places and in some instances they settle illegally.
". . .But for the grace of God we would be like the Haitians," he added.
Mr Smith, former representative for Exuma, cautioned politicians not to fear monger for political traction.
"Political leaders should never pander to ignorance and people who are motivated by fear and this is probably what Mr McCartney - someone who I am fond of - is doing," said Mr Smith, in response to questions from The Tribune.
Instead, he said politicians should convene a non-partisan task force on constitutional reform after the dust settles from the next general election.
Yesterday Immigration and Deputy Prime Minister Brent Symonette said his former Cabinet colleague's latest stance is surprising. He claimed that this policy was never put forth by Mr McCartney while he served as junior immigration minister.
"When I looked at the newspaper I was amused that Mr McCartney would suggest that having been minister of state (of immigration) for a number of years and never recommended that. I'm following his immigration issues with amusement because I know that his views were not put forward (while he was in office).
"He and I had many discussions and he (was able to) put any proposal up to me and I would consider it and put it forward. I don't recall (that policy) coming from him when he was in office," said Mr Symonette.
Mr McCartney resigned from the Free National Movement earlier this year and left the Ingraham Cabinet last year.
Last week he told The Tribune that he quit as a Cabinet minister because his repeated efforts to address the country's immigration problems were "blocked" by "the man himself," Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham.
July 26, 2011
tribune242
Bishop Simeon Hall has called on all politicians to resist the temptation of turning the controversial issue of capital punishment into a “political football”
Hall: Capital punishment should not be political football
KRYSTEL ROLLE
Guardian Staff Reporter
thenassauguardian
krystel@nasguard.com
As the national debate on the issue of capital punishment continues, a religious leader has called on all politicians to resist the temptation of turning the controversial issue into a “political football”.
Bishop Simeon Hall’s comments came in a statement yesterday. Hall is the former chairman of the National Advisory Council on Crime (NACC). One of its key recommendations was for the resumption of capital punishment.
Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Leader Perry Christie declared his party’s support for capital punishment Saturday night and promised to carry out the law if the PLP wins the next general election. Christie was speaking at the PLP’s Eastern Region Constituencies Conclave.
Hall said Bahamians must examine what each party did on the issue while in office rather than the “political rhetoric they espouse” during the pre-election period.
“To be frank, the record shows that both major political parties have been reserved on capital punishment,” said Hall.
No hangings were carried out under the PLP administration led by Christie.
The last time capital punishment was carried out in The Bahamas was on January 6, 2000 when David Mitchell was hanged. Five of the 50 men hanged in The Bahamas since the 1920s were hanged under the FNM between 1997 and 2002; 13 were hanged during the 25-year rule of the late Sir Lynden Pindling; and the remaining 32 were executed between 1929 and 1967.
With nearly 80 murders having been recorded already this year, The Bahamas is likely to set a forth murder record in five years this year. Hall called for cross-party efforts to address the crime problem.
“The progress against the criminal mayhem, which presently confronts us, will only take place when a by-partisan national approach is created and executed by all in power,” Hall said.
During the conclave on Saturday, Christie pledged to take bold action to reduce the crime rate in the country if he is re-elected.
“No effort will be spared to restore the safety of our streets and homes,” he said.
“An urgent priority for the next government is the battle against crime. There is fear on our streets.”
In the run-up to the 2007 general election, the Christie Administration was criticized over the crime issue by the Free National Movement, which was in opposition at the time.
Jul 26, 2011
thenassauguardian
KRYSTEL ROLLE
Guardian Staff Reporter
thenassauguardian
krystel@nasguard.com
As the national debate on the issue of capital punishment continues, a religious leader has called on all politicians to resist the temptation of turning the controversial issue into a “political football”.
Bishop Simeon Hall’s comments came in a statement yesterday. Hall is the former chairman of the National Advisory Council on Crime (NACC). One of its key recommendations was for the resumption of capital punishment.
Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) Leader Perry Christie declared his party’s support for capital punishment Saturday night and promised to carry out the law if the PLP wins the next general election. Christie was speaking at the PLP’s Eastern Region Constituencies Conclave.
