Letters: Blair and Iraq

Sir: So, Eddie Johnson (letter, 30 May) seeks to join your other correspondents who reckon Tony Blair should be taken to a war crimes tribunal.

What amazes me about the lies claim, often fuelled by your editorial, is how it implicitly assumes the prime ministers and ruling parties of Spain, Portugal, Italy, Holland, Denmark, Australia, Poland and the Ukraine were liars as well as Bush and Blair, since they all voted to invade Iraq and sent troops to do so, based on the same flawed intelligence.

I suspect the lack of WMD was just as much a surprise to their leaders as well, but it no more makes liars out of them than it does the substantial majority of the UN who told Saddam Hussein to get rid of his WMD at a time when the wisdom of hindsight shows us he had none.

When will the vociferous minority of the anti-Blair, anti-war brigade realise the world has been rid of a despot responsible for the deaths of millions. They need to realise the reason Bush, Blair and the other eight heads of state will never appear in the bullet-proof glass dock at The Hague, is because they do not deserve to.

Maybe such critics should also reflect on what it must be like to make decisions which affect the safety and prosperity of the country, rather than which soap to watch or whether the milk carton goes in the black bin or the brown bin.

IAN MAUDE

WHERWELL, HAMPSHIRE

Sir: Legal sophistry apart, whether of the ad hoc or the ex-post facto variety (letter, 23 May) the fact remains that, whether de facto or de jure, Tony Blair stands condemned in the court of world opinion - the most important court of all, as a liar and a war criminal.

Even Lord Goldsmith, initially believed the war could be challenged on legal grounds (report, 7 March) until he changed his mind 10 days later. Given that the British government and its controllers in Washington have been responsible for the deaths of up to a million Iraqis, it ill behoves Margaret Beckett to berate the Russian government for refusing to hand over one man for the alleged murder of one Russian dissident.

As Latin seems to be in vogue now one would do well to recall the Latin tag: "Quis tulerit Gracchos de seditione quaerentes." Who would suffer the Gracchi [well-known Roman revolutionaries] to complain of sedition?

FRED SHIPTON

BRIGHTON, EAST SUSSEX

Why do they pick on Israel?

Sir: As a Brit living in Israel, I find it increasingly embarrassing and hard to explain to Israelis why people in Britain appear to be so hypocritical about Israel.

The latest boycott threat condemns the "complicity of Israeli academia in the [Palestinian] occupation". I assume this "complicity" is the only way that they can differentiate between, for example, the US and British occupation of Iraq and that of Palestine. But by paying taxes to the British government, which is paying the British Army which is occupying Iraq, British academics are also complicit in occupation.

The last I heard, the Palestinians voted freely and democratically for a terrorist group that has massacred hundreds of Israelis, and shows no interest in peace. I assume the British academia examined whether the Palestinian members of the group who called for the latest boycott voted for Hamas.

The other call for a boycott that bemused and embarrassed me recently was a British journalist group calling for a boycott of Israel while a British journalist is being held against his will by a Palestinian terror group.

Do I need to list the numerous countries with abysmal human rights records (far, far worse that Israel can ever be accused of) that the British academia are not concerned enough about to consider taking action against?

The repeated singling out of Israel for criticism simply indicates ulterior motives. Growing up in Britain, I only experienced one somewhat serious incident of anti-Semitism and that came from a local Arab family. But it is increasingly hard to come up with another reason why the only country repeatedly demonised in Britain is Israel.

MICHELLE MOSHELIAN

GIVATAYIM, ISRAEL

Sir: Your editorial against the proposed academic boycott of Israel (31 May) was so far from decency and sanity that it must have been a hoax.

The boycott was requested by the Palestinian campaign for academic and cultural boycott of Israel (PACBI). Gandhi said "non-co-operation with evil is a sacred duty" and this is exactly what the 158 academics voted for.

