Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.x

In the search for meaning in our lives, from the past to the future, the now is often sacrificed.

Dear Editor,

The making of Gods, from wo/man

pedrodeweever01112026Today—now, more than ever —with the political and technological distractions, the shifting truths on an earth within an incomprehensible universe, and a world with no inherent meaning except maybe the adulation of a money-tied system that devalues humans and praises money, we seek to make meaning of our lives.

We try various ways to escape our existence and our angsts, to find some type of significance, to deal with that thing or accident we call life. Within the freedoms and flexibility we possess, this responsibility to shape one’s life carries the burden of our anxieties.

Of the many manifestations of our existence, one is problematic: that of exalting oneself, of family members, and of other persons in society, especially that of politicians, who wield, for the most part, an inordinate amount of unchecked power, influence, and selfish interest.

No one—no wo/man—should be praised, idolized, adored, adulated, honored, mythologized, or worshiped without their accompanying faults, sins, failings, and vices, except maybe at a funeral, but even that should be tempered.

Yet we constantly use these tactics and methods: auto/biographies, a cornerstone, a plaque, social media stories/posts, the media, speeches, writing histories, naming a building, giving medals, a statue, etc. I am not (totally) against it, but there has to be a rigorous analytical vetting, screening, and culling process, a deeper evaluation, and a more critical, ethical standard, not just a semi-passive acceptance, with the acceptance of a sort of existential dichotomy of engaging in this selective exercise with an unabashed critique. This duality of our nature is simply part of our being; it cannot be excoriated and expunged. We are human. This is who we are, paradoxical as it may be.

This is similar to how propaganda and ideology work: a deliberate operation that communicates through various means, ideas, messages, and images meant to influence y/our opinions, views, social, cultural, and political behaviors.

This purposeful idolizing actually does more harm than good through a variety of means—blindly following, fixed thinking, fear-mongering, group and bandwagon views, legitimized dogmas, uncritical ideology, excessive admiration or devotion, admirable obedience, devoid of critical thinking, “Yes” people, moral corruption, loss of personal accountability, exploitation of followers, becoming illogical, too sensitive about objections and disagreements, mass manipulation, vulnerable emotions, lack of accountability and responsibility, etc. —all these effects make many people exposed, vulnerable, and susceptible. Maybe that is the point.

These seemingly harmless but persuasive and persistent methods appeal to y/our emotions, identity, history, fear, family, logic, nationalism, generation, future, morality, and desires in many ways to get you to think, feel, and see what again?

Through the Manufacturing of consent—the ubiquitous, seemingly innocuous and innocent device that influences your perception and behavior to get your support.

How do we make sense, in the end, of all this bombardment of illusive, nonchalant, and tricky tactics on our minds?

To counter, we have to carve out space for our minds to be free, to deal with our angst, to reject the onslaught, and to be like Sisyphus: keep pushing that rock up the hill against the weight bearing down on us, and resist consciously and conscientiously. But can we, or should we, live without such admiration of fallible man? There is some irony in our existence.

Nevertheless, there has to be balance between interest, ideology, and idealism against the common good, common sense, and common decency. Consent mixed with ideology eventually becomes a commodity.

Now, not because we are free- and this idea should be questioned: whether we actually are free—related to choice, influence, desire, and the many factors that act upon us in this world/life—we have to be critical, logical, sensible, and hold agents of change and influence and ideology (in its many guises) accountable and responsible for their duties, obligations, and responsibilities.

Thus, when and where this ubiquitous idolizing presence occurs, we must manufacture countermeasures to build a better, more equal society.


SINT MAARTEN’S JOB FAIR NEEDS A SIXTY-DAY RESULTS CHECK

Sint Maarten’s September 24 National Job Fair promised to connect employers and jobseekers through the National Employment Services Center. The fair and its digital vacancy portal offer a useful starting point. The harder question is how many participants move into stable work.

At the sixty-day mark, the organizers should publish aggregate results: job offers made, positions actually filled, workers still employed, and vacancies that remain open. Count results by broad occupational group without exposing anyone’s personal information.

