MR ZILWA
If, Mr Chairman, you'll just give me a chance, I'm going to develop that.  Now this occurred in the heat of the period where Chris Hani had just been killed and white people were killed, no robbery, nothing.  Now in my submission, as the applicants themselves have stated, the message would be clear to everybody as to what it is all about and indeed, we need not look to further afield to see how justified that was.  If we take a look at the very Exhibit B that has been submitted before this Committee by the victims' representatives, Annexure Q, it clearly vindicates the applicants' impression that this would indeed, this could not be, their action could not be mistaken for anything else other than a retaliation for the death of Chris Hani.
	Now Annexure Q is a daily despatched publication and I'd just like to draw the Committee's reference to a passage there, the heading it says:
"Are there enough of us to fill the shoes of this fisherman?"
Then it goes on and on and on and at the last paragraph of the first column it says:
"What we do know is that somehow Allie and his brother"
Allie I suppose is a reference to Alistair Weakley.
"Allie and his brother were random victims of the crime committed in Donpark, Boksburg, such a long way away to the North.  The dreadful dominoes started falling soon after Hani fell on his driveway.  Allie was one of them."
Now that passage clearly indicates that indeed what the applicants assumed that their action would not be regarded as anything else other than retaliation for the death of Chris Hani.  It's clearly born out in this passage which I've referred to.  They knew or they say they assumed that everybody would know, including the press, that their action was related to Chris Hani and indeed this is vindicated here.