Hall said Bahamians must examine what each party did on the issue while in office rather than the “political rhetoric they espouse” during the pre-election period.
“To be frank, the record shows that both major political parties have been reserved on capital punishment,” said Hall.
No hangings were carried out under the PLP administration led by Christie.
The last time capital punishment was carried out in The Bahamas was on January 6, 2000 when David Mitchell was hanged. Five of the 50 men hanged in The Bahamas since the 1920s were hanged under the FNM between 1997 and 2002; 13 were hanged during the 25-year rule of the late Sir Lynden Pindling; and the remaining 32 were executed between 1929 and 1967.
With nearly 80 murders having been recorded already this year, The Bahamas is likely to set a forth murder record in five years this year. Hall called for cross-party efforts to address the crime problem.
“The progress against the criminal mayhem, which presently confronts us, will only take place when a by-partisan national approach is created and executed by all in power,” Hall said.
During the conclave on Saturday, Christie pledged to take bold action to reduce the crime rate in the country if he is re-elected.
“No effort will be spared to restore the safety of our streets and homes,” he said.
“An urgent priority for the next government is the battle against crime. There is fear on our streets.”
In the run-up to the 2007 general election, the Christie Administration was criticized over the crime issue by the Free National Movement, which was in opposition at the time.
Jul 26, 2011
thenassauguardian
Monday, July 25, 2011
Wikileaks Bahamas documents: The Christie administration offered to send Bahamian troops to help quell a violent rebellion in Haiti and discussed the possibility of making Fred Mitchell joint leader of that country
Mitchell 'considered for Haiti leadership role'
tribune242
THE Christie administration offered to send Bahamian troops to help quell a violent rebellion in Haiti and discussed the possibility of making Fred Mitchell joint leader of that country, newly released Wikileaks documents claim.
According to confidential cables sent by US Embassy officials in Nassau at the height of the crisis in early 2004, if diplomacy failed to contain the crisis the Bahamas government felt military assistance would be necessary and was willing to commit "perhaps as many as 100" troops to a multilateral force - whether or not it was led by the United Nations.
The documents also claim then Foreign Affairs minister Fred Mitchell was close to being named one of a threesome of "wise men" to be charged with overseeing that country's affairs.
The three cables, sent by US Embassy officials in 2003 and 2004, detail the Christie administration's response to the rapidly developing crisis as understood by embassy staff.
They claim Mr Mitchell and former prime minister Perry Christie were very concerned about the violence - particularly in terms of what it would mean for Haitian migration to the Bahamas.
One cable quotes former Foreign Affairs permanent secretary Melanie Zonicle as saying that in Mr Mitchell's view, while the preferred mechanism for dealing with Haiti was the UN, "any outside intervention would be preferable to continued and increased chaos."
Another reiterated the importance of illegal immigration to local politics, noting that Mr Christie - despite being an "overprogrammed prime minister" - repeatedly requested and put aside a full hour for an urgent meeting to inform US officials of his position on Haiti.
That position, the cables claim, placed a comparatively low priority on the human rights of the Haitian people.
One of the cables, issued in April 2003 by notoriously combative US Ambassador Richard Blankenship (see story, page 7), said that fear of "mass migration" was the Bahamas government's top priority, but that an immigration agreement with the Aristide government stalled over the Haitian demand that amnesty be granted to the illegals already in the country.
It said: "Such a concession would be suicide for Mitchell in the xenophobic Bahamian political landscape. Pursuit of this agreement and any other means to slow down migration will continue to push any concerns for democracy and human rights into the backseat."
A February 2004 cable quoted Mr Christie as saying that if large numbers of Haitians started arriving in Bahamian territory, the government would not offer asylum, but rather rely on the United States to help with repatriation.
"The Bahamas, he said, simply had no capacity to maintain large numbers of migrants for any period of time. Declaring that he had no concert with 'those liberals' on this issue, he declared that there would never be asylum in the Bahamas for Haitians.
"The total population of the Bahamas was, he said, 'less than that of a small town in the United States. We simply cannot do what Amnesty International and other groups would insist on us'."
