By Anthony L. Hall:

In a deft and enlightened move, Martelly declared from the outset of his presidency that he wanted to make peace -- not just with Aristide but with every other former Haitian leader as well. To this end he made quite a public show today of meeting with both Aristide and Baby Doc. 

Implicit in this of course is that he will discourage any attempt to prosecute Baby Doc, and that Aristide will now be loath to challenge the legitimacy of his presidency. Beyond this, Martelly’s move is deft and enlightened because it lays the foundation for the kind of political certainty that is sine qua non for the foreign direct investments Haiti will need to rebuild.

I made the observations above in an October 12, 2011, commentary, “New Haitian president seeks reconciliation”. Now comes this: 

Haiti’s judicial authorities have dealt yet another blow to the victims of former leader Jean-Claude Duvalier, Amnesty International said this week after the criminal case against the former ‘president-for-life’ for grave human rights violations was dropped. 

An investigating judge in Port-au-Prince on Monday announced that Jean-Claude ‘Baby Doc’ Duvalier will not stand trial for alleged crimes against humanity—including torture, disappearances and extrajudicial executions…. (amnesty.org, January 31, 2012) 

But let me hasten to clarify that nothing could be further from my mind than gloating here about my prescience; especially since nobody was initially more anxious to see Duvalier prosecuted than I. It’s just that, given the way President Martelly and the Haitian judiciary are being pilloried in the press, I think it’s important to put this decision to spare the country a war-crimes trial into context. 

I fully appreciate the criticism that Haiti is opting for political expediency at the expense of criminal justice. But Martelly can point to similar criticisms that were leveled at South Africa’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which granted outright amnesty to many Whites who had the blood of the brutal Apartheid regime on their hands. 

Clearly Haiti could do a lot worse than to follow South Africa’s principled example. Moreover, Martelly was undoubtedly mindful that prosecuting Duvalier for war crimes would probably incite more factional violence in the streets of Haiti: believe it not Baby Doc still has rabid followers who would die for him. And in that event, nobody doubts that self-righteous organizations like Amnesty International would not be able to lift a finger to stop the bloodshed. 

Alas, putting Duvalier on trial for embezzlement of public funds (as the government intends to do) will provide little or no consolation. Especially since he probably has more than enough from the billions he embezzled to settle whatever damages are assessed. 

All the same, my thoughts and prayers go out to all who were affected by the brutal reign of the Duvaliers. Even more, though, I wish the longsuffering people of Haiti an extended period of peace, happiness, and prosperity. I am convinced that foregoing a war-crimes trial will help this wish come true.

February 10, 2012

caribbeannewsnow

Caribbean Blog International

By Keith Noel:

MY FATHER-IN-LAW rarely uttered the word 'Rasta' without prefacing it with the word 'dutty'. He loved my younger daughter dearly and as far as he was concerned, she was the perfect child. He must be revolving in his grave now to see her with locks flowing down her back.

This to me images the marked difference in the perception of Rastafari over the past 30 years. I remember in the 1960s the fear with which people spoke of these cultists. They were sometimes described as 'blackheart' men and spoken of as if they were the spawn of the devil. They were berated and scorned from many a pulpit and many parents suffered paroxysms when their children showed even a mild interest in the movement.

From the very outset, Rastafari had a firm commitment to the struggle for black dignity. What particularly fascinated me was their absolute rejection of the idea of white superiority and even their rejection of any values they considered white. They gave the generation of the '70s the base on which to build a world view that was not a mirror of that of the metropolis.

Brutalise them

Society saw the threat of the Rasta to the status quo and gave licence to their agents in the police force, the teaching profession, and the civil service to brutalise them physically or psychologically. And the rest of 'decent' society stood by in tacit acceptance of this abuse. I remember one day at a football match in the stadium, seeing a policeman search a Rasta for ganja, forcing him to kneel and cutting a couple of his locks in the process. There was no outrage. In fact, at the time, local pop songs had jokes about policemen beating Rastas for speaking their particular dialect!

