| Mirror
Mail |
| |
Leave Trinity Cross, change government
What sin, Canon Griffith?
Step down Mrs. Bissessar
Where the House Speaker went wrong |
| |
|
Leave Trinity Cross, change government
|
| VALENTINE
YOUNG, Brooklyn, New York. |
THE EDITOR:
COULD some one please tell me, what is going on in my beloved
country of Trinidad and Tobago?
Our government, under mild pressure from religious groups has
decided to change the name of our highest national award The Trinity
Cross.
There is no validity in making such a change.
From the time of our discovery, we have always been known to have
an affinity towards the Trinity.
We were not discovered or named by guess, because of the length
of time spent on the high seas prior to our discovery.
Columbus decided to pay homage to Almighty God and name the first
land he saw in honour of God, and low and behold, he saw our beloved
land and on recognising the three mountain peaks he named the
island La Trinity or Trinidad.
This was not done by guess, it had divine intervention with our
discovery.
Changing the name Trinity, which may sound like a Christian thing
to a lot of people, but remember there is also a Trinity in the
Hindu religion.
This government is very weak, and to appease the Opposition party
the Prime Minister has sold out our birthright.
He must be careful he doesn’t throw out the baby with the
bathwater.
We need something spiritual to sustain our survival, why interfere
with our identity when there are much more important things to
be done in Trinidad, like curbing the flow of drugs and illegal
guns coming into the country, the present crime situation, lack
of a steady flow of clean drinking water, rape and incest. However,
our Prime Minister feels changing the name Trinity Cross is a
good thing.
We are slowly becoming like the USA, we are pushing the wrong
values and pushing God out of our daily lives.
It’s time we wake up and smell the coffee, we need every
bit of spiritual value we can muster.
I hope somewhere down the road Patrick Manning would not change
the words of our National Anthem which says “and may God
bless our nation”.
Our nation needs God.
The only change we need now is a change of government.
|
| Back
To Top |
| |
| What
sin, Canon Griffith? |
| ANCIL
BHAGGAN. |
THE EDITOR:
I AM thoroughly disappointed in the statements reported
by Parish Priest Canon Clive Griffith, who would have us believe
that the changing of the name of the Trinity Cross is a sin.
This kind of statement says many things about our nation, that
perhaps, we as a people are unwilling to accept.
One of the major revelations of this statement is the clear indication
of the sense of ownership Christians have felt (and perhaps held)
over our country.
That kind of reaction can only come from someone, or some group
feeling that something is being taken away from them.
This kind of assertion also reveals the absence of tolerance and
appreciation for ethnic, cultural and religious diversity in our
country.
A sin?
Changing the nation’s history?
Would Canon Griffith have us think that Rosa Parks committed a
sin when she refused to sit at the back of a bus?
After all, second class citizenship for Blacks in the US was a
historical imperative.
Would Canon Griffith also have us believe that Dr. Williams committed
a great sin when he removed Trinidad and Tobago from Colonial
rule into independent self government?
Colonialism is what many of our political traditions are built
on.
There is a large difference sir, between history and progress.
History is history, nothing we do can change that.
What we can change is our confinement to history, particularly
when it allows real or perceived dominance of one group in society
over another.
I eagerly anticipate the response of the Archbishop of Port of
Spain to this extremely divisive statement by a priest.
I, for the record, am Roman Catholic.
|
| Back
To Top |
| |
| Step
down Mrs. Bissessar |
SIRRI RAMCOOMAR. |
THE EDITOR:
PLEASE allow me space to express just one short point to
the Leader of the Opposition.
Mrs. Persad-Bissessar, I have nothing personal against you.
Save for a few negative comments which perhaps you felt you had
to make, I have no beef with you.
In fact, I think you would make a fantastic addition to a winning
team led by Winston Dookeran.
But Madame Opposition Leader, after a recent Parliament sitting,
what else will you wait for to just admit, that you simply are
not the person for the job?
You must not allow Basdeo Panday, Jack Warner, Vasant Bharat and
whoever else continue to pull your strings in this way and just
keep you in that position because it suits them.
As a woman politician, you already have a marvellous background
and will not soon be forgotten.
Do not allow a self-serving few to jeopardise your reputation
and more than that, the good of the nation.
Please Mrs. Persad-Bissessar, step down from the Leader of the
Opposition role and allow Winston Dookeran to take our party forward.
Please, I am appealing to you.
You have the best opportunity now, since the major puppet masters
are in Germany.
Let’s get our party back on course and on the road to government
with you and Winston Dookeran standing shoulder to shoulder and
fighting the People’s National Movement (PNM) in the way
they should be fought!
|
| Back
To Top |
| |
| Where
the House Speaker went wrong |
WAYNE JAGGERNAUTH,
Loughborough University, United Kingdom. |
THE EDITOR:
HOUSE Speaker Barry Sinanan took his whip and waved it at
errant MPs, pointing directly at the Opposition benches, for publicising
Parliamentary business before it comes to Parliament.
According to a newspaper report, the Speaker deemed such practice
in regard to petitioning Parliament as an act of “impropriety”.
Perhaps the Speaker has forgotten that a Petition to Parliament
requires the involvement of the public before that business is
laid in the House.
Petitions must be signed by members of the public, alternatively,
they should be allowed to dissuade MPs from petitioning Parliament.
In both cases, the public needs to be informed, and this is where
the Speaker erred when cautioning the Leader of the Opposition.
One would think that the Speaker should have given comparable
warning to those on the government benches when they urged the
public to hound the Opposition over the Police Bills.
If acts of impropriety on the part of the government go without
censure, then surely this is an attempt by the Speaker to muzzle
the Opposition.
|
| Back
To Top |
|