Double standards
From H.P Raynor Sir: Stephen Glover (Media studies, 22 September) makes an encouraging stand against terrorism, and is surely right to say that no crime of America's — real or imagined by sick minds — is an adequate excuse for the attack on her. We should apply the same arguments to all terrorism, anywhere in the world, rural as well as urban. It can be no more heinous for a white farmer to have bought a piece of land in Zimbabwe and developed it into a farm than for America to have backed an unpopular country in the Middle East: the terrorism we are subjected to here is not as spectacular as that committed by the suicide pilots in New York, but it goes on longer.
H.P. Raynor
Zimbabwe
From Mr Edward Somerville Sir: Not long ago Mr Peter Hain was strong in his support for 'liberation movements' that sought to overthrow the elected government of South Africa. These movements put bombs in supermarkets, organised the bar baric `necklacing' of people suspected of supporting the wrong side, and even opened fire with automatic weapons on churchgoers. In essence, their methods were the same as those used in the present terrorist threat: they posed as civilians, talked about an 'armed struggle' and, by planting bombs in public places, terrorised innocent people as a means to gaining their political ends.
Thanks to the support that they received from Mr HaM and his like in the West, they are now in power, and quick to celebrate their 'military' success by referring to themselves as 'war veterans' or 'heroes of the armed struggle'. And, oh yes, of course, they're piously, if half-heartedly, against 'terrorism'.
Edward Somerville
edsomerville2001@yahoo.com
Previous page
