Where is the pride that an Australian city was identified as the best city in the whole world in which to live? Not one word outside this town that an Australian city was identified as such.

Instead, Canberra gets trashed again. It goes to show that umpires untainted by the tired old tripe from all the blow in mediocrity can see what we see in our wonderful city. The OECD and The New York Times have ignored the myths and have seen what we see. A wonderful, wonderful home - a gorgeous city, with faults for sure, but truly a special place in the world.

J. Nesbitt, Page

When people say Canberra lacks a soul, they mean it is an intellectual rather than an emotional place, and thus perhaps rather lacking in warmth. But Anthony Sharwood (''Out-of-towners cry foul over Canberra ranking'', October 9, p3) points to a different dichotomy, between Canberra's (outward) personality and its (inward) soul.

I'm not sure I agree with him that ''before you have a soul you need a personality''. Presumably, we are born with a soul (or mind, or psyche), but develop a personality through interaction with others. And what is a city's soul or personality but the interacting souls or personalities of its citizens?

Michael McCarthy, Deakin

Canberra shortly will celebrate the 50th anniversary of the lake that is its main geographical feature.

The lake was to be named after the architect who conceived it, Walter Griffin, but instead was incorrectly named after some imaginary character, Burley Griffin. Continued use of the incorrect name is extremely discourteous, and miseducates thousands of people. This should be an embarrassment to all Australians, but particularly to all Canberrans.

The Chief Minister today informed me that former minister Crean wrote to her about this in 2011, and that the National Capital Authority has just confirmed that this matter will be placed on the agenda of the first available meeting of the Canberra National Memorials Committee.

This is not good enough. The name should be changed as part of the 50th anniversary celebrations. I urge all Canberra's politicians, especially the federal ones, to immediately petition the Prime Minister for his intervention so that this important unique opportunity will not be missed.

Bob Salmond, Melba

Next time Mark Francis (Letters, October 10) visits Gungahlin, he should devote a couple of hours to walking along Gungaderra Creek, transformed by planners and landscapers into a masterpiece of often beautiful ponds, trees, reeds and waterfowl. Maybe he will then change his opinion about the ''triumph of the second rate''.

On the way back to Griffith, perhaps with that curmudgeon Jack Waterford in tow, he could call at the splendid Dickson and Lyneham wetlands, more evidence of creative genius at work in this wonderful city.

Graeme Barrow, Hackett

When I moved to Canberra in 1962, the Australian-American memorial at the end of Kings Avenue was colloquially nicknamed ''Bugs Bunny'', and the Academy of Science was ''The Igloo''. The Northbourne Flats were referred to, for obvious reasons as ''Kremlin Court''. Were a vote taken to ''keep 'em'' or ''knock 'em down'', the latter option would romp in. Heritage listing (Corridor of uncertainty: Northbourne gets heritage nod'', October 10, p1)? No way. Send in the bulldozers and level the eyesores.

Michael J. Adler, Gungahlin

No wonder Adrian Gibbs (Letters, October 9) suggested that the ACT Chief Minister, one of the two shareholders on the ACTEW board should be representing and standing up for the ratepayers of the ACT.

Dear Chief Minister, it's no good hiding behind the determinations of the Remuneration Tribunal and the ACTEW board chair's agreements with unidentified benchmarks when defending the remuneration for senior executives of ACTEW. It is so easy to use the words ''open and transparent'' government in the ACT - it just rolls off the tongue.

ACTEW operates a publicly owned utility for water and sewerage and operates in a monopoly environment. The infrastructure was paid for years ago by the Commonwealth and ACT ratepayers.

The ''corporatisation'' of the ACT's water and sewerage assets some years ago has conveniently led to the unreasonable expectations of board and senior executives of ACTEW that their contracts, remuneration and ''packages'' should meet private companies' benchmarks. To the best of my knowledge, there has been no public disclosure identifying these ''industry benchmarks'' - either by Ms Gallagher, the Treasurer, ACTEW or the current Industry Panel.

Sorry, Chief Minister, one could be forgiven for thinking that perhaps there's collusion in the senior ranks of ACTEW and the ACT government that actively keeps information from the ACT tax and ratepayer.

Suzanne Vidler, O'Malley

What measures has Australia taken to screen the incoming tourists who attended the Haj at Mecca for the Ebola virus?

The Haj is an annual Islamic pilgrimage that has attracted over 2 million people this year.

It is one of the largest mass gatherings in the world, and the risk of outbreaks is considerable, as extreme heat, physical exhaustion and crowded accommodation can lead to the rapid spread of diseases. There seems to be no special attention to the fact that the danger of the spread of Ebola can be exponentially intensified by such a large congregation of people.

