It has finally come to pass that the wishes of the "idiot" minority are valued more than those of the supposed majority. In Thursday's ET, two items made me extremely angry.
Firstly, there was the story that RAF staff had been told not to wear their uniforms, as they might offend certain sections of the community. When I read this item, I contrasted it with something I witnessed on a flight from Los Angeles to San Franc
isco last year.
There were a good number of US forces personnel at LAX airport, and people showed their support by shaking their hands and talking to them. In return, the army personnel, who were all in uniform, spoke to people in an appreciative and courteous manner.
Once we were on the plane, the head steward announced: "Ladies and gentlemen, we all have busy lives, but on the flight today we have a group of people who have chosen to do a job that many of us would not, and place their lives in danger to protect us, so please show your appreciation for our military personnel on this flight today."
The entire plane applaued enthusiastically. To show this was no hollow gesture, the aircraft staff then upgraded some of the military staff to first class as there were spare seats. I happened to be sitting in first next to an empty seat, and as I am a Sikh and have a turban and beard, the steward told me what they wanted to do, and asked if I would object to a military person in uniform sitting next to me.
My reply was: "If they are comfortable sitting next to me in my uniform, then I would be delighted to have them sit next to me." He laughed and shook my hand.
For the next hour I sat next to a soldier from Texas, who was flying to Iraq in two days' time. I was the first Sikh he had ever met, and although he kept calling me sir throughout our conversation, he was just a young man who was doing his job, and he just happened to be wearing a uniform.
For once, we could learn something from the Americans, who take pride in their forces personnel and the sacrifices they make. If we fail to do so, then what next? Police officers wearing civvies, so as not to upset anyone who has ever been arrested?
Secondly, regarding the report of the"huge" number of expulsions from the city's Thomas Deacon Academy. Once again, why should a handful of thugs who disrupt the learning of about 2,000 pupils be given special dispensation, or even a second thought?
If they feel that school has nothing to offer them, then why should the good kids suffer? The bleeding heart liberals will say that it is our duty to help them, otherwise they will fall into a life of crime.
Chances are, they are already there, so can we concentrate on the 2,000 pupils who go to school to learn and try to better society? My support is fully with the principal and I hope that he and his staff continue to weed out the unruly, disruptive and violent elements, as it makes school a safer place for the children who value their education.
So, in conclusion, hang the minority (metaphorically speaking) and let's have safer schools and support our military personnel.
Del Singh
Park Road,
Peterborough Mark RAF day with
march in the cityReGARDING the RAF uniform row, April 1 is the 90th anniversary of the formation of the Royal Air Force.
It should be marked by RAF Wittering exercising its Freedom of the City by marching proudly in uniform through Peterborough with fitted bayonets and beating drums, and with the Group Captain leading.
Does the saying "sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me" mean nothing to her? Get to it Ma'am! ( I am a retired ex-serviceman of 37 years' service).
John Webber
Bedford Way,
Sawtry,
near PeterboroughGet facts right first
before taking popIn a letter of February 27, R Maywood states that "our wretched tax- grabbing government" is launching a pilot programme "aimed at taxing excessive amounts of non-recyclable rubbish in our black bins". He then asserts that the Green Party and Friends of the Earth are sure to applaud such a move.
I am both a member of the Green Party and supporter of Friends of the Earth and should have liked to respond to these remarks. However, it is not at all clear what Mr Maywood is talking about.
Mr Maywood takes a pop at the above organisations for believing we are in danger from rising sea levels as a result of global warming. He does not seem to appreciate that most people who take an interest in the world around them now accept that this threat is real. There is hardly a shortage of evidence.
On a previous occasion, your correspondent informed readers that the Green Party and Friends of the Earth "enthusiastically advocate the use of biofuels to reduce carbon dioxide". This is far from the truth.
These groups did give a cautious welcome to early moves to replace fossil fuels with biofuels because, if produced wisely and on a sensible scale, they could contribute to a reduction in emissions from the transport sector, without damaging the environment. However, both groups have been highly critical of a dash for biofuels that is ill-thought out, lacking in appropriate safeguards and may create more problems than it solves.
May I suggest Mr Maywood takes the trouble to acquaint himself with the policies of organisations he is not a member of, but seeks to represent, rather than putting words into their mouths or making unfounded allegations.
Finally, I would ask that Mr Maywood addresses Friends of the Earth and the Green Party as the quite different organisations that they are, rather than lumping them together.
Sally Plummer
Franklyn Crescent,
PeterboroughThe full article contains 1011 words and appears in n/a newspaper.
