1-whateverIt's hard to believe that these prominent Liberals haven't been coming to the same conclusion that i did some time earlier, Bishop de Roo-- that Mr. Trudeau's efforts, award-winning or not, are by themselves not an adequate answer to the problems raised by his actions in and since 1978--and with respect for the concerns of Cardinal Carter of Toronto, also in response to the problems of widespread knowledge in and since 1977.
These people aren't putting it all together in one place, but surely we
can see that they are now revealing the omitted elements of the peace
plan i offered to Mr, Trudeau in 1978.
It perplexes me, though, that if they realize that the major problem
and mistake in Trudeau's undertaking was in not having credited me for
that original work--and taking the necessary and proper steps to
resolve this issue of the non-payment to me for that work--they would
not have contacted me first...before following the Trudeau suit and
broadening the extent of his mistake.
Because of this, Bishop de Roo, ifs difficult to say what my "100%
cooperation" towards resolution of these problems, as is indicated to
President Carter in the report i sent him before Prime Minister Turner
called for the Canadian federal election, could be.
And i'd like to think, sir, that if the Liberals are taking such
extraordinary care now to ensure that i will be a major figure in that
action--as evidenced by these actions--they'd want a great deal of
cooperation from me.
And certainly, Bishop de Roo, in view of the damage to the credibility
of the Roman Catholic Christian Church done by the evasive, deceitful
Trudeau policy--that January 21, 1984 Toronto Star article, "The 'elite
team' behind Trudeau's peace plan" especially disturbs me in this regard--as well as the damage done to the credibility and integrity of my
Protestant Christian faith, one would suppose that they are concerned
finally about how much cooperation they can expect from you and Cardinal
Carter and the Holy See.
I am preparing a further statement about this issue of the Squamish Five
and the acouragemexit of terrorist actions because of bad government
policies in the forthcoming submissions to Prime Minister Turner and
President Reagan.
I thought, Bishop de Roo, that as we share that understanding of the 1978
events which such as the Squamish Five were not provided with by Mr.
Trudeau and his government--and which the Supreme Court of Canada
apparently weren1! provided with by them, despite my recommendation
that they especially be so provided--you'd be interested in this other
attachment from the June 23, 1984 Globe and Mail.
I direct your attention to the final reference to and quote from the
British philosopher and jurist Jeremy Bentham contained in the article.
My "Encyclopedia of Philosophy" contains the following about the
philosophy of Mr. Bentham:
"If the central question of political philosophy is taken to be: ^Why, if at all, should the citizen obey the state?' the utilitarian answer is quite clear. The citizen should obey just so far as obedience will contribute more to the general happiness than disobedience. If the central question is taken to be the the nature and ontological status of the state, the answer is equally clear: the state is not a super-entity with purposes and a will of its own, but a human contrivance to enable men to realize as many of their desires as possible. The 'general happiness,' or 'the interest of the community in general,' is always, in Bentham, to be understood as the resultant of the hedonic calculus, the sum of the pleasures and pains of individuals."
Of course, this issue of a "general happiness" brings to mind the concept of "Civitas" put forward by de Tocqueville, the concept of "fellow feeling" noted by Adam Smith, and in these terms, perhaps should once more lead us to consider Christ's words about "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God that which is God's."
As well as Plato's record of Socrates' argument with Thrasymachus that "injustice can never be more profitable than justice"--as i pointed out in my April 16, 1983 submission to Mssrs, Trudeau and MacEachen.2
TO CONSIDER THE TEXT OF THE NEXT PAGE OF THIS STATEMENT, TAKE YOUR NEXT FOOTSTEP HERE.
1-whatever
2-I RECOMMEND YOU READ THE WHOLE 8-PAGE SEQUENCE TO APPRECIATE SOCRATES' DISECTION OF THRASYMACHUS' FLAWED THINKING ABOUT SOCIETIES.
TO DO SO, TAKE A SERIES OF (8) BRIEF SIDESTEPS HERE.