Then there was the chilling story of Peter Tosh stepping out into the yard of the studio in Half-Way Tree where he was recording what was to be a classic LP. He was smoking a spliff and a policeman saw him and, although he had flicked the spliff away, began to beat him, and as Tosh said "when him lif up de batten to deliver the fatal blow" to his head, he parried it with his forearm, which was badly broken. There was no real outcry and, as far as I know, the policeman did not lose his job.

The aggression was psychological as well. Under the guise of 'proper grooming' any efforts by teenage blacks to adopt hairstyles that shouted their blackness to the world were outlawed in schools. There was tremendous opposition to the 'afro'. A young friend of mine was prevented from going to her exams at Immaculate High unless she agreed to forego her afro. A namesake of mine lost his job at Knox College for being too afrocentric in his teaching, and one reason given for my being fired from my post at Haile Selassie Junior Secondary, where I was acting head of English, was that I had become too obviously sympathetic to the Rasta movement (there is an irony there somewhere).

Black assumption

There seemed to be a reason for this fear. Rastafari, with all its apparent strangeness, delivered a message of black assumption of full personhood and of rejection of the perception of himself as inferior. This would mean a revolution in thinking that would result in the white world relinquishing much of its power over the black man. And who wants to relinquish power?

The Rastaman's message was delivered through his music. Bob Marley, its leading exponent, was a creative genius, but his creativity found its roots in his Rastafarianism. His message is possibly the most important delivered to the world by any entertainer, maybe any man, in the 20th century.

It is a tribute to the steadfastness, the courage, the vision, the clearheadedness and the creativity of these 'ancient Rastas', as Morgan Heritage calls them, that they are now a prominent part of our society. We owe them a great deal. Their vision of Jamaica's and the black man's "emancipation from mental slavery" has not been fully achieved, but we would have been so much further back were it not for them.

Keith Noel is an educator. Send comments to columns@gleanerjm.com.

February 9, 2012

jamaica-gleaner

Caribbean Blog International

by Caribbean News Now contributor:

CARACAS, Venezuela -- The Commonwealth Caribbean countries of Antigua-Barbuda, Dominica and St Vincent and the Grenadines are among ALBA members that have agreed to block any ships flying the Falkland Islands flag from docking in their ports.

At the 11th summit of the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our Americas (ALBA), made up of Venezuela, Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua, Dominica, Antigua and Barbuda, Ecuador and St Vincent and the Grenadines, participating heads of state and government on Saturday approved a special agreement to back Argentina's call for the restoration of the British Overseas Territory claimed by Argentina as Las Malvinas to Argentinean sovereignty.

President of Ecuador, Rafael Correa, said, "It is time for Latin America to decide sanctions against this mistaken power that pretends to be imperialist and colonialist in the 21st century. I think we have to apply more forceful things. We have to talk about sanctions."

Hugo Chavez, the president of Venezuela, said, "If it should occur to the British empire to attack Argentina militarily, Argentina won't be alone this time. Venezuela is no power, but we've got some weapons and the will to face any imperialist aggression."

Tensions have risen over the Falklands as the 30th anniversary of Argentina's 1982 invasion nears. Celebrations are planned in the UK for the anniversary of the Falklands War starting from May 20.

Britain has recently sent to the area HMS Dauntless, a Type 45 destroyer armed with enough firepower that one navy source told the Daily Mail newspaper, could “take out all of South America’s fighter aircraft, let alone those of Argentina”.

A British nuclear submarine is also reportedly being deployed to the area.

During the ALBA summit, Chavez praised the economic potential of several Caribbean nations such as Dominica, with its coffee production, and St Vincent and the Grenadines, with its tourist industry, and agricultural and fishing production.

He also referred to the bloc’s decision to maintain Haiti as a permanent guest of their meetings and to have Saint Lucia and Suriname as special guest-members.

February 7, 2012

caribbeannewsnow

Caribbean Blog International

Esther Tyson , Jamaica-Gleaner Contributor:

There is a wind blowing across our nation, Jamaica, which threatens to destabilise the Christian world view that we accept as the norm in our country. This wind has swept in from countries such as Germany, England, Sweden and North America.

