I know that what I don't know is irrelevant

In my posting The CBC, CTV and the Globe & Mail in relation to all the people in power who have not acknowledged receiving a copy of Shooting the Messenger I write:

My story is a hot potato, a can of worms, minefield… pick your metaphor. To even acknowledge that they have received the book is to become part of the story. It’s not unlike someone who has witnessed a crime but does not want to help in the investigation fearing where it will end or the time it will take and therefore pretends he or she did not see or hear anything. Pity!

Mr. Bilodeau Q.C. asks if I want my book back. Under ordinary circumstances this is insulting to most authors, but not in this case. What Mr. Bilodeau is simply doing is making it clear that they (the Justices and staffers) have not read the book and don’t intend to, that perhaps like Ambassador Woolham they know that what they don’t know is irrelevant; or more likely they don't want to get involve which is why they focus on the irrelevant. Again, pity! Bernard P.

Letter to Madam Chief Justice McLachlin