Sir, - It is only a few hours since the holocaust descended on New York and Washington but we already know that some aspects of our living have changed, perhaps forever.

No doubt future high-rise buildings will be designed to minimise the impact of aircraft; flight plans will be filed to avoid routes over major cities; security procedures at airports will reduce the flying experience to purgatory. What other effects? If we are faced with America seeking vengeance and super-terrorists responding we are in for a sad time.

An eye for an eye strategy will only lead to a world of blindness.

Even at this early stage, most of us link Islam extremists with the destruction but we must not classify all Muslims by what we read about such extremists; any more than we rank Christians by Catholic and Protestant extremists on the Ardoyne Road; nor for that matter, some humanists, whose answer is "nuke the lot of them."

Those who have studied approaches to peace in the nine major faiths find a wonderful gentleness in all their works.

The United Nations Association believes our best hope would be in a revitalised and restructured United Nations, fully supported by the nations of the world, having a key role in conflict prevention and the continuing search for a lasting peace with justice for all people, whether they are stateless refugees in a Middle East camp or pampered westerners.

RICHARD STAINSBY

Secretary, Cleveland interfaith group.

Chairman, Cleveland branch UNA.

Linden Road,

Great Ayton.

Common sense

Sir, - As one who spent his formative years living next to Pear Tree Cottage in North End, Hutton Rudby, may I take the opportunity of commenting on the front page article in your August 31 edition?

The land which you describe as a paddock has in fact been used over at least three generations as a "kitchen garden." It has never been under grazing which the word paddock implies.

Gated access to the garden is from the back yard across the public footpath through a gate at the other side; a distance of 2m at most. The previous owners managed over all this time to accommodate the "difficulty" of having the garden separated from the cottage by the public footpath. One has to ask "What has changed?"

It is difficult to escape the cynical view that the sole objective of the proposed diversion of the footpath has its roots in a) the Nimby principle - no footpath in my backyard; b) if the moving of the path is achieved, a further application will be forthcoming to develop the garden.

On a different note, it seems odd that local councillors do not know whether the land would be classified as "greenfield" or "infill" and that the voting which resulted in support for the diversion of the path was five for the proposal with six abstentions. None against?

By all means have the cottage improved and redeveloped, it is in serious need of it. As for the path, common sense should prevail and community needs be respected rather than allowing commercial pressures to dictate.

DEREK WISE

High Grange,

Faverdale,

Darlington.