The digital matching portal should also help identify applicants with relevant experience who need a specific skill. An employer could offer a short supervised work exercise in hospitality, utilities, or administration. Rather than relying on an automated keyword match, the employer would see how a person handles a real problem and asks for assistance.

Applicants deserve actionable feedback when a match fails. A message saying only that the application was unsuccessful teaches nothing. A clear explanation can direct the worker to a relevant training opportunity.

A job fair proves its value when it helps people get and keep jobs. The next report should show that pathway.

Gleb Tsipursky, PhD, a behavioral scientist, CEO of Disaster Avoidance Experts, and author of The Psychology of AI Adoption at Work: From Resistance to Results (Georgetown University Press, 2026) https://disasteravoidanceexperts.com/aibook

Community Continues to Seek Answers in the Rudy Benjamin Upcoming Court Case.

Dear Editor,

mauricelake29072015There remains a profound sense of grief, concern, unanswered questions, and lingering pain within the community of St. Peters and across St. Martin regarding the fatal shooting of Mr. Rudy Benjamin on February 13, 2026. Although time has passed since the incident, many residents still seek clarity and transparency about what happened that evening. The community believes that a full understanding of the facts is essential to fostering accountability and rebuilding public trust.

As the court proceedings approach on November 13, many residents continue to await information regarding key aspects of the investigation being handled by the Prosecutor's Office of Curaçao. To date, little public information has been shared about the time of the Court Case on November 13, the evidence collected (including camera footage), autopsy findings, and other details that may help clarify what transpired that night. Mr. Benjamin's family and the wider community are still seeking answers.

As a community leader, I believe law enforcement agencies and their representatives should strengthen their engagement with the communities they serve, particularly during times of tragedy. Empathy, open communication, and meaningful community outreach can play a vital role in rebuilding trust and confidence between residents and the Police Force.

As Co-Founder of the St. Peters Community Council, I remain concerned by the many differing accounts, questions regarding procedures, and unresolved issues that have emerged since the incident. The public deserves assurance that all established protocols, training standards, and operational procedures were followed appropriately and that any shortcomings, if identified, will be addressed transparently.

The Police Force invests considerable resources in professional development, including emergency response training, lifesaving techniques, crisis intervention, and community-oriented policing. Consequently, members of the public continue to ask important questions, including:

  • Were all appropriate de-escalation measures exhausted before deadly force was used?
  • What is the police procedure when an officer is going to the scene of an individual who is perceived to have a weapon?
  • Were officers able to apply any of their life-saving or CPR training immediately following the shooting?
  • Is it necessary to shoot a person more than allegedly 10 times when the person did not shoot back at the officers?
  • Did the officers who shot Rudy Benjamin leave the crime scene, and were other officers brought in to take over the scene on their behalf? Is this part of standard police procedure?
  • Did the Police call a physician to officially pronounce Mr. Benjamin's death on the night of February 13 before his body was removed to the funeral home?
  • Can the authorities explain why Mr. Benjamin's death certificate allegedly indicates that a doctor pronounced him dead on February 14 at 11:50 a.m., rather than on the night of February 13 when the shooting occurred?
  • Are the three officers involved in the incident still actively serving? If so, why were they not placed on administrative leave pending the outcome of the investigation?
  • Did all investigative protocols follow established police procedures?

These questions are not intended to prejudge the outcome of the investigation or court proceedings. Rather, they reflect the legitimate concerns of a community seeking transparency, accountability, and a clear understanding of the facts. Many unanswered questions and conflicting accounts remain surrounding this incident. For this reason, many residents believe that presenting any available camera footage and other relevant evidence during the court proceedings will be essential to provide clarity, address speculation, and restore public confidence in the investigative process.

St. Peters residents viewed Rudy Benjamin as a well-known and respected member of the community. Many knew him as a hardworking individual who contributed positively to those around him and was often willing to help those in need. For that reason, many residents remain deeply shocked by the circumstances of his death and continue to struggle with the loss.

The family and the wider community hope that the court proceedings will provide a thorough, fair, and transparent examination of all relevant evidence, including any available video or audio recordings. Public confidence can only be strengthened when questions are answered openly and justice is administered impartially.