You state: "A boycott will not discomfort the Israeli government." The proposed British academic boycott in the other previously apartheid state worked very well. Bearing in mind the other boycotts developing amongst artists, architects, doctors and others here and in many other countries I am quite sure the Israeli government will be very sensitive indeed. The Israeli government must be aware that it governs a pariah state. When the majority of its population realises it as well then they will have to concede equal rights for all occupants of Israel/Palestine.

As a British doctor, I am ashamed that our BMA refuses to criticise the Israeli Medical Association for allowing its members to behave unethically. The Israeli Medical Association should be boycotted as requested by PACBI. The damning evidence lies in several international reports, and that from Physicians for Human Rights Israel.

DR CHRIS BURNS-COX

CONSULTANT PHYSICIAN WOTTON-UNDER-EDGE GLOUCESTERSHIRE

Electrosmog panic obscures science

Sir: As a science teacher, I was stunned by the pseudo-science Julia Stephenson was allowed to promote ("My war on electrosmog", 31 May). We do live in an electrosmog. Indeed, we have evolved from the primordial soup in an electrosmog and those electromagnetic waves (light, microwaves, radio-waves) continue to inform us about the origins of the Universe.

As for electromagnetic waves making someone "radioactive", I would hope that most of my Year 10 students could point out the idiocy of that statement.

A Wi-Fi transmitter operates at less than one watt. The Crystal Palace transmitter works at many thousands of watts but I don't remember south London's plants wilting when that started transmitting digital TV signals in the mid-Nineties.

We keep being told there is a crisis in science education. Perhaps this sort of scaremongering is evidence of that. Either way, it has given me a great piece of material to use in class as an example of how scientific ignorance can lead to fear and the purchase of expensive trinkets with no proven effect.

THOMAS WILLIAM-POWLETT

NEWPORT, ESSEX

Sir: I too have noticed a strange headache and nausea, much like that described by Ms Stephenson. But I'm becoming convinced that mine is being induced by articles such as this.

No matter what one believes about the effects of Wi-Fi on one's health, the ramblings of a self-confessed hypochondriac, "diagnosed" by her naturopath, and who now believes herself to be "less radioactive" (does she possess a Geiger counter? If not, I have one I can lend her) cannot be taken seriously.

DR ANNELA SEDDON

DEPARTMENT OF CHEMISTRY IMPERIAL COLLEGE, LONDON

Sir: Julia Stephenson deserves a prize for mentioning the maximum number of fashionable delusions in a single article.

"Electrosensitivity" may exist, although despite research the evidence is equivocal, to put it mildly. The symptoms Ms Stephenson mentions (disturbed sleep, fatigue, headaches) are utterly non-specific. When I get them, I attribute them to being alive, or having a job, or having small children.

One thing you can be quite sure of: the remedies Ms Stephenson lists for electrosensitivity - herbalism, homeopathy, magic pendants, flower essences and "EMF protective boxes" - will all cost you real money, and the people selling them are all keen believers in electrosensitivity.

As a low-cost alternative, I would recommend a relaxing country walk. If you want to choose the route to avoid radio masts and pylons, please yourself.

AUSTIN ELLIOTT

MANCHESTER

Sir: It is telling that reports on the negative effect of cellphone masts and wireless internet are mostly confined to Britain. It leads one to believe that they are not a medical phenomenon but a cultural-specific syndrome, much akin to the cases of "penis panic" seen in South-east Asia.

THOMAS ALBERS

LONDON NW3

Software fails in test? Good news

Sir: Your article on the sex-offenders' database computer system (29 May) states that "the Home Office has cancelled the launch after software failed in tests". The tone of the article suggests this is a bad thing.

As a software testing professional, I am heartened to learn that the Home Office has undertaken testing, discovered problems (that is what testing is intended to do) and decided not to release a faulty system.

Government and the private sector often release systems that are found not to work properly only after they go live, which can be attributed to inadequate testing. That really is a bad thing, particularly because it can be avoided.

This should be seen as a good news story, for common sense, and in celebration of the testing community, who for some reason very rarely get into the news.

