A criminal, with his own personal motivations, alleges that the Minister of Home Affairs has been involved in the killings of several persons over a period of time.
This same criminal claims that he was involved in the killing gang, but had a falling-out.
The Minister of Home Affairs in an impromptu statement said categorically that when a criminal's 'back is against the wall', he will do anything to save himself - a little lie is insignificant to that criminal.
The lengths that he would go to save himself are unlimited. If he has to say that a high priest also played a role in killings, he will do so.
So, without evidence, whom would/should responsible persons believe? How feasible is it to believe a criminal as against a Minister of Government?
Tomorrow, we might find that another criminal who, wanting asylum because of a disagreement with his colleagues, decides to say that some high Government official or even a member of the Opposition is involved with Saddam Hussein! Is our society so gullible that we tend to believe all that we hear from people who are opposed to the Government?
Rebecca Brown