The February 2004 cable quotes Mr Christie as mentioning the possibility that Fred Mitchell could play a "new and significant ongoing role in Haiti as the third member in a tripartite committee that, Christie seemed to believe, would effectively serve as a kind of 'Council of Wise Men' in governing the country."
Under this scenario, Mr Mitchell, as the representative of "CARICOM and others" would have governed Haiti along with a new Haitian prime minister and a representative of the opposition.
The former PM is quoted as saying President Aristide had reservations about the plan and for his own part, Mr Christie would prefer the third member to be French or American - although he seemed to think Mr Mitchell was the US's preference. The cables do not clarify if this was the case.
However, they do paint a picture of a prime minister who is a bit naive about US policy towards Haiti.
Despite the hard line on the Haitian regime sustained throughout the crisis - culminating in claims that the United States government abducted President Aristide - Mr Christie appears in the cables as appealing to the US to share his sympathy for the Haitian leader.
The February 2004 cable notes that the former PM "appeared comfortable in his newly-assumed role of international mediator," mentioning that he had spoken with Aristide "at least a dozen times" recently and at least once a week that day.
Mr Christie is said to have stressed that he and Mr Mitchell felt an agreement should be reached that conferred some "dignity" to Aristide, and that he sympathised with the Haitian leader's complaint that he was being asked to take unconstitutional actions.
He added that he does not believe Aristide would be opposed to working with the opposition on the joint appointment of a new prime minister and cabinet, but simply did not want to be "left out of the process."
Mr Christie also seemed confident that Mr Mitchell and US Assistant Secretary Roger Noriega would fly to Haiti later that week and "continue to work all sides of the issue."
Mr Mitchell, on the other hand, is quoted in a 2003 cable as saying the US position on Haiti was "hard-minded" and calling for more dialogue.
Another cable compared Mr Mitchell to Mr Christie, saying that: "While his decision-making style may be protracted and indecisive, Bahamian Prime Minister Perry Christie is also an impressive, dynamic, charismatic and ebullient presence and an indefatigable seeker of consensus. For the purpose of promoting peace in Haiti, his personality complements that of Foreign Minister Mitchell, which is steadier, stealthier, and more methodical."
July 25, 2011
tribune242
tribune242
THE Christie administration offered to send Bahamian troops to help quell a violent rebellion in Haiti and discussed the possibility of making Fred Mitchell joint leader of that country, newly released Wikileaks documents claim.
According to confidential cables sent by US Embassy officials in Nassau at the height of the crisis in early 2004, if diplomacy failed to contain the crisis the Bahamas government felt military assistance would be necessary and was willing to commit "perhaps as many as 100" troops to a multilateral force - whether or not it was led by the United Nations.
The documents also claim then Foreign Affairs minister Fred Mitchell was close to being named one of a threesome of "wise men" to be charged with overseeing that country's affairs.
The three cables, sent by US Embassy officials in 2003 and 2004, detail the Christie administration's response to the rapidly developing crisis as understood by embassy staff.
They claim Mr Mitchell and former prime minister Perry Christie were very concerned about the violence - particularly in terms of what it would mean for Haitian migration to the Bahamas.
One cable quotes former Foreign Affairs permanent secretary Melanie Zonicle as saying that in Mr Mitchell's view, while the preferred mechanism for dealing with Haiti was the UN, "any outside intervention would be preferable to continued and increased chaos."
Another reiterated the importance of illegal immigration to local politics, noting that Mr Christie - despite being an "overprogrammed prime minister" - repeatedly requested and put aside a full hour for an urgent meeting to inform US officials of his position on Haiti.
That position, the cables claim, placed a comparatively low priority on the human rights of the Haitian people.
One of the cables, issued in April 2003 by notoriously combative US Ambassador Richard Blankenship (see story, page 7), said that fear of "mass migration" was the Bahamas government's top priority, but that an immigration agreement with the Aristide government stalled over the Haitian demand that amnesty be granted to the illegals already in the country.
It said: "Such a concession would be suicide for Mitchell in the xenophobic Bahamian political landscape. Pursuit of this agreement and any other means to slow down migration will continue to push any concerns for democracy and human rights into the backseat."