It brings with it the view that posits that homosexual rights must be seen as paramount at this time. This is so because it comes under the agenda of human rights. All well-thinking individuals agree that all persons must have the rights that are due to all citizens of a nation, including homosexuals, bisexuals, transgender, et al.

What the country needs to be aware of, and stand its guard against, is that in many instances, once homosexuals have been granted their rights to practise their 'alternative lifestyle' openly, along with it come other demands which infringe on the rights of persons with a Judaeo-Christian world view.

This is the pattern that has been observed in nations such as United States, Canada, Germany and England. In England, according to a report at http://www.tinyurl.com/lawforcechurches, religious groups are to be forced to accept homosexual youth workers, secretaries and other staff, even if their faith holds same-sex relationships to be sinful. Christian organisations fear that the tightened legislation, which is due to come into force next year, will undermine the integrity of churches and dilute their moral message.

important development

Christianity Today Australia makes an important point on this development:

"And that is just what the homosexual activists and the militant secularists have long been working towards. They have been very clever about this. They say that religious people are welcome to practise their faith, just as long as it is not done in public."

Christians in England are coming under increasing persecution because of their faith. Yet, on the other hand, the rights of other groups, such as gays, are being promoted. In 2011 in England, a Christian couple was banned from foster-parenting because of their views on homosexuality. They "were told by a court yesterday that gay rights 'should take precedence' over their religious beliefs". Owen and Eunice Johns heard that their values could conflict with the local authority's duty to 'safeguard and promote the welfare' of those in foster care.

This shift against Christianity is taking place not only in England but in the USA. An example of this is seen in California.

(CNSNews.com) - On January 1, the California Department of Education started implementing a new law that requires all children in the state's public schools to study the "role and contributions" of "lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans" to the "development of California and the United States of America".

All public schools in California, from kindergarten to grade 12, will be required to actively teach students to admire the gay lifestyle, and refusal to do so will have teachers charged with discrimination. This means that Christian teachers will not be allowed to keep silent on the matter but are being put into a situation to go against their faith if they are to keep their jobs.

In each of these instances, what began as the 'gay' agenda being accepted as part of human rights has resulted in the rights of Christians being eroded.

Even more far-reaching are the implications of the following report.

NEW YORK, July 27, 2011

(LifeSiteNews.com) - A high-level push at the United Nations for more contraception and abortion among the world's youths has met with resistance from over 120,000 people, including 57,000 young people, who have signed a Youth Statement that says that so-called "sexual rights" cannot trump the real rights of life and family.

Campaigners at the United Nations are seeking more permissive laws and policies towards homosexuality, drug use, explicit sexual education, contraception, and prostitution on all levels of world government, framed as advocacy for youth's sexual and reproductive health and 'rights'.

Persons who hold to the traditional Judaeo-Christian values which form the foundation of our society's laws and practices need to become conscious that already such values are being eroded in nations that previously were seen as having the same philosophical foundations as we do in Jamaica.

Furthermore, this insidious destruction is continuing, as can be seen in the report concerning the advocacy of sexual rights for children at the United Nations.

The Church must be careful that while we ensure that all mankind is treated with humanity and dignity, we do not fail to see that there are many groups that are using the human-rights cover to foist upon many unsuspecting persons laws that will have Jamaicans finding ourselves being forced to accept lifestyles alien to us.

threaten Economic sanctions

Already we see the British prime minister, David Cameron, threatening economic sanctions against those Commonwealth nations that do not decriminalise homosexuality and/or buggery. United States President Barack Obama is also issuing a call in support of gay rights. These calls are being promoted as a part of the human-rights agenda. Countries are now being forced to bow to the beliefs of these superpowers. Although colonialism has ended, this situation makes us aware that cultural imperialism is still alive and rampant.

Our prime minister, Portia Simpson Miller, has promised J-FLAG - the Jamaica Forum for Lesbians, All-Sexuals and Gays - that she will review the buggery law.