SARAGH PENFOLD

FALKIRK

No way to shape a debate on abortion

Sir: The Independent front page (1 June), with a picture of Cardinal Keith O'Brien pictured alongside the heading, "The man who wants to lead a sensible debate on abortion", is clever, but is itself scarcely calculated to promote "sensible debate".

The photograph is close-cropped and the cardinal caught in mid-speech, with an intense stare, well-known methods of making a figure look threatening. The reader is thus invited to conclude that the cardinal is the last person who might lead a rational discussion.

Turning the page, Joan Smith proceeds to ask in her column: "How can you have a political debate with anti-abortionists who don't like the present law?" Certainly not by caricaturing them, accusing them of "hysteria" or equating them with the American "religious right".

A new debate between pro-choice and pro-life positions is required, and it needs to begin, as the cardinal begins, by acknowledging the uncomfortable truth that in Scotland alone "the equivalent of a classful of kids" is aborted every day.

ROB ESDAILE

THAMES DITTON, SURREY

Sir: Cardinal O'Brien is missing a trick. Abortion itself is not the problem that needs to be addressed; the root of the problem is in the lack of education regarding safe sex, the pressures from the media and peer groups to have sex, the continuing disempowerment of women, and the stigma attached to behaving sensibly. Somehow, it is the done thing to put oneself at risk, rather than to protect oneself.

Until these issues are addressed directly by the churches themselves as well as other agencies, abortion will remain the problematic tip of a very problematic iceberg.

SUSAN O'MAHONY

NORWICH

Sir: Any Catholic MP who intends to heed Cardinal O'Brien's strictures on abortion should, resign their seat and stand again in the ensuing by-election with the following inserted into their election address: "I am a practising member of the Roman Catholic Church and pledge to follow the instructions of the Pope on any issue where failing to comply would mean my soul burning in Hell for eternity."

Let's see how many votes they get then.

HARRY PERRY

LEICESTER

Sir: The Catholic Church is in no position to preach to us about abortion. In perpetrating the lie that condoms are ineffectual against transmission of Aids, the Catholic Church has already brought about an enormous number of unnecessary deaths. Is this not also an "unspeakable crime"?

ROGER PLENTY

STROUD, GLOUCESTERSHIRE

A murderous Queen

Sir: Eric Chadwick says "all the homicidal despots have been men" (letter, 30 May). Queen Ranavalona I of Madagascar, (1828-61) suppressed Christianity in the island by the savage execution of an estimated 150,000 of her subjects. By the end of her reign, she had succeeded in killing one-third of the population.

BRUCE NAPIER

BURTON-ON-TRENT

It's a howler

Sir: According to Will Self (Magazine, 2 June), "the crew of the Cutty Sark sailed her round the Horn in force 11 gales using only sexton, chronometer and compass". A sexton would have been of little use on the Cutty Sark, since one does not need to dig a grave for burial at sea. A sextant for measuring the altitude of the sun, would have been invaluable.

JOHN CROOKS

LONDON SW15

Barmy Boorman

Sir: Wonderful to see John Boorman in your pages (Arts & Books Review, 1 June), but it can't be accurate to accuse him of making any "forgettable failures", can it? Surely, no director's failures have been less forgettable than Boorman's Zardoz, one of the world's most heroically deranged films, beloved of students and late-night TV viewers who may have indulged in something a little mind-altering before settling down to watch.

CHRIS COATES

COLCHESTER

Housing debate solved

Sir: The answer to the social housing entitlement debate is simple: British citizens, and refugees with the right to remain in the UK, should be offered social housing on the basis of need. Economic migrants should not be offered social housing. They have chosen to come here and presumably, if things don't work out, they can return home. If I emigrated to another country, I wouldn't for one moment imagine I had any claim on state-funded services. I would need to either earn enough to support myself or return home.

H STERN

LONDON NW3

The answer's 'Non'

Sir: I read on the Underground last week that there were "Non-stopping trains at Edgware". Mon Dieu! If we'd had these remarkable trains when De Gaulle was alive, the whole history of the Common Market would be different.

STEWART TROTTER

LONDON W9