Objectivity VS "Smearing"

As a citizen of the Turks and Caicos Islands, (TCI), I find it necessary to add to the momentum of freedom that is finally beginning to resurface. I hear opinions from people who both approve and oppose the inquiry. What I find fascinating is that the typical attitudes of people who approve the inquiry are that it should help restore civil order and give the just a chance to exonerate themselves.

People who object, typically proclaim that it is bad for the country politically. A significant amount of objections are--sometimes in conjunction with the former--that this is an attempt by the Peoples Democratic Movement, (PDM), to smear the Progressive National Party, (PNP), and perhaps influence people to vote for them. I have also heard some people blame Anthony Hall for this inquiry. Since it is possible to argue about this all day, it is necessary to establish a belief system about this inquiry as it goes forward.I will apply my own understanding to the terms Objectivity and Smearing.

Objectivity
The ability to accept and practice the principle that others have the right to expression as oneself does.

Smearing
Smearing is a deliberate attempt to discredit someone by means of distorting events and facts to his demise.

Floyd Hall (FH)--Deputy Premier (DP), has made reference that the Foreign Affairs Committee's, (FAC), report that recommended a Commission of Inquiry (COI), portrayed the PNP as a Sodom and Gomorrah government. I interpreted him as saying that the FAC was smearing the PNP. However, was it really?

FH never realized the potential of the opportunity at hand when he made those remarks. He could have shown some objectivity and said that even though he thought it was a smear attempt by the FAC--at least give Sir Stanley some credit man--and the PDM they are open to an inquiry as it reinforces good governance and transparency. Would he have been selling the country out? No, because the inquiry was inevitable and he would appear a man without burden.

We have heard dissent towards the COI from some prominent figures within the PNP ranks--Washington Misick and his brother Michael Misick--whose stature seems to have rescinded significantly. Most of their statements lack objectivity and are presented against the backdrop that the FAC/PDM is attempting to smear them in their quest for power. Are they behaving rationally? Do they not sound paranoid?

Floyd Seymour (FS), leader of the Opposition, has accepted the inquiry and spoke as a man who seems to have a clear state. He seemed more objective--to me--given the dilemma we face. Yes, dilemma is correct. For We accept an inquiry not on the basis of subjectivity but out of necessity--if not desperation. An inquiry from Her Majesty's Government (HMG), gives a negative political connotation to the world about TCI--by the way The Queen, represented by His Exellency (HE), the Governor, is the Head of State, not Mike.

However, for some, things can get no worst. And, it is fitting for me to say, objectively, that things could not be any better for others. While some of us live in fear from our government's behavior, others from this same country find it strange that people even use the words fear or suppression of press. There are two worlds within our community both of which deserves consideration and understanding.

Regardless of consideration or understanding, there exists a common ground. That is a record of the conscience and emotions. As humans we inherently know when we are being treated unfairly. So, we at least have this conscious base from which to discriminate and interpret the events that occur in our community. And, while something may be devastating to one group of people it may escape the consciences of another group.

This works well in the personal domain, but in public affairs it proves too naive. Thought management which eventually influence opinions/facts should be based on standards and not just emotions or personal convictions. In the public case this is the law and the statutes of governance. So for us to determine whether there was/is corruption we have to compare the ministers' deeds to governing guidelines and laws.

So, by refusing the PDM access to government funded media, has the PNP transgressed any laws or statues? Is a minister who issues large amounts of reserved land to religious affiliates, without duly process, in contravention of the law? Do ministers who use their newspapers to send messages of hate and fear to a select group of individuals, doing something that deserves prosecution? When a leader is accused of raping a tourist and assaulting fellow Ministers of Parliament (MP), is he doing the right thing by not removing himself from the Tourism and Policing portfolio and avoiding prosecution?

Is there anything wrong with an Attorney General, (AG), failing to prosecute a Premier because of stated friendship? Is there anything worthy of prosecution, if an AG accepts favors from a Premier that puts him in a position of compromise, or perhaps influential judgment? Should we even honor an AG with a disreputable record? Should we feel privy to allow him to execute policing authority over a COI? Should he be investigated?

How about a Police Commissioner (PC), who has failed to professionally handle rape charges against a Premier by not properly investigating the turning away of an American citizen filing the complaint? How about the controversial issues surrounding the PC's installation? How about his inability to solve some of the serious crimes in TCI? Can we really trust these people, the AG, and the PC? Could we expect anything authentic from them in a COI? Should they be removed and investigated?

What about the disappearances of a Premier in his dealings to sell off 80% of a pristine inhabited key with a valuable historical context to TCI? What about the questionable backgrounds of the people he has made the agreement with? How about the reports of these people intimidating and promising harm to residents on the key? How about the money he earns--comparable to the United States' President, the world's richest nation--is this viable for such a poor country? How about FH's involvement in the questionable health care removal from Canada to Cayman? Why Cayman--is he connected to Caymanian health care company?