The Saudi Arabian government has taken precautions to diminish the risk but the danger cannot be eliminated.

Australia has to assume its responsibility in this matter to ensure it does everything to contain the virus. Special screenings and quarantining are a few of the precautionary steps but, to date, none of these have been put in place. Unless immediate action is taken, it is very likely that the spread of the Ebola virus in Australia will not be contained.

Lydia Frommer, Lyons

The National Curriculum Review authored by Ken Wiltshire and Kevin Donnelly is a mixture of common sense and frightening conservative ideology. When the review ventures into specific recommendations about the social sciences, the alarm bells start ringing.

''Patriotism'' is too often a code word for unquestioning nationalism and blind obedience to authority. ''Love of country'' too easily becomes American-style flag worship and daily pledges of allegiance. Schools should be trying to help students to be independent learners and thinkers, to weigh up evidence, and to come to rational conclusions about the world. Demanding that students swallow one-eyed propaganda is easy, though older students will treat such an approach with the contempt it deserves. Helping and encouraging students to seek the always elusive objective truth is difficult, but learning how to think is the most important reason for students attending school.

Perhaps Wiltshire and Donnelly went on a ''fact-finding'' trip to Texas as part of their review work. There, the education policy of the majority Republican Party states : ''We oppose the teaching of higher order thinking skills which have the purpose of challenging the student's fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.''

Steve Ellis, Hackett

It was unpleasant wading through the bile of Z. Kovacs' letter (Letters, October 11) but illuminating, because there in the final paragraph was the indication of his own loss of the plot. Kovacs writes, ''Thank the pantheon that we have a mature and level-headed prime minister and government who are aware of this urgency'' (referring to the danger presented by Islamic State). I would take his letter more seriously if he himself was mature and level-headed enough to acknowledge this is a bipartisan issue as far as the opposition is concerned.

Peter Dark, Queanbeyan, NSW

In an exemplary display of rhetorical fury, Mr Kovacs has raised yet again the sceptre of the moral relativism rampant in the letters to the editor of the Canberra Times. The situation is quite the opposite. Breakfast rarely goes by without my encountering in these columns the advancement of some moral certainty with which I am in fierce disagreement. It provides an intellectual tonic for which I am in great debt to my fellow citizens and correspondents.

On the issue of Australian military involvement in Iraq, which seems to be the occasion of Mr Kovacs' polemic, I would suggest that disagreement with his views as to what Australia should do about the crisis there is not evidence of moral relativism. I would draw his attention to Oliver Cromwell's plea, no moral relativist he, in his dispute with the Church of Scotland, ''I beseech you in the bowels of Christ think it possible you may be mistaken''.

Doug Hynd, Stirling

I agree with Norman Lee (Letters, October 10), the term ''fighter jet'' is irritating and does not describe the role of the RAAF aircraft operating in Iraq. F/A-18 is an American designation, which stands for number 18 in the Fighter/Attack series. The designation shows the aircraft has a dual role as both a fighter aircraft and an attack aircraft.

The RAAF F/A-18A Hornet is single seat and primarily a fighter aircraft, which are traditionally defensive. The F/A-18F Super Hornet is primarily an attack aircraft and therefore offensive. It is larger with two crew - a pilot and a weapons systems operator.

''Jet aircraft'' could refer to almost any aircraft, as most have jet engines of some form. Primarily, they are either turboprops, such as a C-130 Hercules, or turbofans, such as the C-17 Globemaster. The ''C'' is the US designation for cargo aircraft. Most civil airliners have turbofans.

The RAAF F/A-18F Super Hornets are operating in Iraq in an attack role and, therefore, if they are going to be categorised as anything it should be ''attack aircraft''. They are certainly not ''fighter jets''. I note that the pictures on television show these attack aircraft using laser-guided bombs. This means the target is designated by a laser beam and the bomb homes on to that target. If you have to attack something, this is an effective way, as it is precision bombing and limits the amount of collateral damage.

Kevin Kirk, Wing Commander (Ret) Kambah

The pervasive incorrect nomenclature highlighted by Messrs Callaghan and Lee (Letters, October 8 and 9) is indicative of a much wider problem hampering informed public debate.

When the ADA recently raised the jarring inaccuracy of ''fighter jets'' with relevant ABC staff, we were told the public understood this term and would not understand ''jet-fighters'' or ''strike aircraft'' My observation that, given its charter, surely the ABC should instead help educate the public in this regard was met with indifference.

