In making a comparison between working for Associated Newspapers and being a "concentration camp guard", Ken Livingstone was certainly guilty of making a remark in extreme bad taste and one that Jewish people, for obvious reasons, would have grounds to regard as particularly offensive. He ought to have the magnanimity to recognise that and issue an appropriate apology. Most reasonable people would then be prepared to write off the incident as the result of Livingstone being caught off-guard when he, just possibly, had had one drink too many at a party. Doing so, moreover, would in no way imply deference to the Evening Standard or the Daily Mail. You don't have to be a supporter of Livingstone to acknowledge that sections of the press have waged a campaign of vilification against him for many years and that his hostility to them isn't entirely unwarranted. The fact that he seems unable to separate these two quite distinct elements of this controversy demonstrates not principle or consistency, but merely an unpleasant mix of obstinacy and self-righteousness. Mike Farish, London

This illustrates one of Ken's most significant weaknesses - his rough edges are seen to add to his credibility but there are times when diplomacy is needed and this is one of them. He should have backed off immediately; as it is he is now entrenched in a pointless debate that can do no good to him or anyone else. But why should this sorry episode affect our chances of winning the Olympic bid? The ramifications of Ken's remarks are being exagerated by the press, who are seeking to maximise Ken's embarrassment in a misguided attempt to protect one of their own. Peter Leatherbarrow, London

No, of course, Ken Livingstone shouldn't apologise. He felt justified in saying what he did by the actions of the reporter. The fact that the reporter was Jewish is an unfortunate coincidence. The whole situation has been blown out of all proportion and is now just being used as another political brickbat to beat him with. Chris Dumper, Kingston

I am incensed by Ken Livingstone's comments and my first thought was that he should most definately apologise. After hearing him say that to apologise would make him a liar, I now do not want him to apologise. If ever there was any doubt, there is now none whatsoever that he will resort to making capital of the worst atrocity in history and use it to insult. This makes him completely unworthy of his office. I do not want him to apologise - I want him thrown out of office at the earliest opportunity. Laurence Seef, Edgware

As a elected public figure, the Mayor should not be forced to apologise. Rather, voters should remember this behaviour and if they feel that it is inappropriate seek to remove him at the next elections. This is the ultimate in accountability. Name and address withheld

How ridiculous we have become as a nation to make such an issue out of a comment that, at worse, is in bad taste. Nobody in their right mind would deliberately go out of their way to offend or upset the Jewish people, particularly Holocaust survivors, who deserve our respect. Let's get things in perspective here. I don't the Mayor should apologise for the comment, but perhaps he needs to think a little before he opens his mouth next time. He's in the public eye, and people will be out to put him down and generally have a dig at every opportunity. Stick to your guns, Mr Mayor (and I don't even like you much). Andy Smith, London

I think the point is being very much missed with regard to Ken Livingstone's comments. What is utterly inapropriate and offensive is to compare anyone other than someone involved in genocide to a Nazi Concentration Camp guard. It belittles the suffering of those who actually had experience of such guards to compare the actions of a questioning journalist to a violent racist murderer. Plus it is ridiculous to attack someone for representing a different political viewpoint, as clearly opposing newspapers are a tenet of democracy. The fact that Livingstone was instrumental in welcoming Al-Qarawadi to London, in addition to the bad timing of such remarks in the wake of Auschwitz remembrance, would lead some to believe at best he is an outspoken boorish fool and at worst has no real understanding or appreciation for the very real suffering of those on the recieving end of racism. Katie Walmsley, London

I cannot express strongly enough how much I believe that for the cause of good sense and common decency that Ken should NOT apologise. Yes, his comments were offensive, but racist?! My God, are the Jewish people the only ones to have suffered severe human rights abuses in the 20 century - what of the women being raped and children being murdered in Dafur at this very moment? Julie Davis, London

He should apologise for these inappropriate comments. To liken the reporter to a guard at a concentration camp was stupid and crassly insensitive. It is even more incredible when you consider Ken Livingstone's past and the many efforts he has lead to promote understanding and cultural awareness. How could he have failed to appreciate the implications of his language? Come on, Ken, do the decent thing and apologise - not to the Daily Mail or the Evening Standard, but to Oliver Finegold personally and to Jews and other Holocaust survivors in general. Name and address withheld

I think people should get a life. I don't vote Labour, don't personally think that if I ever met Mr Livingstone I'd like him, but frankly this tendency to hang on to someone's every word is pointless sensationalism. His remark wasn't anti-Jewish, he might well have compared the reporter to a traffic warden instead. He simply compared the reporter to a person doing an unpleasant job - and if that is his personal opinion, I think that is fair. Paul Scofield, Milton Keynes

Anyone with the slightest knowledge of Ken's track record on anti-racism could see through the facade of the present furore. This is not about Holocaust victims, it's about Ken Livingstone being offensive to a newspaper group with a clearly right wing agenda and which has targeted him over the years. I've no doubt that he will survive this controversy as he has done so often, simply because the majority of people in London and elsewhere can see the difference between what Ken stands for and defends and the clearly political machinations that motivate his attackers. Nicholas Cassidy, Omagh