Regiment Releases Absentee Soldiers Names

Comments (72)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

1. tsol says:

   July 3, 2013

   A couple of these guys are over the age limit for conscription, I mean one of them was born 1977! How can he be made to do the regiment if he’s 35 or 36? Someone better tell that new commander of their’s that there is an age limitation.
   • Time Shall Tell says:

     July 3, 2013

     Exact same thing that I was thinking…
   • Hey says:

     July 3, 2013

     Why is it men only…discrimination against men. Women should be conscripted too. Otherwise it gives them more available time to advance their careers ahead of men.
     • chingo bingo says:

       July 5, 2013

       There is a lady on the list.
2. 111** long term absentee =p says:

   July 3, 2013

   I got some info for you, stop posting people’s s*** on the internet, you f#@kin a$$es, u not only ones lookin for ppl moron’s, regiment can sck something, ya and my names on the list, n I live next to you pricks.
   • Chingas Bye says:

     July 4, 2013

     So, you are a tough guy…just not tough enough for the regiment. I’m against conscription but boy can you use it. You won’t be so tough when you get pulled away from ya mommy dress.
3. Sandgrownan says:

   July 3, 2013

   What a complete waste of time and money. Why do they care about people born in the 70′s and 80′s.

   The Regiment is on he wrong side of history and this is he last gasp of a dying institution as long as it violate human rights.
4. Ride says:

   July 3, 2013

   Bad boys, bad boys. What ya gonna do? What ya gonna do when de come for you?

   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPrtvv014h8
5. Bermyman says:

   July 3, 2013

   “It’s in everyone’s interests for people with outstanding time to serve in the Regiment to do something about it, rather than just hoping the problem will go away – it won’t,”

   Why would we want to help the regiment imprison people!? It is not in my best interests nor the general publics to turn in these men. It is upto the regiment to deal with it themselves, not to get the public involved. It has nothing to do with the public that they cannot control their own recruits. Why do these people not want to be there? That is the main issue.
6. SAJIL says:

   July 3, 2013

   Typical Regiment scare tactics:
   Just an FYI:
   According to the Defence Act 1965 part II section 17A:
   “Requirement to serve if selected for military service
   Notwithstanding anything in this Act contained, any person selected for military service under this Act shall be required to serve in the regiment for a period of three years and two months:
   Provided that no person shall be required to serve in the regiment after he attains the age of thirty-three years”

   There are 20 people on that list above that are over 33 years old and by the law cannot be required to serve.
   • uncle sam says:

     July 3, 2013

     Noticed the same thing
   • hmm says:

     July 3, 2013

     if you understood the defense act you’d realise that that 33 year old limit only applies to initially entereing the regiment, it doesn’t count if you skip for 10 years. Then again I’m surprised that they are looking for these guys, considering their budget cuts you’d think they’d spend the resources on something else. i did my 3 years, 2 months, 2 weeks and got out of there, that’s the easiest thing to do.
     • SAJIL says:

       July 3, 2013

       Actually I do understand the act very well… making sure Government departments are in compliance with legislation is the biggest part of my job. Any decent lawyer can argue once a man reaches the age 33 they cannot be forced to serve regardless if they have started their service or not. That being said they are probably only still listed due to the regiment’s complete ineptitude of compiling accurate data.

       I do agree with you that chasing down 33 year old men is a complete waste of time and money when they should be focusing on (a) the young guys that could use the discipline and (b) providing a better service for Bermuda.
       • Truth (Original) says:

         July 3, 2013

         The Regiments ineptitude? The Government of Bermuda has the same problem. Considering, that’s where all of this information is coming from in the first place, I suggest that your criticism is misplaced.
       • Actual Legal Mind says:

         July 3, 2013

         “the biggest part of your job”? Well I’m an actual, good lawyer, who works in Government and I will tell you that your assesment is incorrect- this is not a call for service, this is an absentee list, which means age has no bearing. The heading of the section you quoted sums it up nicely- selection for service- obviously those on this list over 33 were selected for service prior to attaining that age…
         “any decent lawyer can argue…” your sentence makes no sense- why would a man who has attained the age of 33, and already called for service be incapable of serving?? And do tell how this “decent lawyer” would pose his/her arguement…
         • SAJIL says:

           July 3, 2013

           My comment makes perfect sense if read correctly. It was based on the assumption that should the Regiment be successful in locating these men they would want them to complete their service. I never said they were incapable, the act states they are not required to do so. We in fact do not know for sure what the Regiment intends to do with these gentlemen if found, I was merely pointing out that they could not force the ones who have attained the age of 33 to finish their service if that is their intention.
   • Laughin' My A** Off says:

     July 3, 2013

     if you can read properly it says you cannot be called up after the age of 33. Those people were obviously called up before but failed to complete their service. which is entirely sad and ridiculous because as much as Bermudians insult the regiment myself included there are alot of names on this list for a defense unit which in terms of defense region wide or even worldwide does absolutely nothing. the regiment in military standards is a walk in the park
     • SAJIL says:

       July 3, 2013

       If you read it accurately it says:
       “Provided that no person shall be required to serve in the regiment after he attains the age of thirty-three years”

       “Required to serve” means that they cannot be called up that’s true but it also means that if they have already been called up and they reach the age of 33 during their service they are not required to serve past that age. They can if they wish but cannot be forced to. This was confirmed by a Commanding Sergeant Major at the Regiment.
       • Truth (Original) says:

         July 3, 2013

         I think you’re reading way too much into the act. I don’t know how you are coming to that conclusion given the wording of the act.

         Fuethermore, “Commanding Seargent Major” do not exist in the Regiment.
         • SAJIL says:

           July 3, 2013

           His rank was CSM I was told that stood for Commanding Seargent Major, if I am mistaken please let me know. I do not wish to print his name as I do not have his permission.
           • Rockfish#2 says:

             July 3, 2013

             SAJIL,

             CSM means Company Sergeant Major.
             • SAJIL says:

               July 3, 2013

               Thank you.
           • Watching On says:

             July 3, 2013

             Methinks you mean Company Sergeant Major
7. Victor says:

   July 3, 2013

   It seems likely new CO, undefeated in Afghanistan, is keen to prove his mettle with these miscreants – somehow, I think he has met his match here…
   • Time Shall Tell says:

     July 3, 2013

     Agreed, though considering the state Afghanistan is still in, I think this is not the first time.
8. tsol says:

   July 3, 2013

   @SAJIL, yeah that was the first thing that went through my mind, but I think all this really is a money grab. If they get hold of any of the guys on the list they will get a “substantial fine”, which I’m guessing is probably a couple grand. The guys who are over 33, “and looking the list over again I see there is 38 year old on it), cannot be made to actually do the regiment but the obviously went up to Warwick Camp and signed up at some point, hence their ranks and numbers are listed, so they can still be fined. The joke of course is you know that none of these older 30 something guys names have been called up or had their names printed in the papers probably for at least a decade.
   JUST SIMPLY A MONEY MAKING SCHEME BY THE NEW COMMMANDER
9. gatsby says:

   July 3, 2013

   Fine them a $1,000 each. Then pay them $3,000/year x 3.2. They should all show up and bankrupt the regiment!!

   Not a good first move by the new CO. This and arresting the other guy at the airport.
10. jake best says:

    July 3, 2013

    bermudas joke army,,,funny as hell
11. I Am Just Saying says:

    July 3, 2013

    one of those listed is a cop lol
12. Judge Dredd says:

    July 3, 2013

    I see a woman’s name on the list? Are women conscripted as well? I must be really late.
    • 1minute says:

      July 3, 2013

      That meant she volunteered… Then didn’t go…
13. Vote for Me says:

    July 3, 2013

    Seems like they have not realy tried to find these guys. Many are household names and a simple visit to their houses would have quickly located them years ago.

    One story said their skipping the Regiment costs the Bermuda tax payer. Something about that does not seem right. How does me skipping the Regimaent cost money?? The reverse is probably true. If they do not serve, there is no need to pay them.
14. toy machine says:

    July 3, 2013

    Tsol, your giving the regiment to much credit. This is just some list on a computer up at Warwick Camp, do you think they even bothered to check if people on it were over 33 before they issued it to the press? That being said it would be good for a lawyer reading this article to chime in and tell us what the regiment can legally do if you are over 33.
    • wow. just wow says:

      July 3, 2013

      once you are enlisted that 33 years you guys are holding dear too is out the window. read your defence act before talk your sh*t!
      • SAJIL says:

        July 3, 2013

        Actually it isn’t. The Defence act is unmistakably clear in that once you reach the age of 33 you are not required to serve. PERIOD. It applies to enlisted men as well as men not yet drafted. It was specifically added to the end of the paragraph that lays out the length of service that is what “provided that” means in legal terms.

        You are required to serve three years and two months “provided that” you are not required to serve past 33 years of age (if you don’t want to). Therefore if you have not finished your service and are now 33 years old you cannot be forced to.