Part of the problem is sloppy (or biased) media use of ''fighters'' and ''militants'' to describe militiamen/troops and terrorists respectively. The basis of the problem is that most reporting of defence, security and intelligence matters is now by generalist journalists and columnists, rather than by specialists.

Together with the incessant demands of the 24-hour media cycle, incorrect fads easily become prevailing terminology.

A prevalent example where this is actually dangerous, as well as dumb, is where ASIO is wrongly described as a ''spy'' agency.

This particular habitual and thoughtless usage causes unnecessary unease, and often worse, about the security-intelligence function necessary in any liberal democracy and the public co-operation with ASIO needed to protect the community generally.

Neil James, executive director, Australia Defence Association

ACT Chief Minister Katy Gallagher is right to support medicinal cannabis (ACT could join NSW medical cannabis trial'', canberratimes.com.au, October 6) and to call for a national approach. But her claim ''the anecdotal evidence is pretty loud … but when you ask where the closely monitored trials and evidence is, there isn't a lot of that'' is not correct. More than 100 randomised controlled trials have been published. Most researchers and policymakers regard randomised controlled trials as the most important and influential kind of medical research for evidence of effectiveness and safety.

My colleagues and I published a paper on medicinal cannabis in the Medical Journal of Australia last December citing a German review that identified 82 favourable and nine unfavourable controlled trials. Many drugs used widely in medicine today are not supported by evidence as strong as this. Reviews by major and prestigious scientific organisations have concluded there is more than enough scientific research available to start using medicinal cannabis. This research has been conducted despite the vigorous efforts in many countries to make it almost impossible to conduct scientific research using cannabis medicinally. In the US, cannabis is still classified in Schedule 1, along with heroin, and above Schedule 2, which includes cocaine.

A spokeswoman for the US government's National Institute of Drug Abuse, which funds more than 80 per cent of the world's research on illicit drugs, was reported in The New York Times in 2010 to have said ''as the National Institute on Drug Abuse, our focus is primarily on the negative consequences of marijuana use. We generally do not fund research focused on the potential beneficial medical effects of marijuana.''

Dr Alex Wodak, president, Australian Drug Law

Reform Foundation

SILENT DISAPPROVAL

At a meeting last week, the question raised in the course of a discussion was ''What has the Abbott government done for the ordinary Australian?'' A hush came over the room, then someone said, ''Well, the Howard government got rid of guns!'' ''Yes,'' we said, ''but what about the Abbott government?''

Jane Timbrell, Reid

ATTACKS AT HOME

I really don't understand how Australians can be sceptical that the Abbott government will be succeed in the mission to degrade and destroy IS. After all, they have been practising such tactics for over a year on such institutions as the Bureau of Meteorology, the CSIRO, the ABC, the university system and most recently the Australian Bureau of Statistics. Oh ye of little faith!

Ann Darbyshire, Gunning, NSW

PRIDE IN APPEARANCE

Bums out, knees out, tracky-dacks, grubby shirts: if we girls went for dinner at the club looking like most blokes do, we'd feel slatternly. Why are we so damn fussy? We could have things hanging out, too. We just wouldn't be happy looking that way.

Charlotte Beaupipe, Dickson

SENSITIVE GUYS

Bruce Glossop (Letters, October 11) has noted my use of the euphemism ''bathroom''. He would be aware that some of us are married to refined ladies, and that, over time, we have learned to use euphemisms in order to spare the sensibilities of those cultured souls.

Gordon Fyfe, Kambah

THEY'RE NOT REAL

What is the difference between the fast train to Sydney, the Murrumbateman bypass, a new Canberra Convention Centre and the Loch Ness monster? The first three are figments of the imagination.

T. Robb, Weetangera

SHIELD MEN'S EYES

Veronica Giles (Letters October 12) draws attention to the ''lust'' factor in the veiling of women. As lust is in the eye and brain of the beholder, perhaps men's eyes, not women's faces, should be veiled.

Patricia Saunders, Chapman

PUTIN WARNED

Great to see Joe Hockey laying it on the line about the Ukraine to Russian President Vladimir Putin, ahead of the G20 meeting in Brisbane. Mr Putin will undoubtedly now spend many a sleepless night ahead of the face-to-face meeting with our belligerent Joe. After his recent weight loss and his budgetary efforts, our Joe is the undisputed political champion of the world (lightweight).

R. King, Melba

Email: letters.editor@canberratimes.com.au. Send from the message field, not as an attached file. Fax: 6280 2282.Mail: Letters to the Editor, The Canberra Times, PO Box 7155, Canberra Mail Centre, ACT 2610.

Keep your letter to 250 words or less. References to Canberra Times reports should include date and page number. Letters may be edited. Provide phone number and full home address (suburb only published).