Anonymity is granted only at the discretion of the editor, who also reserves the right to edit letters.

White poppy not needed

AS REMEMBRANCE Day approaches, I see on the TV news that white poppies for peace will be sold in schools alongside red poppies.

I see no need for white poppies as, to me, they signify absolutely nothing.

Years ago, as a team leader, I had a conflict of interest with a dominating type of female who told me, “I wear a white poppy for peace and refuse to wear a red poppy.”

My answer to that was: “Although lots of men and ladies had no choice during the wars, past and present, they fought and died so that you would have a ‘choice’ and, if things had worked out differently, you wouldn’t have any ‘choices’ so throw the white poppy in the bin and wear the nationwide recognised symbol that is the red poppy!”

I do, in a way understand the reason behind the need for a white poppy but we have established the use of the red poppy for Remembrance.

If anyone does write in with support for the White Poppy, then my response could be very personal, so I will not respond. That, though, is my personal opinion!

Can anyone see the sense in someone wearing a white poppy attending a Remembrance Service amongst a sea of red poppies?

We know where the money collected for the sale of white poppies goes, seemingly to promote white poppies.

In conclusion, after watching ‘Sunday Morning Live’, the argument for wearing the white poppies was, to me, inconclusive.

Even a member of the Green Party was shown wearing both red and white poppies - obviously to show that she was unable to come to a reason to differentiate and made out that she supported both. ‘Sitting on the fence’ comes to mind.

CHRIS GLEED, Proud Close, Purton

Hate crime problem

IN A display of virtue signalling of the highest magnitude, Police And Crime Commissioner Angus Macpherson brings together a ‘select’ group of people to talk about one of the fastest growing crimes to hit our shores for decades – hate crime.

There is no doubt there has been an exponential rise in hate crime reporting, that should come as no surprise, as not only is reporting hate crime actively encouraged; just in case there is any chance of it not being reported, the definition of hate crime is so wide it includes anything a complainant wants it to mean.

The need for evidence is secondary when it comes to hate crime, a point reinforced by the police who are advised that “evidence of the hostility is not required for an incident or crime to be recorded as a hate crime.”

Moreover, you don’t have to be a victim or even in the vicinity of an incident to ‘perceive whether a hate crime has taken place’ and a victim or witness should not have their ‘impression that a crime is motivated by hate or prejudice challenged’ – hardly a rigorous examination of the facts.

Supt Sue Austin who leads on hate crime states that despite alleged hate crime amounting to 600 out of 41,000 reported crimes all hate crime is unacceptable. So, too, is knife crime but that’s a different story.

Perhaps we shouldn’t be surprised in an increase in reporting from a generation of easily upset and often indulged minority groups, who are more likely to register a compliant when they know there is a Police And Crime Commissioner ready and willing to ‘understand them’ and pander to their undoubted sensibilities.

As I pen these words, I am sure someone will use them to suggest I hate the LGBT community, the Muslim community and the disabled. Nothing could be further from the truth, but in this over sensitive environment nothing would surprise me.

DES MORGAN, Caraway Drive, Swindon

Is anyone happier?

MY WIFE and I married in our teens. Fifty five years later we still hold hands, regardless of her advanced Alzheimer’s. All I get now is a brief smile, which makes my day, as she has lost the gift of speech We both worked hard and brought up five children, plus now long gone cherished family pets.

I live in a more technologically advanced society than the one I was born in, which had no central heating, outside toilets, baths TVs or telephones, never mind mobiles.

However, are our children any happier than we were for all these modern advances? I doubt it.

Some examples come to mind: University fees are a disgrace, they are a taxpayers’ obligation; The destruction of our fishing fleets and unlimited immigration to our island.

No police presence on the streets, transgender nonsense regarding young vulnerable children, a depleted Armed Forces in dangerous times for us all.

A disgraceful waste of billions of pounds in Foreign Aid.

Finally, a dithering Prime Minister and elected government paying financial homage, at British hard working taxpayers’ expense, to a European Disunion that is on the verge of financial collapse and anarchy.

BILL WILLIAMS, Merlin Way, Covingham, Swindon

Pot calling kettle black

DOES Steve Thompson understand the meaning of the word hypocrisy? Letters to the Editor, “Not worth a reply” (SA October 23).

Referring to a letter from Roger Lack he said, “He has lost any credibility by his use of insulting words and therefore is unworthy of detailed refutation.”

In his letter, “A third referendum” (SA October 20) Mr Thompson said, “There will be some no doubt who say calling for a third referendum (for we have had two) is treason, but this is nonsense and they are headbangers and trolls with no knowledge of the law.”

When you used the term “headbangers” Mr Thompson were you referring to fans or performers of heavy metal music or were you using a derogatory term for people who have a mental illness? Is it acceptable to call anybody who disagrees with your opinions a “troll”?

Bigotry comes in many forms. Are members of the Green Party only tolerant of and pleasant to people who share their opinions?

If Mr Thompson feels the need to use insults to justify his cause it is his prerogative to do so but to reprimand someone else for allegedly doing the same stinks of duplicity. It is like the kettle calling the pot black.

Are your insulting words worthy of detailed refutation Mr Thompson?

K KANE, Wharf Road, Wroughton

Just walk away

AS THE EU continues to be intransigent over Brexit negotiations, the British government should be prepared to walk away with no deal rather than a bad deal.

The Government would have the support of the British people. According to a new Sky Data poll a majority believe ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’.

Seventy four per cent agree the country should walk away rather than accept a ‘punishment’ deal. Just 26 per cent think ‘any deal is better than no deal’.

While it is be hoped that the UK and EU will reach a deal that benefits both sides, it is vital that we should be prepared to walk away without a deal if necessary.

If, because of EU bullying, the UK and EU agree to a bad deal, then Britain will be saddled with the terms of the deal for decades.

PHILIP WINTER, Southmead Road, Filton, South Glos

A simple solution

IT IS fascinating to listen to those who are advocating a transition period after the deal is done between Britain and the EU because of the uncertainty of the trade deal.

Surely if the Government said they intended to trade with all comers, including the EU, via World Trade Organisation rules there would be no uncertainty requiring a transition period, no payments for EU membership, and no more EU control of Britain’s affairs?

NOEL GARDNER, Carlisle Avenue, Swindon