The one word Braverman needs to understand is ‘contradiction’

Is the Suella Braverman who is urging the Met Police to use the “full force of the law” over so-called “jihad” chants at pro-Palestinian protests, the same Braverman who told the police in March that they must prioritise “freedom of speech” over “taking offence” and argued that police officers must have freedom of expression “at the forefront of their minds”?

Can’t someone in the reactionary pit that is her Home Office explain the meaning of the word “contradiction” to her?

Sasha Simic

London

I suggest that it is long overdue for the world, its people, and particularly its politicians to draw a very clear distinction between the totally unacceptable and ugly face of antisemitism and the justifiable, objective criticism of Israel’s policies when it comes to Palestine.

The atrocities and the horror carried out by Hamas are unforgivable, not to say inhuman. That Israel has to defend itself against such horror is beyond discussion.

However, this needs to be seen against the history of Israel’s wilful displacement of Palestinians, some 700,000 alone in 1948, and the forceful taking of their land which they had owned rightfully for a long time. This policy is still being enforced in the West Bank today where Jewish settlers push Palestinians off Palestinian land, totally ignoring UN resolutions.

Israel’s defence minister, Yoav Gallant, said yesterday that the incessant bombing of Gaza should be the last maneuvering operation in Gaza, for the simple reason that afterwards there will be no more Hamas.

This is delusional – there will be no end to Hamas. Instead, those displaced, left homeless, without hope, and in this case imprisoned in Gaza, will come to see Israel as the enemy, and the fighting will never end.

Benjamin Netanyahu’s policies, enforced by Israel for the last 12 years, need to be seen for what they are: destructive.

Israel can never be at peace unless its political elite will negotiate and create an acceptable future for all people who have endured so much.

A first step would be for both sides to see each other as human beings, not as animals.

Anonymous

London

As this Conservative government limps on from mishaps, investigations, and disastrous by-elections, we understandably hear more comparisons to general elections from yesteryear. Often we read about 1945, 1966 and 1997.

Regular readers of this page will recall that I personally usually stick to the liberal landslide of 1906. There were, like all elections, several key issues in that era, but one that always comes to mind was the Boer War (1899-1902). Not the war itself, but what it uncovered in society.

Historically we always had a small professional army and when said war ignited many men rushed to volunteer. Due to increased medical checks, over 40 per cent were rejected and reports that upset the middle classes essentially blamed bad diet, bad social conditions, and near-zero medical care. In other words, a mini-scandal on the Tory party’s watch.

Now, if we move nearly 120 years into the future, we see a parallel in record food bank use. How on earth did we allow malnutrition to raise its ugly head again in the 21st century in one of the richest countries in the world?

Robert Boston

Kent

As the invasive tentacles of “green energy” and its devastating infrastructure spread with a vengeance across rural Scotland, we are regularly subjected to the politicians’ and industry’s “buzzwords” to persuade us that succumbing to the industrialisation of where we live is for the “greater good”.

Greater good for whom?

Not Scotland and certainly not the innocents who are steamrolled out of the way by multinational companies with no connection or love for the areas they spear their industrial junk into.

“Green” electricity doesn’t exist if it is produced at the expense of the environment, wildlife, communities and the peace and enjoyment of living in their homes.

“Clean” generation can’t exist if it relies on fossil fuels and massively increases demand for metal and rare-earth mining, much of it unregulated and highly polluting, for its manufacture, construction, operation and backup.

Where is the amenity and pleasure in seeing monstrous rotating cash machines slicing through once peaceful and undisturbed vistas?

“Net zero” is bandied about with no figures or data to back up what it means to us financially or environmentally. How much more industrialisation does Scotland need on its hills, mountains, and in its rural communities and glens before we reach this elusive target?

The faux “green” movement has been allowed to become all-powerful and seemingly without accountability. They are in government, shaping policies and the beneficiaries of their actions are filling their shareholder’s bank accounts with our hard-earned money while our land and oceans are sacrificed on their warped altar of “sustainability”.

Lyndsey Ward

Beauly

Until the use of EVs is as convenient as traditional fossil-fuelled vehicles the public will continue to favour the traditional. Providing a charging infrastructure for many urban dwellers is a challenge.

What should be better promoted in the interim are hybrid vehicles.

It was a mistake by the UK government to delay the phasing out of petrol and diesel when hybrids would still be available after 2030.

What is most important is that people keep their foot off the loud pedal which can save a lot of fuel. Automatic speed control would make a valuable contribution to both reducing fuel consumption and pollution.

The average speed in urban areas is 19mph, so there is no point in rushing along and catching up with other traffic.

Even better, if people ceased eating meat, dairy and marine products that would be of greater benefit to our severely overpopulated and polluted planet than most other actions.

Graham Cooper

Address Supplied