THere was a letter in the Guardian today which it seems to me eloquently makes a point which is all too often blurred. It was written in the context of a current media "controversy" about an off-the-cuff remark by Cherie Blair, the wife of the Prime Minister:

My sympathy is with Cherie Blair. As a psychologist I have always found that if I offer an explanation as to why a certain injury to the brain leads to severe dementia, I am not accused of being on the side of dementia. Yet if I offer an explanation as to why the conclusions a person drew from certain experiences led that person to become a paedophile, or a thief, or a suicide bomber, I am likely to be accused of promoting paedophilia, or thieving, or suicide bombing. These accusations arise because my accusers cannot make the distinction between an explanation and an excuse.

Cherie Blair quite correctly stated that if people feel that their situation is hopeless, they may choose to make one last gesture to assert that their existence should be acknowl edged. This explains their behaviour. It does not excuse it.