SIR, - I would like the opportunity to reply to your correspondents, Mr Teale and Gordon Bradley, who support the military actions of the Government against terrorism. I wish to make clear, my purpose is to question and debate the propaganda used to justify the unlawful, undemocratic, killing of innocent people.

The Bush/Blair propaganda, with a Big Brother mentality, is chillingly similar to Orwell's predictions in his novel 1984. I hope the public can see the dangers.

Firstly, Mr Bradley accused me of ignorance of Saudi Arabia and for criticising Blair's propaganda of the treatment of Afghan women, when Saudis behave with similar contempt.

I have to tell Mr Bradley I also am a Saudi ex-patriot and lived and worked there for a considerable time. My criticism is based on fact, not fiction.

When I was there, women were kept prisoners in their own homes and not allowed to go out unaccompanied. They were not allowed to work, drive cars or go shopping. They could be divorced without grounds by a husband making a public declaration.

They had no freedom with dress, speech, religion or anything else. There were shanty towns and poverty. There was TV and press censorship and NO democracy.

I was present when public executions took place, and much more. So how sincere is Blair when he criticises, the Taliban but not Saudi Arabia for what are common practices in the Arab world?

Turning to Mr Teale, as a result of these dreadful events, Blair/Bush are now more powerful than they have ever been. War is and always has been, the lifeblood of politicians in difficulty. Thatcher's adventures in the Falklands is a recent example.

Declaration of war allows 'leaders' to act unlawfully, execute innocent people without trial, and restrict freedom and information. Blair has already attempted to impose TV censorship. And this war is being conducted in our name without reference to us.

Mr Teale may resent it, but it is the truth. The only winners in a war are politicians and capitalists who profit from death by the sale of arms. Mr Teale should say if he approves of bombing Red Cross warehouses, shepherds, villages, hospitals, buses and schools. These are all 'collateral' victims of the Bush/Blair action. Little respect is being shown to them.

With regard to drugs in Afghanistan. Blair could not resist the temptation of using drugs as part of his propaganda. If we are bombing because this funds terrorism, why do we not also bomb South America and stop selling arms to fascists?

Mr Teale apparently condones British and American arms profiteering because arms 'probably kill fewer people' (his words) than drugs. If he really believes this, it is he who should be treated with contempt.

Mr Teale sneers at my repeated reference to the fact that New Tory Labour were elected by only 26 per cent of the electorate when questioning the validity of our democracy. It is depressing he considers this unimportant.

The reason for the low turnout is because the British public are rightly cynical and refuse to vote for the two Tory parties we now have. There is no genuine alternative and the electorate are impotent to change the system. Hence the lowest vote ever.

The public are not all fools but under the present corrupt undemocratic voting system, enough are fooled to put the likes of Blair into power. Mr Teale may be interested to learn that even if Duncan Smith supports his fellow Tory, Blair, our MP, Harold Best, does not.

I am delighted to inform you, Mr Best, whose views were reported recently in the Observer, has signed a Commons motion opposing the bombing. There are still those in the Labour party with principles. If I am out of step, then so is our MP, a man for whom I have high regard.

Mr Teale sneers at my use of the word 'mendacity' to describe the speeches of Blair but I am glad he understands what it means. Had I used the alternative, more accurate word, and the one I prefer, I am afraid the Editor may not have been able to publish my letter.

Malcolm Naylor

21 Grange View,

Otley.

Signs refused

SIR, - I was most interested to read in your front page report (Planners bar new signs ) October 18 issue, that planning permission has been refused for advertising signs both inside and outside The Suburban Bar in Bridge Street, Otley.

According to your report, Leeds City Council's Development Control Panel (West) has said that the signs were unsuitable in the Otley Conservation Area. Using the same reasoning, perhaps someone could explain how the coloured illuminations which now adorn The Generous Pioneer in Burley in Wharfedale have become acceptable?

Mr P Griffiths

Bradford Road,

Otley.

Crime complaint

SIR, - With reference to your report "Anger at town's 'unacceptable' crime figures" (October 25): Their complaints about the crime figures for Horsforth were over the top.

Most of the people present at the recent Community Police Forum did not agree with their argument. The main complaint was that officers should be based in Horsforth rather than Weetwood and Otley.

