Greenham commentary
Sir: Paul Johnson should really come out in the open and give us all a coherent sum- mary of his views instead of favouring us with choleric outbursts on isolated minor issues with no connecting line of thought. What is he really saying about Greenham Common (19 March) when he demands that Newbury Council should 'act' and get rid of the women?
An impartial observer of this country would probably say that 99 per cent of the press and media are hostile to unilateral disarmament; that the women have already been bullied a lot both officially by British- style 'think of a law' style justice, by misrepresentation and otherwise; that if they were doing the slightest harm, real or imagined, to anyone in the area the authorities would come down on them with all the relish they show when the target is safe to attack.
It would seem therefore that what Mr Johnson objects to is any discussion about Britain's role as the main target in any dispute between the USA and USSR. It may be that the USSR favours getting rid of nuclear weapons in Britain, but so does Enoch Powell, who has been proved right on many topics in the past. It seems, too, that most people in this country don't want Cruise. So what is Mr Johnson asking for? The answer seems to be that what he wants is a form of censorship of views unpalatable to the government, and if this is so, he should come out and say so, instead of bor- ing us with second-hand salacious details about the Greenham ladies.
George Stern
6 Eton Court, Shepherds Hill, London N6
Previous page