And, what about the hospital deals and the Belize Bank scandals? Do we know who will own these hospitals? Do we care that the new state of the art hospital in Grand Turk will have significantly less beds than the present hospital? Do we know who is even financing these loans? Do we even know the exact loan amount? Should we care about the interest on these loans? How does Belize Bank get so entrenched in our politics? Has Belize bank been used to wash dirty money from drug affiliated countries? Why is Lord Ashcroft so implicated in Belize? Why is there an uproar in Belize that prompted protest even from MPs there about the 10 million of 20 million dollars that came from South America, then to Belize Bank in Belize as a grant, and then finally wired to Belize bank in TCI? Is there something worth finding out about the ministers' dealings here? Did Mike Misick really have talks with Hugo Chavez in North Caicos? Why? What were they discussing? How did Chavez get here? How did he leave? Did we pay for it? Is Chavez paying for our hospitals? Is he paying for anything that we use in TCI? Is it even ok to ask these questions? Are we smearing the PNP?

Is there any truth to the statements about a minister's wife gouging on ticket prices to America through her government approved travel agency? Is there anything here that deserves scrutiny and investigation? Could that be a significant contributing factor to the increased cost of overseas health care? Why would we need to switch from a 10 million dollar health care provider to a 30 million dollar health care provider that FH has connections with? Does it make sense to you?

How about the TCI bank and the many accounts that have been opened by questionable foreign people linked to drug trafficking and extortion, is there anything worth investigating there? Or is it just an attempt to smear one party? How about the sale of islands that occur without record or due process, is there anything wrong there? How about the issuances of land where ministers receive significant amounts of the sale price, is there anything wrong with that? How about people selling work permits and issuing to friends in contravention of policies, is there anything wrong with that?

There is no end to the complaints brought against this PNP government, it seems. Yet the head figures typically respond with personal attacks of accusations of being smeared for political gain by the PDM. There is hardly any objective reception on their part. It is time to focus on the true issues of accusations and present some answers not personal attacks. The fairness of accusing someone lies in giving that person a chance to respond. The PNP has a full plethora of mediums through which to channel their focused responses to the charges of corruption against them.

The truth is these people cannot handle objection. That is the first sign of dictatorship. Instead of arguing with facts they resort to personal attacks. It's so funny how they hate when people criticize them but they want to lead and be in office. Here is a secret for ya'll--public life comes with criticism. You should expect to be subjected to scrutiny and hate. It is nothing personal it is just a part of public life.

To all of ya'll ministers, we want the best for you and us together. We need good leadership. We need people we can trust to manage our resources. We do not wish to smear any of you. We only wish to have some civil order. Most of ya'll appear to be living it up at our expense. So we have decided to check it out ourselves. You cannot be mad at us for that. We know you all want the best for our country but we have to ensure that you give us the best.

A COI will not harm us if there is no corruption, as FH and the Premier has stated. At this point, let us give it a chance. We know you all are innocent so this COI will just be an opportunity to show the world that the government of TCI is not comparable to Sodom and Gomorrah. Furthermore, to our advantage, we can put more stuff in place to stop the PDM from smearing us.

Let me give ya'll a hint--especially you FH--If they accuse you all of stealing land make them show you which land you are being accused of--as the accused ya'll have a great advantage of the via negativa. Then you produce the documentation and financial records--in process of law--to prove that you are not a thief. See how simple it is? You can use it as a template--you know like in Word or Excel--and apply it to other situations where ya'll are charged. Tell the other ministers that too. It really is not that hard, since you seem to be at the helm now.

You guys are not victims, you are victors at this point. You have a chance to prove the FAC and the PDM wrong about the PNP and arrest their smearing attempts. So let us go to work and get our records in order because we know we did nothing wrong. When they accuse us we will not resort to personal attacks but we will maintain that we are innocent while we produce records to prove it. So, I have a prepared a statement for you, FH, that can make you seem less hostile and more objective the next time you find yourself on a very credible media outlet--let's say for example...ummm...the BBC?--again. You looked weak and stupid--you know that?

Here is what you should have said:

FH:
"We understand the process of a Commission of Inquiry and we are concerned about the negative political connotations it may portray globally. Therefore, as a transparent government we may not welcome it, but we certainly appreciate the opportunity to prove that we truly are a good government. I am confident there are no sources of corruption within the PNP administration and we are eager to show the inquiry this. We would also like to thank the Opposition and the people of TCI for holding us accountable as we have always embraced accountability as paramount to good governance."

See how nice that sound and you would not seem so agitated to objection. I know you can do it.

For those of us who know we understand what we see going on around us, and we know we have seen the oppression and affliction of what mr. FH himself describes as Sodom and Gomorrah, I leave with you my daily inspiration that was expressed by a man who knows unjust suffering better than us all, Job! In his moment of spiritual despair he objectively questions himself for encouragement, thus:

Job 14:7-9
For there is hope of a tree,
if it be cut down,
that it will sprout again,

and that the tender branch
thereof will not cease.

Though the root thereof wax old in earth
in the earth, and the stock thereof
die in the ground;
yet through the scent of water
it will bud, and bring forth
boughs like a plant.

For us, the scent of water is objection and freedom!