Officers have to have a base of operations irrespective of its location. It seems to me that they want to close the present offices and relocate them to Horsforth. At a time of budget restraints, this would be imprudent.

In reality, the current locations are only used when shifts change and for administration. Shift changes cause problems whatever the location. When responding to 999 calls, police cars can be in Horsforth very quickly. The cars are on the road not at their base.

Their attempt to compare the crime figures for Horsforth with Otley was condemned by the other people present. It was made clear that they were wrong as they were not comparing like with like.

I wonder what their comments would be if the figures for their area was compared with Gipton or Chapeltown. When Otley Police station was downgraded to office hours only there was a local outcry. The recent crime figures show that crime has actually fallen in Otley.

There was sympathy for Horsforth by those present, but the suggested solution was not acceptable. I feel that your reporter has sensationalised one part of a very good meeting.

In fact, a number of people present felt there was more of a political point being made, rather than

useful suggestions. The police are always the scapegoats in these situations. I should also like to point out that the meeting was held in Rawdon and not at Otley Civic Centre.

Bill McIlwraith

Chairman,

Otley Neighbourhood Watch,

84 Bradford Road,

Otley.

Seeking headlines

SIR, - You reported last week in what was no doubt a well rehearsed and co-ordinated move that the three Liberal councillors for neighbouring Horsforth ward 'erupted in fury' at the Police Community Forum on hearing that Horsforth had experienced some three times the level of house burglaries compared with Otley over the past six months.

One of the Horsforth councillors is quoted as saying that it was absolutely disgraceful that 'the figures are ridiculously low for other areas, such as Otley. We are just asking for parity'.

One feels bound to ask whether it is now the official policy of the Liberal Party to seek be parity of crime levels as between the different wards in Leeds? Is the councillor really asking for something like a hundred extra Otley householders, all presumably Liberal voters, to volunteer their houses for break-ins over the next six months simply to achieve parity with Horsforth. He is on record in any event in advocating that limited police resources should be diverted away from Otley to achieve the parity, or should that read publicity, he so craves.

Try telling that to the people in Otley who are concerned at the present level of crime, never mind switching the precious few police we already have to the Horsforth ward.

As Supt Habgood said at the meeting there are a lot of differences between Otley and Horsforth. One of those differences is surely that Horsforth is burdened with three Liberal councillors more concerned with seeking headlines than talking commonsense.

Coun Clive Fox

99 Breary Lane East,

Bramhope.

Appeal for sellers

SIR, - We are approaching the time of year when we remember those who have died in the two world wars and in conflicts since. The Annual Remembrance Day Service will be held this year on Sunday, November 11.

The parade will assemble at Station Road, Otley, at 2pm setting off at 2.15pm for the Service at Out Lady and All Saints Church at 2.30pm. After the service the laying of wreaths will take place in the Memorial Gardens, Bondgate.

The Royal British Legion has asked me to request help in selling poppies in the run-up to Remembrance Day, particularly on November 9 and 10. If anyone has a little time to spare and is able to help please contact Mrs M Barker c/o Civic Centre, Cross Green, Otley.

Also, poppies will be sold at the Buttercross on Saturday, November 10, so please give generously at that time.

Finally, two minutes' silence will be observed at 11am on Sunday, November 11, at the Garden of Remembrance and you are invited to assemble there at 10.50am if you so wish, to take part in this simple act of remembrance.

Coun Philip Coyne

Town Mayor,

Otley Town Council.

No surprise

SIR, - Your front page report advising that the Pool Bridge strengthening works will take 35 weeks instead of 20 weeks was no surprise to the residents of this village. It is unfortunate that Leeds City Council should now have to reissue tenders. How much easier it would have been to ask contractors at the time of selection for their estimate of the contract period!

For those of us who are familiar with the performance of Leeds City Council and the Department of Highways and Procrastination it is very easy to recognise this latest example of pathetic of planning and procurement skills.

We only wish that this organisation was subject to the same scrutiny which was applied by OFSTED to the Education Department.

Bernard Mitchinson

Chairman,

Pool 2020 Group,

Pool-in-Wharfedale.