The Spectator

Letters to the Editor | 18 February 2006

Already a subscriber? Log in

This article is for subscribers only

Subscribe today to get 3 months' delivery of the magazine, as well as online and app access, for only £3.

  • Weekly delivery of the magazine
  • Unlimited access to our website and app
  • Enjoy Spectator newsletters and podcasts
  • Explore our online archive, going back to 1828

Islam and the Cross

From David Eddyshaw
Sir: Charles Moore (The Spectator’s Notes, 11 February) says in passing that Muslims ‘oddly’ deny the crucifixion of Jesus. This is true but by no means odd; as I understand it, the power and justice of Allah make it inconceivable that he could permit one of his messengers to be killed. This reflects a profound difference between the Muslim and Christian concepts of God, and indeed of power and justice.
Swansea

The limits of liberty

From Dennis Morris
Sir: Apropos Daniel Wolf’s article (‘Censorship wasn’t all bad’, 4 February) and the question of freedom becoming licence, there are two other quotations of Edmund Burke’s which are not only relevant to Mr Wolf’s arresting piece but also easy to remember. And though both date from 1777, bearing them in mind would probably stop many a political commentator appearing shallow. The first is, ‘Liberty too must be limited in order to be possessed’; and the second, ‘There is, however, a limit at which forbearance ceases to be a virtue.’
Dennis Morris
Caiscais, Portugal

Wet Stones

From Rodney Garrood
Sir: Rod Liddle’s confirmation that the Rolling Stones are less than bolshevik will come as a complete surprise to nobody, least of all, one suspects, the grand old men themselves (‘Blue-collar blues’, 11 February). There have been clues, among them a knighthood, an injury to Keith caused by falling off his library steps and, of course, a very early censorship of ‘Let’s Spend the Night Together’ on The Ed Sullivan Show.
Rodney Garrood
Amersham, Buckinghamshire

What drives Boris

From Alex Moulton
Sir: I was surprised to read that Boris Johnson, as a cyclist and historian, had not pondered on what had allowed the reduction of wheel size from the ordinary ‘penny-farthing’ with the crank drive to that of the conventional bicycle which he no doubt rides (Diary, 11 February). It is, of course, the chain drive with the larger chainwheel at the crank and a smaller sprocket at the hub which enables the revolution of the cranks to be independent of wheel size. The Starley ‘Safety’ incorporated this. Lord Hailsham was probably the first parliamentarian to enjoy the benefits of the yet further reduction of wheel size with the Moulton bicycle. He acquired this in 1964.
Alex Moulton
Moulton Bicycles, Bradford on Avon, Wiltshire

A Franco–Russian war

From David J. Kidd
Sir: I hope Jane Kelly is as unimpressed by the replies to her letter as I am (Letters, 11 February). Britain’s Liberal administration entered the 1914 war not to defend the country but to assist French revanchists and the Tsar’s imperialist pan-Slav expansion. In his 1920 book How the War Came Lord Loreburn, Lord Chancellor in the 1906 Campbell-Bannerman cabinet, summed it up thus: ‘We went to war in a Russian quarrel because we were tied to France in the dark.’ Foreign policy made in Petrograd and Paris sealed the fate of Englishmen and women.
David J. Kidd
London N22

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in