A February 2004 cable quoted Mr Christie as saying that if large numbers of Haitians started arriving in Bahamian territory, the government would not offer asylum, but rather rely on the United States to help with repatriation.
"The Bahamas, he said, simply had no capacity to maintain large numbers of migrants for any period of time. Declaring that he had no concert with 'those liberals' on this issue, he declared that there would never be asylum in the Bahamas for Haitians.
"The total population of the Bahamas was, he said, 'less than that of a small town in the United States. We simply cannot do what Amnesty International and other groups would insist on us'."
The February 2004 cable quotes Mr Christie as mentioning the possibility that Fred Mitchell could play a "new and significant ongoing role in Haiti as the third member in a tripartite committee that, Christie seemed to believe, would effectively serve as a kind of 'Council of Wise Men' in governing the country."
Under this scenario, Mr Mitchell, as the representative of "CARICOM and others" would have governed Haiti along with a new Haitian prime minister and a representative of the opposition.
The former PM is quoted as saying President Aristide had reservations about the plan and for his own part, Mr Christie would prefer the third member to be French or American - although he seemed to think Mr Mitchell was the US's preference. The cables do not clarify if this was the case.
However, they do paint a picture of a prime minister who is a bit naive about US policy towards Haiti.
Despite the hard line on the Haitian regime sustained throughout the crisis - culminating in claims that the United States government abducted President Aristide - Mr Christie appears in the cables as appealing to the US to share his sympathy for the Haitian leader.
The February 2004 cable notes that the former PM "appeared comfortable in his newly-assumed role of international mediator," mentioning that he had spoken with Aristide "at least a dozen times" recently and at least once a week that day.
Mr Christie is said to have stressed that he and Mr Mitchell felt an agreement should be reached that conferred some "dignity" to Aristide, and that he sympathised with the Haitian leader's complaint that he was being asked to take unconstitutional actions.
He added that he does not believe Aristide would be opposed to working with the opposition on the joint appointment of a new prime minister and cabinet, but simply did not want to be "left out of the process."
Mr Christie also seemed confident that Mr Mitchell and US Assistant Secretary Roger Noriega would fly to Haiti later that week and "continue to work all sides of the issue."
Mr Mitchell, on the other hand, is quoted in a 2003 cable as saying the US position on Haiti was "hard-minded" and calling for more dialogue.
Another cable compared Mr Mitchell to Mr Christie, saying that: "While his decision-making style may be protracted and indecisive, Bahamian Prime Minister Perry Christie is also an impressive, dynamic, charismatic and ebullient presence and an indefatigable seeker of consensus. For the purpose of promoting peace in Haiti, his personality complements that of Foreign Minister Mitchell, which is steadier, stealthier, and more methodical."
July 25, 2011
tribune242
John Marquis - the political assassin - returns to Tribune242
The political assassin returns
Consider This...
BY PHILIP C. GALANIS
The past week in Great Britain will long be remembered for the shocking disclosure that the print media in that country sank to an all-time low with the revelations concerning the nefarious and illegal lengths to which the members of the media there would go to get a story. Many of that country's citizens sat in amazement, revulsion and shame, listening to both the hearings of the British Parliamentary Select Committee that investigated the behavior of the English press, as well as to the penetrating questions that the beleaguered Prime Minister, David Cameron, was compelled to answer in Parliament regarding those developments.
Just when some of us felt that this low and criminal type of journalism would never rear its ugly head in our Commonwealth, in walks Mr. John Marquis who, during his tenure as managing editor of The Tribune, oversaw the transformation of that newspaper from a somewhat respected newspaper engaged in the dissemination of news, to one with tabloid status. Therefore this week, we would like to consider this - does the return of John Marquis as a regular contributing columnist to The Tribune signal the return of a person possessed of journalistic integrity or has he been drafted as a political assassin with one singular objective in mind, namely, doing everything he can to dissuade the Bahamian people from returning the PLP to office when the general election is called next year? Moreover, is he the embodiment of the questionable type of journalistic integrity demonstrated by his fellow Brits and is he bringing that back to infect our young journalists?
