---

Terrorism Bill

I see another difficulty. Let us assume that a student wishes to discuss or to write an historical essay on the Afghan-Russian war of whenever it was—1970-odd to 1985. Sandy Gall wrote strongly in favour of the Mujaheddin who were resisting the Russians. Almost certainly the Russians referred to those gentlemen as terrorists. Had we been Russians, we would have done so, too. We regard that sort of behaviour as terrorism. The Americans provided them with large, substantive gifts of arms solely to make their terrorism much more effective, which was part of the policy. We have to be careful. Would it be an offence of ““indirect encouragement”” were a librarian to recommend Sandy Gall’s articles on the Afghan war? What about library-held copies of some of the United States’ newspapers with their encouragement of the Irish uprisings at various times—not least the 1916 rebellion—and up to and including the present troubles, from which, thank goodness, it looks as if we are about to be spared? It is a difficult question. I seem to remember that there were good terrorists called the Macquis, who should be encouraged and bad terrorists, called the IRA, who should definitely not be encouraged. The Bill seems to catch them all with all its dangers and illogicalities. That is a perfect example, and this is the first time we have had in Committee to consider the point.