AS I recall, Mr R Segal's original 'response' to me was a letter seeking to refute part of the Lancs Association of TUC's press release about the London terrorist attacks of July 7.

The parts he seized upon sought to explain why the bombings happened but in no way condoned them as responses to the unjust imperialist foreign, economic and military policies of the USA, Britain and lesser 'hanger's-on'.

Mr Segal did not choose to focus his anger on that sober statement because it was, and still is, the area where he and his ilk will be most exposed.

Hence his sophistry over the question of socialism, which Mr Segal is unintentionally helping to further.

Sophistry is 'to reason, with clever but false arguments, especially ones intended to deceive'. This is what the capitalist ruling class tries to use via universities and other institutions to confuse, divide and enslave the rest of us. It has ever been so.

In the era of slavery under Egypt, Greece and Rome the rulers tried to justify the continued power of those in control. It was the same in the feudal era. It did not save these systems, and neither will it save wage-slavery and monopoly capitalism under George Bush, Tony Blair and their allies.

I was disappointed that Mr Segal did not come to the August 13 meeting of LATUC which discussed its agenda with special reference to the dire civil rights situation following the terrorism hysteria which elements among our rulers seek to exploit to weaken and divide those of us who are wise to their nefarious intentions.

Perhaps he can only feel confident in the company of often brainwashed undergrad-uates, especially those from the USA. Even they, Mr Segal, are now having the scales removed from their eyes.

We intend to assist everyone in this process of enlightenment to the workings of the world as opposed to how it ought to be under socialism. This is a world-wide aim.

In no way is socialism 'a century out of date' as Mr Segal would like it to be in his ivory tower. Muslims, Jews, Chris-tians and Marxists have often been able to work together solidly and respectfully with the holders of all modes of belief.

Finally, allow me to compare the views of Mr Segal to the farm chicken which criticised a woodpecker as it went about its activities. The woodpecker turned to the chicken and said quietly: 'When did you last see a box of Kentucky Fried Woodpecker, mate?'

Steve Metcalfe, Lancaster.