For my own part here, let me just repeat what i have steadfastly maintained throughout the many years of my "International Diplomatic Work...on a direct basis" which has been ignored by the Canadian press though i have made so many disclosures to the press about it.
I agree with a lot of what Nelson Mandela says here. But he admits to being a socialist basically--as would Ed Broadbent, Bob Skelly of British Columbia, Canadian Ambassador to the United Nations Stephen Lewis, and the late Olaf Palme of Sweden, were he still alive. I am not, and nor have i ever been, a communist or even a socialist. I am really basically apolitical--which is why i have long resisted certain calls put to me to enter the arena of partisan politics. And what upsets me, Mr. Webster, is being denied for so long the human rights guaranteed to me as a natural-born citizen in the Canadian democracy.*
If you in some way doubt that the Canadian press is failing to live up to its responsibilities in this same Canadian democracy, be then only advised that i will provide Archbishop Ted Scott** and the Commonwealth committee, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, United Nations Secretary-General Javier Perez de Cuellar (i spoke personally with Assistant U.N. Secretary-General Gorin Ohlin when he was in this city to attend the recent peace festival, and as per prior arrangements with them, he returned to the United Nations with certain document copies about my contact with Archbishop Tutu--including a copy of my March 31, 1986 statement to the press), "The Southern African Action Coalition", "The Centre for Investigative Journalism", and whoever else it seems should be given the right "to argue" with the press censorship implicitly being practised in Canada regarding my work and "(my) present situation." After all, Mr. Webster, you should bear in mind that as the original disclosures to the press underlined, given that i am in the nuclear disarmament field and also must consider dealings with figures and groups internationally which would react to arguments in ways unsuitable to the security interests of our people (and our 1986 World's Fair, possibly)--i avoid senseless and stupid arguments which would overly compromise such "concerns" and instead i continue my work, as promised throughout, on the basis of truth being the "best" provider of genuine and durable security.***
And of course i will provide Prime Minister Mulroney with a copy of this.
Presumably, he will ensure that it is brought to the attention of the Reagan Administration.
Regrettably, Mr. Webster, according to my understanding of President Reagan's practices, he won't read anything longer than three pages--which this is, as you see.
Maybe the Mulroney Government can edit it down so that the present U.S. President will read it.
But for your own part, my fellow Canadian, ask yourself what you'd edit out if the "alternative" to my disputing the Trudeau-engineered "policy of silence" (as i've known since 1977-78) leaves us represented by "Trudeau's legacy."
I am aware of the Mulroney Government's "Africa 2000" policy from the Globe and Mail's May 7, 1986 edition.
If you start hearing rumours, ask the Canadian authorities when they were first aware of "the new Marshall Plan for the Middle East" idea which Ronald Reagan credits to Shimon Peres without reference to a date.
34-year old Gordon C. Wong, as you should have noted by the List of Contents for my submissions to "The Vancouver Centennial Peace Festival" participants, gave them copies of his most recent statements to "The Arab League" and "International Bank for Reconstruction and Development"...prior to Reagan's announcement.
On May 5, 1986, as promised to Archbishop Desmond Tutu during our second telephone conversation, i sent Jimmy Carter a registered letter with document copies for his analysis and response in regards to "(my) present situation."
Or should i say...once again...our present situation?