Laos

Press, Volume C, Issue 29480, 5 April 1961, Page 7

Laos

Sir.—R. W. Anderson rightly takes exception to the attitude of anti-democratic correspondents. A noted American publicist asks, “How may democracy defend itself?” The words, in times of peace, might be added. “When the blast of war blows in our ears it is a case of fight and win.” So long as the enemy knows this the cold war is won. A gangster or aggressor does not bargain for determined opposition. The presence of appeasors and defeatists (to an undue extent) in the ranks of the democracies could be a green light to the enemy. Democracy stands for free speech but not for slander and subversion. To draw the line of demarcation in this

regard is to serve the cause of peace and progress.— Yours, etc., T. E. SHAW. West port, April 3, 1961. Sir,—l respectfully challenge your editorial on Daos. As reverence for human life should be paramount in everyone, I suggest it a very dangerous occupation to misinform readers to the extent that their very existence is threatened. The United States Government report, “U.S. Operations in Laos,” depicts a sad picture of graft and corruption (June 15, 1959), which I am sure you would not support. No matter what you or I think, or want, the people themselves will have the final say, and may, whether Communists or capitalists, not be so charitable as humanists. Asian and African conferences have repeatedly condemned such actions as the United States in Laos, and it is wishful thinking to expect these peoples to support their enemies. The oneness of humanity is inevitable.— Yours, etc., MELVILLE B. MITCHELL. April 3. 1961.