        There is no “holding on” it’s simply the facts. If you believe that it doesn’t apply to men already enlisted copy and paste the clause in the Act to back up your claim.

        http://www.bermudalaws.bm/Laws/Consolidated%20Laws/Defence%20Act%201965.pdf
        • Actual Legal Mind says:

          July 3, 2013

          Sajil your interpretation of the law is flawed. You are reading a section that deals with service- again, age has no bearing for absent soldiers. These over 33 year old soldiers are absent, and therefore in breach of the Act and should suffer the penalty provided in the Act, which by the way isn’t service- nowhere does it say that persons listed have to report for duty…
          • SAJIL says:

            July 3, 2013

            I respectfully disagree with you. However it is the nature of legislation that it is open to interpretation, otherwise lawyers wouldn’t have much work to do.
      • WTF says:

        July 3, 2013

        “Requirement to serve if selected for military service
        17A Notwithstanding anything in this Act contained, any person selected for military service under this Act shall be required to serve in the regiment for a period of three years and two months:

        Provided that no person shall be required to serve in the regiment after he attains the age of thirty-three years.”

        Please re-read wow. just wow
15. Nuffin but da Truth says:

    July 3, 2013

    more B/S from the B/S regiment!
16. Umm.... says:

    July 3, 2013

    Haha! My name isn’t on there and I never showed up for camp! SUCKERS!!!!
17. slow potato says:

    July 3, 2013

    they cant lock you all up.
18. Jahma says:

    July 3, 2013

    The regiment is a joke and a type of slavery!I refused and will always refuse to be a slave to that system!I saw a friend of mine name and he was born in 1975!I guess my name should be in there also than cause I did 2 week camp and never went back cause it was like playing toy soldiers!A waist of damn time to me!I thought slavery was over!NOT!
    • What Grinds My Gears says:

      July 3, 2013

      Although conscription is wrong, it is NO WAY SHAPE OR FORM of slavery.

      Ppl fail to realize that there are atleast 50+ individuals within the Regiment that are currently unemployed who seek extra hours just so that they are able to have a sustainable source of income. You all think its a waist. Your entiled to your opinion. BUT dont judge an organization that is only enforcing what is law. SIMPLE FACT
      • Hey says:

        July 3, 2013

        It discriminates agains men ! Why aren’t women treated the same.
19. smokey says:

    July 3, 2013

    Is it the governor who is in charge of the regiment and police.This name release had to be approved by himself and the oba gov. I wonder if the oba will out businesses that break the law by this same method.Those businesses that keep pension and health monies taken from employees pay to enhance their own personal gains. Some of these businessman are their friends doing this.Remember the list of guilty companies published last year , what ever happened to these companies?
20. Ty says:

    July 3, 2013

    I could be wrong on this one but I also heard that if you have a criminal record you cannot serve in the regiment. How many of these young guys have a criminal record. (gotten after being called up to serve) I see one on there that I know for fact has a criminal record.

    Someone correct me if I am wrong on this.
    • What Grinds My Gears says:

      July 3, 2013

      You are correct, however, it is not up to the regiment to vet the individuals. That process is done by Gov. If any of the individuals listed now have a criminal record; more than likely they will be discharged from the regiment.
      • watchfuleyes says:

        July 4, 2013

        well how many Bermudians have not been arrested and charged for possession of herb? that should allow quite a few of them to be discharged right? they would then have a criminal record and be on the none stop list!
21. Sorry Sir says:

    July 3, 2013

    This is what happens when you have a Regiment built solely on Conscription.

    The Regiment has nothing to do but chase absentees. We waste money on this rubbish.

    Either give the Regiment something to do like help tackle gang violence or get rid of it all together.
    • What Grinds My Gears says:

      July 3, 2013

      You are so worng. The regiment is chasing ppl through public notices and other means. Has anyone seen an RP lately chasing ppl? NO! WHY? They cant afford to pay them (RPs.

      This guy was caught at the airport as this list and other names, are held with customs. Thus, goodluck trying the leave OR return to the island without being caught.

      I suggest everyone hold their comments about the future of the regiment until the National Security Review has been completed.
22. this is crap! says:

    July 3, 2013

    putting people’s names and addresses in the public domain is dangerous, you are enviting crazy idiots to come to people’s home.
    In this gang/gun climate, that is a very unwise move.
    • REMOVE NOW!!!!!!!! says:

      July 3, 2013

      CO of the Regiment it appears you have no idea what’s going on in Bermuda. It was not a good idea to place information about these young men on Bernews. You have placed their safety in question. Lord help you if this information goes to the wrong people. : (
23. Chocolate Syrup says:

    July 3, 2013

    Does anyone else have a problem with the names, birthdates and addresses being made public???? Is this legal?
    • What Grinds My Gears says:

      July 3, 2013

      Yes, it is very legal. No different when names are published for recruits and no different when individuals appear in court and are convicted of a crime. These guys are breaking the law; thus, the info is made public.
24. ? says:

    July 3, 2013

    I guess I would be mad if I put in my dues and these fools don’t wanna stand up for their rights publicly So they hide like cowards. I’m sure it would cost taxpayers less if the military police didn’t have so many brethren on the above list
25. Pickles says:

    July 3, 2013

    I don’t see how this can be allowed. That’s personal information being broadcast over the internet.