In addition, I encourage continued investment in tools and training that support accountability and de-escalation, including body-worn cameras, enhanced crisis intervention techniques, pepper spray, and other non-lethal response options. Such measures can strengthen community trust and help prevent similar tragedies in the future.

Ultimately, the people of St. Peters are seeking the truth. Transparency, accountability, and open communication are essential not only for the Benjamin family but also for restoring trust between law enforcement and the community it serves.

Maurice Lake

Co-Founder
St. Peters Community Council

A Call for Professionalism, Accountability and Respect from the Sint Maarten Red Cross.

Dear Editor,

luciancommunity0911206I am writing on behalf of the United St. Lucian Community Association to bring to the attention of the general public a matter of serious concern involving the Sint Maarten Red Cross, particularly its handling of our request for first responder services for our Annual Creole Day event.

On September 1, 2026, our Association formally submitted a written request to the Sint Maarten Red Cross for two first responders for our event, scheduled for October 31, 2026.

Unfortunately, as of September 25, 2026, when we formally raised our concerns with the organization, we had received no official response to our request.

This was particularly troubling because one requirement for obtaining an event permit from the Ministry of Justice was written confirmation from the relevant first responder agency indicating its willingness to provide coverage at the event.

We believe that organizations serving the public have a responsibility to communicate professionally, respond within a reasonable timeframe, and demonstrate accountability, particularly when their services are essential to community activities.

What made this situation even more concerning was how a Red Cross volunteer, Mr. Bradly Attly, subsequently handled communication.

Rather than addressing our formal correspondence through the Association's established communication channel, Mr. Attly contacted me personally by telephone seeking additional information. Despite my request that he direct further communication through the official channel, he subsequently contacted other members of our Board and attempted to arrange meetings with them.

As President, I believe it is important to maintain proper lines of communication and respect an organization's authority and structure. When a community association submits an official request, it is reasonable to expect a response directed to the Association through its established leadership.

I am also deeply concerned about previous statements attributed to Mr. Attly during earlier interactions. On those occasions, he stated that he had the authority to issue or reject event permits and could stop our event because we did not use the services of the Red Cross.

Such statements raise legitimate questions about the extent of authority vested in individual volunteers and the boundaries between an organization's responsibilities and the authority of government agencies.

No individual, regardless of their position or organizational affiliation, should create the impression that they possess powers that properly belong to government authorities. Equally, no community organization should feel intimidated, pressured, or disadvantaged for exercising its right to make independent decisions concerning its activities.

This matter is bigger than one event or one community association.

Community organizations throughout Sint Maarten dedicate considerable time, effort, and resources to organizing cultural, social, and charitable activities that contribute to the development and preservation of our communities. These organizations deserve courtesy, fairness, and professionalism from every institution with which they interact.

The Red Cross plays an important role in public safety and emergency response. We recognize and respect the importance of its work. However, the importance of an organization's mandate should never place it above the principles of transparency, accountability, and professional conduct.

We are not asking for special treatment. We are asking for respect, clear communication, and accountability.

We believe the leadership of the Sint Maarten Red Cross should address the following concerns:

  1. Why was our formal request of September 1, 2026, not formally acknowledged and addressed within a reasonable timeframe?
  2. What are the official procedures and requirements for community organizations seeking first responder services for public events?
  3. What authority, if any, do individual Red Cross volunteers have regarding event permits or preventing events from taking place?
  4. What measures are in place to ensure that volunteers communicate appropriately and professionally with the organizations requesting their services?

We believe these are reasonable questions that deserve clear answers, not only for our Association but also for other community organizations that may encounter similar circumstances.

As President of the United St. Lucian Community Association, I remain committed to protecting our organization's interests, dignity, and independence, as well as the communities we serve.

Community organizations should be partners in Sint Maarten's development, not entities made to feel intimidated or powerless when seeking essential services.

I hope that by bringing this matter into the public domain, we can encourage greater transparency, mutual respect, and accountability in the way institutions interact with community organizations.

Respect must be mutual, accountability must be expected, and no organization should feel that its ability to serve the community depends on submitting to the personal authority of an individual.

Yours respectfully,

Cliff C. James
President
The United St. Lucian Community Association

Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.xVinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x
Vinaora Nivo Slider 3.x