MR VISSER
This is what the man says.  Then at page 15 there's a heading - "Are the means justified?".  And round the third sentence of that it says
"The just war doctrine lays down to more conditions which help us to answer this question in a case of war.   They are tests to see whether the means we use to wage a war are themselves just".
and are as follows:  The first one is -
"The means used must be proportionate to the ends of our struggle.  There should be an attempt to cause the least damage possible without endangering the achievement of the just ends of war".
And the second one is -
"There must be no intentional killing of innocent people".
And the Chairman has asked me in what context am I talking about terrorism.  At page 18 of that same article, in the same Sishaba the question is posed by him "What is terrorism" and he says that -
"The Geneva Conventions condemn terrorism and the ANC is called terrorists by the apartheid regime.  It is therefore important to note what terrorism involves.  A terrorist act maliciously and intentionally injures innocent people".
That's his definition. "Vicious and intentional killing of innocent people".
	Then he gives an interesting example, he says -
"Parcel bombs, the sort which killed Ruth First are a terrorist weapon".
Would you subscribe to that, that last part of what I have just put to you?