Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!yale!decvax!cca!mirror!misc!inmet!janw
From: janw@inmet.UUCP
Newsgroups: talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: South Africa terrorizes Souther
Message-ID: <117200159@inmet>
Date: Wed, 24-Sep-86 18:14:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: inmet.117200159
Posted: Wed Sep 24 18:14:00 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 11-Oct-86 07:59:28 EDT
References: <8592@duke.duke.UUCP>
Lines: 27
Nf-ID: #R:duke.duke.UUCP:-859200:inmet:117200159:000:1209
Nf-From: inmet.UUCP!janw    Sep 24 18:14:00 1986


[rjn@duke.UUCP ] [/* ---- "Re: South Africa terrorizes Souther" ---- */]
>In article <8143@watrose.UUCP> gdvsmit@watrose.UUCP (Riel Smit) writes:
[...]
>>I agree, but there is no way that you can convince me that a bomb placed
>>in a dustbin in a shopping mall or fast food restaurant that is not
>>even close to a military base, is not a blatant act of terrorism.

>And there is no way, given the circumstances, that you  can  con-
>vince me that it is. The white South Africans who do not actively
>oppose apartheid are supporting it by inaction if nothing else. I
>have the same contempt for them as I do for the Americans who sat
>back and let us get involved in Vietnam.

And *contempt* is sufficient justification for tearing them
into pieces?

>As a supposedly democratic country (at least if  you're  white)
>all white South Africans are directly or indirectly responsible
>for their governments actions. They should be  actively  fighting
>alongside the blacks for equal rights and justice.

Under penalty of violent death? Babies, too, should be actively
fighting, under the same penalty? Finally, how do you know
some of those blown up in a mall *are* not actively fighting etc.?

		Jan Wasilewsky