    Much more than a slight invasion of privacy right there! I mean c’mon!

    But in all seriousness, is this actually legal? Or are we going to see this article retracted with ‘apologies’ to all the people who were violated today?
26. markus says:

    July 3, 2013

    regiment is terrible. Waste of taxpayers money. Bringing MORE people who don’t want to go will increase the taxpayers’ money. I do not understand their logic at all.
27. Next says:

    July 3, 2013

    Imagine if they put the same effort into finding drug dealers, gang members and murderers.
28. think about it says:

    July 3, 2013

    the taxpayers paid me $144 to stand at a gate for 6-7 hours in june.

    thank you taxpayers, money well spent! thank your government and your joke of an army in which 5 people actually take seriously.
29. toy machine says:

    July 3, 2013

    “Provided that no person shall be required to serve in the regiment after he attains the age of thirty-three years” Straight from the Defense Act of 1965(I know other people have quoted it already), but it just goes to show how inept the Regiment is. The regiment and their new CO better revise that list in regards to the people on it 33 years old and over before they get sued and the Regiment goes bankrupt.
    • Bermyman says:

      July 3, 2013

      Technically because those people are now exempt they could engage in a lawsuit against the regiment. You are publicly being accused of a crime that you are not committing according to the law.
      • wow. just wow says:

        July 4, 2013

        dunba$$ the crime was committed before the age of 33. non of you f#@kfaces figured that out yet
30. Annoyed says:

    July 3, 2013

    If there is a list of names at the airport for non-compliance to conscription, then the same should be done for non-payment of child support and maintenance.
31. ya says:

    July 3, 2013

    I used my I.D. issued by the regiment when I went to a gun range out in America so I could get a discount.

    They man behind the counter argued that it was fake, and while I did say it was real, he said that all the fonts were different sizes and some were bold font and some were not and no real army would distribute such a unprofesional grainy innacurate I.D.

    There is proof right there that even forigners think our regiment is a joke, they dont even believe it exists.
32. R U SERZ says:

    July 3, 2013

    They should be ashamed of their damn selves why the heck would you post all these people’s names and addresses on the Internet are you all daft dumb or dopey. What happened to privacy. Nobody cares about the damn regiment.
33. d.o. says:

    July 3, 2013

    you know the names so put all on the stop list for ships or planes points of departure. Also at TCD , social insurance. Gotta be plenty of ways to coral most of them. Some monies for the government coffers lets hope.
34. Amazing says:

    July 3, 2013

    The ‘new’ English Commander is definitely starting off on the wrong foot on trying to get persons to like the regiment. This is a person who has no understanding of Bermudians and I venture to gamble that he doesn’t even care. This is very highly disrespectful.
35. Honesty says:

    July 4, 2013

    lol wake up Bermuda Regiment…Forget calling it the ‘Absentee Soldiers’..just rename it to what it really is “Individuals who don’t give a f#@k”. I have yet to come across a Bermudian who is thrilled to do that shxt. Why don’t they list all the sex offenders? Name and address… No, instead you want to piss off the average person who clearly does not want to be bothered
36. watchfuleyes says:

    July 4, 2013

    this is hilarious- people would have done well to join BAD years ago and show a united front and no one would probably be going through this nonsense right now- isn’t conscription suppose to be abolished in 2013 according to our new govt? what is with the OBA’s lies- lies to get in and lies to stay in- someone should take them to task on these lies. stand firm you guys, but I have been fighting your fight for over 8 years now, maybe you need to be more vocal and not just on the blogs. Take them to task, keep arguing your point on the talk shows and maybe even on Let’s Talk on Monday nights, rally Bermuda behind you there is lots of support to do away with conscription believe me.
37. CRAZY RIDER says:

    July 4, 2013

    name and shame people who dont want to serve in the regiment but dont have the balls to name sex offenders is there something wrong with this picture
38. WTF?! says:

    July 11, 2013

    Alright what the hell. I served my time and did my extra days long before summer came around and you still have the audacity to put my full name and address and DoB on this sxxtlist?!
39. Truth (Original) says:

    July 3, 2013

    1. You’re a numpty.

    2. The Regiment is not a defense agency.

    3. You can’t steal anyone’s info from a name and an address. If that were the case, every piece of mail that gets delivered would be putting everyone at risk.