I GENERALLY like Dr Gerald Edwards' contributions to the Letters Pages although I don't agree with them. However, his latest contribution (February 6) was so ridiculous I had to laugh out loud.
President Trump came to Scotland on an official visit, which generated a campaign against him. According to Dr Edwards, this was not welcoming and things would have been different if Nicola Sturgeon had gone to the United States. On the orders of President Trump, the border officials tore babies out of the arms of their parents and locked them in cages. Has Dr Edwards never heard of adverse childhood experiences? These children will never recover from what was done to them, on the express command of President Trump. If anyone thinks that was a welcoming act, words fail me.
Margaret Forbes,
Corlic Way, Kilmacolm, Inverclyde.
ON reading Alison Rowat ("Watch out for the women in white in fight against Trump", The Herald, February 7) I genuinely wondered if we live in an alternate universe. It is sad how unrepresentative this article was of the actual reaction of US citizens to President Trump’s State of the Union speech.
CBS, hardly a Trump supporter, revealed that the approval of the speech stood at 76 per cent and voters were 72 per cent in support of President Trump’s immigration policy. It would appear that in common with the vast majority of the UK media Ms Rowat is reflecting the Democratic bias of most of the US media.
Surely we should expect our journalists to accurately inform us of the real state of the world rather than act as cheerleaders for political spin and fake news.
It is also worth noting that several of the newly-elected female Congresswomen have already become embroiled in scandals so it might be wise to reserve judgment before lavishing praise upon them all.
David Stubley,
22 Templeton Crescent, Prestwick.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here