by Colin Hyde

This Angelfish Cay project that got the green light from GoB, and has stalled twice because it has encountered stiff winds from some parties, I am thinking that the issue here is more about ownership than it is about the environment. Briefly, what we have here is a famous “flats”, fishing ground about 10 miles SE of Hopkins. Pictures of the area show no manmade structures. A company, Angelfish Caye LLC, proposed and won approval to dredge and develop an area on the flats where they would put some structures to house staff, guests, and equipment.

I have heard that those against the project challenge the government’s decision on the grounds that it would cause too much harm to the environment. We must accept, even encourage challenges to decisions made by environmentalists in an effort to guide development, but since the savage attack on the NEAC by agents of the group called Waterloo, we need to be wary, lest people lose their respect for this absolutely essential body. Waterloo most likely was swinging wildly. The NEAC has distinguished itself over the years.

If you look at videos showing those protesting the development, they are many and they are standing/ their boats are anchored in what looks like an area for bathing, not fishing. If that area was alive with fish and corals, those fisherfolk in the fly fishing business would not have been where they were. Of course, there’s an environmental cost if this project goes ahead. The NEAC thought its negative impact wouldn’t be excessive.

You’ll really have a job to convince me that the concern of those against the project isn’t primarily about ownership. We know that on land the early bird catches the worm, and on the sea the fisherman who is the first to the spot when things are hot, catches the fish. As it stands now, without the development, no one has an advantage.

There are jobs for those in the construction and transportation businesses if the project goes ahead. But, forevermore Angelfish Cay Resort will run things on the flats. It’s possible that the economic arm of the NEAC didn’t sufficiently weigh the interests of those against the project. Reports say that when the project was publicly aired, few dissenting voices were present to make their position known. Hmm, Minister Ferguson said the project owners might end up ferrying in the materials to build on the site.

Westwego

I believe that peace is the most important thing for a country. I believe it is also important for a country to respect its neighbors, especially ones that are good friends. These are two things which I believe are essential for a country to be good.

Some time ago I forwarded my two cents that if America or any friendly neighbor claims that a Belizean has violated their space, and they present credible information to back their request, that there should be a handing over. Our country should not appear to be in the corner of any individual whom a friendly neighbor wants to talk to. I am aware that there wasn’t “unanimous” support for the view I had expressed.

These cases, America after Belizeans whom they say have done them wrong, come up quite frequently. We are not the only people the Americans are after. It’s big international news this week that they are still after one Julian Assange, an Australian who just might deserve a raking. I haven’t put enough thought into the Assange case to say a certain yay or nay on my part, but if I had to choose I would say yay, feed him to the Americans. You must admit that is more respectful than spinning a coin, drawing from straws, or pulling a number from a hat.

According to The Guardian (UK), Assange was “indicted on 17 espionage charges and one charge of computer misuse, exposing him to a maximum of 175 years in prison, over his website’s publication of a trove of classified US documents almost 15 years ago.” The story said, “US prosecutors allege that Assange, 52, encouraged and helped the army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning steal diplomatic cables and military files that WikiLeaks published, putting lives at risk.”

I accept a debate about extradition for drug charges. There should be none about murder. If the US has evidence that one of us committed murder on their soil, that shouldn’t reach the costly High Court. The Attorney General’s office should look at the evidence and if there is a case, a handing over should follow.

Now drugs, I can see there might be some valid arguments; but I still think you have to go. I say that even though someone very near and very dear to me could have been caught in that net. In fact, presently I have a young cousin in the US serving time because he is said to have helped someone run drugs into America. Incidentally, he isn’t there through extradition.

In his eulogy of my paternal grandfather, my dad said he shared his knowledge on machines with a man who had knowledge about navigation. My grampa, tops in handling machines and navigation, became a valuable asset for Bob Turton, who was probably Belize’s most famous businessman in his day. My grampa ran boats for Mr. Turton from Puerto Cortes to New Orleans.

In 1920, in one of the craziest acts ever, the sale and importation of alcoholic beverages was outlawed in many states in America. Overnight America went dry, and that would lead to mayhem, murder, and the making of millionaires. We know that Turton ran rum to America. Yes, my grampa ran boats for Turton. The man who generously shared his navigation skills with my grampa, well, that benefactor of his was one of three prominent Belizean bootleggers who were paraded along with their boat through the streets of Westwego, Louisiana. I note that when prohibition began my grampa was in his early twenties. And he didn’t have the guidance of a father, his dad having died when he was a young teenager.

Of course, I would have had a dilemma. If my grampa had run rum for Turton, and the Americans had brought evidence here that he was doing so and wanted him, I would not have been pleased if he had been handed over. But I support a friend’s request if they feel their turf has been violated.

There are some law principles in play here which make these lawyers feel well justified in their defenses in these cases. I will tell you that these people at the top of the system shouldn’t be so proud about the country, world they made. They will talk about jurisdiction, and territory, and sovereignty. I believe in respect for a friend.

I understand the particularities of some cases. But in general, when our neighbor accuses one of us of doing wrong to them, the accused should start packing dehn pataki. Stuff such as the quality of a neighbor’s justice system shouldn’t figure here. Neither should the comfort rating of their jails. I say, if we believe a country has a rotten justice system and/or rotten jails, we should not have an extradition treaty with them. Of course, such wouldn’t come up if the invitation is from America. I hear their jails are tops, ehm, luxury suites, and their justice system is supposed to be more thorough than ours. The icing for America is that they have all kinds of rights.

The main game is to have peace within our borders, and good standing with our friends. I believe in legalization. If you don’t peddle drugs to minors, and you carry out the trade without murders, I have no quarrel with you. If you run drugs to our neighbors, you know the risk. If they tell our government you are running drugs to their country, go and face the charge. Goodwill between neighbors is important. If we are in good standing with our neighbors we might find favor when we demand of them that they try and stop the flow of illegal guns from their country to ours.