As a nation, we need to be aware of this process. This issue might be decided through a vote by the people. As a nation, we are not used to voting on two issues at once, so we must be careful to see that a second matter is not being decided on in any election without the electorate's full knowledge.

In addition, it is very important that every Jamaican whose world view is based on the Judaeo-Christian teaching become aware of this debate and make his or her contribution to it. Furthermore, all such persons need to be enumerated.

Esther Tyson is an educator. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.

February 5, 2012

jamaica-gleaner

Caribbean Blog International

Gambling and human rights:

By Peter Espeut -

Elements within the Jamaican church fraternity wish to make gambling - and these days, horse racing in particular - a religious issue. If it were just a religious matter, the irreligious among us could dismiss it (as they have done) as the Church seeking to impose its religious prejudices on the whole society.

It would then become, as they might put it, a human-rights issue - the right to do with one's time and money what one wishes. And if free persons wish to engage in watching or betting on racehorses on Sunday, the Lord's Day, surely that's their right, the argument goes, even if most people lose their money.

This view may be identified with the libertarian position about which I have recently written ('Victimless crime', January 13, 2012).

Neville Duncan, in a letter published in The Gleaner of December 29 last, puts it this way: "Each individual has the basic right to do anything with her/his life that s/he chooses, including damaging oneself by using alcohol and drugs, just as s/he has the right to damage herself/himself with sugar, tobacco, religion, promiscuous sex, mysticism, suicide, etc, so long as s/he does not initiate threats, force or fraud against any other individual."

And so libertarians believe that people have the right to gamble, even if it is a certainty that the vast majority will lose their money, and might jeopardise the welfare of their families.

It must be clear to the thinking person that the gambling industry is not a gamble for casinos, gaming lounges and betting parlours; they are guaranteed to make money at the expense of their patrons because of their carefully designed business model. As I learned at university from my lecturers in mathematics, gambling is about 'odds', based on probabilities and permutations, which are mathematical operations.

Odds against most

In roulette, for example, the odds of the ball falling into your slot have been calculated by the gambling house, and the payout fixed such that the house always collects more from losers than it pays to winners. In American roulette, there are 38 numbers (1-36, as well as 0 and 00), and so betting on any number, there is a 37:1 chance of losing; and if you win, you receive a 35:1 payout. Hearing that if he wins he will get 35 times what he bets will attract persons to gamble; but sensible people know that, on average, they will win only once out of 38 times; and so over time, the gambler always loses.

At every game and at every table, the house always wins. The gambling industry has calculated the odds, and has set the rules of the game so that it will always win. No gambling house anywhere in the world operates at a loss. Only the customers gamble, and the fact is that for the gambling houses to make a profit, every day and every week, the majority of customers have to lose.

Horse racing is a particular case. If there are seven horses in a race, the odds are not set at 6:1 for a win; the odds are determined by how many people bet on a particular horse. And so the favourite might pay only 2:1, while a poorly supported horse might pay 99:1.

If the favourite wins, the bets of the losers are more than enough to cover the payout to the winners, plus a handsome profit. If the favourite loses, most of the punters have lost their bets, while a few pocket a big payout, which stimulates the losers to bet harder next time.

The simple fact is that the betting shops set the odds so that they can never lose.

Now if it is true that that almost all gamblers will lose all of the time, should not a responsible Government protect gamblers from themselves, and from mathematical pickpockets who have set the rules and the odds so that, over time, the gamblers will always lose?

This is not just a religious matter; this is a matter of human rights.

The majority of Jamaicans are weak in literacy and numeracy; the Government should protect Jamaicans from rapacious businessmen, who laugh all the way to the bank as they speak of rights, but know that the public, over time, will always lose.

The libertarians, however, will disagree; people must be free to lose their money if they are foolish enough to gamble.

Peter Espeut is a sociologist, natural scientist and Roman Catholic deacon. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com.

February 3, 2012

jamaica-gleaner

Caribbean Blog International