The answer to the first question can readily be found in Marquis' own narrative. He began his column last Wednesday with the following words: "Soon after the 2007 general election, when the PLP were unceremoniously dumped into what we all hoped would be the garbage bin of history... the (PLP) couldn't possibly seek the public's support again with Perry Christie at the helm." This is unadulterated dishonesty by Mr. Marquis and at the outset should clearly signal what his motives are. Just who is he referring to when he says "we all hoped (the PLP) would be dumped into the garbage bin of history"? Mr. Marquis' assertions are deliberately dishonest and intentionally incorrect.
Why does he choose to completely ignore the fact that in the general election of 2007, not only did the PLP win 18 of the 41 seats in Parliament but did so with a very large percentage of votes? Has he completely dismissed the fact that of the nearly 137,000 votes cast in that election, 64,637 or 46.98 percent of the voters supported the PLP, compared to 68,547 or 49.82 percent for the FNM? In case he lacks the capacity to do the math, there was a difference of only 3,910 votes or less than three percent between the winners and the losers. So deceitful and dishonest is his characterization of "we all" – arrogantly dismissing nearly half the Bahamian voters - that he lacks any credibility for whatever follows in his inaugural incursion into Bahamian politics after a two-year hiatus.
PLP politics is none of John Marquis' business, but as a political assassin, his obvious objective is to do all that he can to present twisted untruths and nonsensical non-sequiturs about the PLP and why Mr. Christie remains the leader of that party. He laments that because Mr. Christie remains at the helm of the PLP, "doesn't say much for the PLP..." and by his own assertion, Marquis admits that he is "judging from afar -- and I confess four thousand miles of ocean do blur one's perspective.” It seems that his "blurred perspective" and his clouded and fogged up mind cannot fathom the fact that Mr. Christie has legitimately fended off all challenges to his leadership in democratic exercises within the PLP, surviving as the duly elected leader. That is the process by which we govern ourselves. Sorry, Mr. Marquis, if you cannot understand or accept that.
But it gets worse. Mr. Marquis continues his gratuitous and condescending comments about some of the other leaders of the PLP. He denigrates Mr. Philip “Brave” Davis, the properly elected deputy leader, although he concedes that he sees Davis as "the only possible leader-in-waiting, the sole heir apparent to Pindling's tarnished crown." Marquis cannot refrain from writing anything about the PLP without deriding Sir Lynden and his historic political legacy. Then he offers a backhanded compliment to Dr. Bernard Nottage for his "comparative commonsense and rationality." Dr. Nottage is unquestionably and consistently the best prepared, best researched and most methodical debater in Parliament on the PLP's team. It is unmistakable that Marquis really hates the PLP and shows it in every poison and patronizing word that he pens.
But he reserves his most caustic and critical comments for Mr. Fred Mitchell who he describes in a feeble and failed attempt at a classical witticism as "Marley's Ghost of Bahamian politics." He devotes nearly half of his entire column to castigating an individual who is perhaps one of the brightest minds in the PLP and one of the hardest workers and most visible member of Parliament in his constituency. It is clear that Marquis is really afraid of "Dred Fred" and sinks to a new low by deriding Mitchell for his "five disastrous years as minister of foreign affairs." It is Marquis' disdainfully dishonest and derisive depiction of Fred Mitchell that should be relegated to the dust bin. History will probably record that Fred Mitchell was one of the most active, best informed, Caribbean-centric and worldly foreign ministers of modern Bahamian politics.
Mr. Marquis, you are a foreigner and your brand of "journalism" in Bahamian politics will result in your becoming even more persona non grata than you were when you lived among us. Our politics, sir, especially PLP politics, are none of your business. We resent your incursions into our domestic affairs and we regard your methods as highly suspect, just like your compatriots whose underhanded work has been exposed as the unlawful practice that it is.
We got rid of British colonialists of your ilk on July 10, 1973, thirty-eight years ago, and your brand of "journalism" is not welcome here. We suggest that you keep your thoughts about Bahamian politics to yourself. However, if you cannot restrain yourself for whatever reason from trying to play the role of an expert, at least confine yourself to the local arena and cease to represent yourself as the authoritative voice on all things Bahamian for international news media, circling the globe on the worldwide web with your vicious verbiage that no more represents a balanced and fair picture of The Bahamas as does the local newspaper where your column appears.
But Bahamians are onto you now. We have seen what it is you are trying to do and this time we won’t stand for it. We will not swallow the gutter journalism you call truth. This time, one thing is certain: If you persist in such pernicious political polemics, parading as jingoist journalism, your vitriolic and venomous invectives against the PLP will have the unintended consequences of encouraging Bahamians to register to vote and to cast that vote to return the PLP to office in next year's general election.
In so many ways, you remind me and other Bahamians who remember, of another foreigner who sought to influence our domestic politics. Paul Knaur, a far smoother, tactful, rabid racist relic of yesteryear, sought in the late 1950s to coach the United Bahamian Party (UBP) as to what they needed to do to retain political power, despite the inevitable and jubilant march toward Majority Rule. Of course, we know what eventually resulted from his efforts. It was the UBP, unlike the PLP, in your words, that was relegated to the garbage bin of history.
Philip C. Galanis is the managing partner of HLB Galanis & Co., Chartered Accountants, Forensic & Litigation Support Services. He served 15 years in Parliament. Please send your comments to pgalanis@gmail.com.
Jul 25, 2011
thenassauguardian
Consider This...
BY PHILIP C. GALANIS
The past week in Great Britain will long be remembered for the shocking disclosure that the print media in that country sank to an all-time low with the revelations concerning the nefarious and illegal lengths to which the members of the media there would go to get a story. Many of that country's citizens sat in amazement, revulsion and shame, listening to both the hearings of the British Parliamentary Select Committee that investigated the behavior of the English press, as well as to the penetrating questions that the beleaguered Prime Minister, David Cameron, was compelled to answer in Parliament regarding those developments.
Just when some of us felt that this low and criminal type of journalism would never rear its ugly head in our Commonwealth, in walks Mr. John Marquis who, during his tenure as managing editor of The Tribune, oversaw the transformation of that newspaper from a somewhat respected newspaper engaged in the dissemination of news, to one with tabloid status. Therefore this week, we would like to consider this - does the return of John Marquis as a regular contributing columnist to The Tribune signal the return of a person possessed of journalistic integrity or has he been drafted as a political assassin with one singular objective in mind, namely, doing everything he can to dissuade the Bahamian people from returning the PLP to office when the general election is called next year? Moreover, is he the embodiment of the questionable type of journalistic integrity demonstrated by his fellow Brits and is he bringing that back to infect our young journalists?
The answer to the first question can readily be found in Marquis' own narrative. He began his column last Wednesday with the following words: "Soon after the 2007 general election, when the PLP were unceremoniously dumped into what we all hoped would be the garbage bin of history... the (PLP) couldn't possibly seek the public's support again with Perry Christie at the helm." This is unadulterated dishonesty by Mr. Marquis and at the outset should clearly signal what his motives are. Just who is he referring to when he says "we all hoped (the PLP) would be dumped into the garbage bin of history"? Mr. Marquis' assertions are deliberately dishonest and intentionally incorrect.
Why does he choose to completely ignore the fact that in the general election of 2007, not only did the PLP win 18 of the 41 seats in Parliament but did so with a very large percentage of votes? Has he completely dismissed the fact that of the nearly 137,000 votes cast in that election, 64,637 or 46.98 percent of the voters supported the PLP, compared to 68,547 or 49.82 percent for the FNM? In case he lacks the capacity to do the math, there was a difference of only 3,910 votes or less than three percent between the winners and the losers. So deceitful and dishonest is his characterization of "we all" – arrogantly dismissing nearly half the Bahamian voters - that he lacks any credibility for whatever follows in his inaugural incursion into Bahamian politics after a two-year hiatus.
PLP politics is none of John Marquis' business, but as a political assassin, his obvious objective is to do all that he can to present twisted untruths and nonsensical non-sequiturs about the PLP and why Mr. Christie remains the leader of that party. He laments that because Mr. Christie remains at the helm of the PLP, "doesn't say much for the PLP..." and by his own assertion, Marquis admits that he is "judging from afar -- and I confess four thousand miles of ocean do blur one's perspective.” It seems that his "blurred perspective" and his clouded and fogged up mind cannot fathom the fact that Mr. Christie has legitimately fended off all challenges to his leadership in democratic exercises within the PLP, surviving as the duly elected leader. That is the process by which we govern ourselves. Sorry, Mr. Marquis, if you cannot understand or accept that.
But it gets worse. Mr. Marquis continues his gratuitous and condescending comments about some of the other leaders of the PLP. He denigrates Mr. Philip “Brave” Davis, the properly elected deputy leader, although he concedes that he sees Davis as "the only possible leader-in-waiting, the sole heir apparent to Pindling's tarnished crown." Marquis cannot refrain from writing anything about the PLP without deriding Sir Lynden and his historic political legacy. Then he offers a backhanded compliment to Dr. Bernard Nottage for his "comparative commonsense and rationality." Dr. Nottage is unquestionably and consistently the best prepared, best researched and most methodical debater in Parliament on the PLP's team. It is unmistakable that Marquis really hates the PLP and shows it in every poison and patronizing word that he pens.
But he reserves his most caustic and critical comments for Mr. Fred Mitchell who he describes in a feeble and failed attempt at a classical witticism as "Marley's Ghost of Bahamian politics." He devotes nearly half of his entire column to castigating an individual who is perhaps one of the brightest minds in the PLP and one of the hardest workers and most visible member of Parliament in his constituency. It is clear that Marquis is really afraid of "Dred Fred" and sinks to a new low by deriding Mitchell for his "five disastrous years as minister of foreign affairs." It is Marquis' disdainfully dishonest and derisive depiction of Fred Mitchell that should be relegated to the dust bin. History will probably record that Fred Mitchell was one of the most active, best informed, Caribbean-centric and worldly foreign ministers of modern Bahamian politics.
Mr. Marquis, you are a foreigner and your brand of "journalism" in Bahamian politics will result in your becoming even more persona non grata than you were when you lived among us. Our politics, sir, especially PLP politics, are none of your business. We resent your incursions into our domestic affairs and we regard your methods as highly suspect, just like your compatriots whose underhanded work has been exposed as the unlawful practice that it is.
We got rid of British colonialists of your ilk on July 10, 1973, thirty-eight years ago, and your brand of "journalism" is not welcome here. We suggest that you keep your thoughts about Bahamian politics to yourself. However, if you cannot restrain yourself for whatever reason from trying to play the role of an expert, at least confine yourself to the local arena and cease to represent yourself as the authoritative voice on all things Bahamian for international news media, circling the globe on the worldwide web with your vicious verbiage that no more represents a balanced and fair picture of The Bahamas as does the local newspaper where your column appears.
But Bahamians are onto you now. We have seen what it is you are trying to do and this time we won’t stand for it. We will not swallow the gutter journalism you call truth. This time, one thing is certain: If you persist in such pernicious political polemics, parading as jingoist journalism, your vitriolic and venomous invectives against the PLP will have the unintended consequences of encouraging Bahamians to register to vote and to cast that vote to return the PLP to office in next year's general election.
In so many ways, you remind me and other Bahamians who remember, of another foreigner who sought to influence our domestic politics. Paul Knaur, a far smoother, tactful, rabid racist relic of yesteryear, sought in the late 1950s to coach the United Bahamian Party (UBP) as to what they needed to do to retain political power, despite the inevitable and jubilant march toward Majority Rule. Of course, we know what eventually resulted from his efforts. It was the UBP, unlike the PLP, in your words, that was relegated to the garbage bin of history.
Philip C. Galanis is the managing partner of HLB Galanis & Co., Chartered Accountants, Forensic & Litigation Support Services. He served 15 years in Parliament. Please send your comments to pgalanis@gmail.com.
Jul 25, 2011
thenassauguardian
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)