| WORLD -— eae _ Grenada’s occupation ‘cops deport Canadian From the Caribbean : BRIDGETOWN, Barbados — nminal-like treatment. his is how a Toronto resident described how officials of the rul- ing Interim Administration in Tenada went about interrogating ae finally deporting her after a 'sit to the Spice Isle. Fi Speaking to reporters here fol- Wing the incident, nutritionist phate Hillman said that police Immigration officials in St. forge’s refused to give her Teasons in writing for her deporta- ton so that it would be possible tor her to re-enter the island at a future date. he eee authorities later told (CAN aribbean News Agency ae . radio network that Hill- tisk?” S considered ‘‘a security Reacting to the charge, Hillman thin I am very upset. I did no- Bade oe: There are no activiti: to accuse me of any such FN She added that she an return to Grenada because Sr ital no harm would come to “es the average Grenadian. nutritionist, who had oe in the island in 1981 as a chbped In schools for handi- aa children under the Ple s Revolutionary Govern- nt of murdered Prime Minister aurice Bishop, said that the Whole c iso ee for’? Plsode was. ‘‘uncalled a and went against universal - cratic right of freedom of Ovement. ae nner Canadian, described Self employed graphic.artist named Noel Thomas who was her travelling companion, was also kicked out by the Paul Scoon re- gime. The ordeal for the two began Nov. 2 when they were picked up on the streets of St. George’s and told they had to report to the office of the Commissioner of Police, top Barbadian police of- ficial Mervyn Holder. (Many of the occupation forces are Barba- dian troops and policemen). It was there that Holder told her that her personal safety was in danger although he did not sub- stantiate his claims. Immigration officials then questioned her about any involvement with the Maurice Bishop and October 19th, 1983 Martyrs Foundation, an organization formed to honor and preserve the memory of Maurice Bishop and other Government Ministers, trade union leaders, workers and stu- dents slain on October 19th, last ar. She told officials that she knew members of the Foundation but was uninvolved with the organization. : Hillman, who had arrived in Grenada Oct. 4 to gather research for a project she is working on, was then taken along with Thomas. to-get their. belongings Norman Faria from their hotel. From there they were driven to the island’s airport under escort and put on a plane for neighboring Barbados. Hillman told the Tribune that she understood other non- Grenadians, although they had a legal right to be in the island, con- tinue to be deported by the In- terim Administration. Immediate- ly after last October’s invasion by U.S.-led troops, several hundred internationalist workers who worked in PRG programs were put on U.S. transport planes and flown out. When contacted by this re- porter, the Canadian High Com- mission in Bridgetown conceded that Hillman had come into the office to express dissatisfaction on the way she was treated in Grenada. However, when asked whether the Commission, which also takes in Grenada and neighboring territories would be taking any action on the matter, a spokesperson said the complaint is being ‘referred to Ottawa’’. Hillman said that although she recognized the extent to which the Commission could help the situation she nevertheless ex- pressed concern with the fact that no guarantee was forthcoming . that she would be allowed to re- turn to Grenada. { What, when and how to write while on a visit to India, my life.”’ India. 1967. she remarked. _ family and friends. For most of her self-imposed exile, she lived moving-to England in 1982. While in the U.S., she said, she became “‘a favorite pet of the CIA. They told me what I should write, when and how . . .”’ Her third book which described her disillusionment with life in the U.S. was rejected by American and British publishers and was published in a small edition in ‘Manipulated’ in West Aleluyeva back home MOSCOW — Returning to the USSR after defecting in 1967 Svetlana Aleluyeva, daughter of former Soviet Premier Joseph Stalin, told reporters her de- cision was ‘‘purely personal, not political’’. Aleluyeva said that during her years in the ‘*‘free world’’ she was ‘“‘manipulated by entrepreneurs, lawyers and publishers who sensationalized the name of my father, my own name and in the U.S., Aleluyeva spoke of her constant feeling of guilt and how, on June 14, 1984 during the 40th anniversary of D-Day when the West marked the Normandy landings, did she fully compre- hend where she belonged. On Sept. 10 she wrote a letter to the Soviet ambassador in London, delivering it in person the following day, requesting restoration of her Soviet citizenship. It was, she stressed, her first contact with Soviet officials since Alluding to Western press reports about the fate of her 13 _ year-old daughter, Olga, Aleluyeva said that as the sole legal guardian, it was her decision where the child should live. _ She expressed surprise that her former husband, U.S. archi- tect William Peters, should suddenly express concern over the child’s welfare 12 years after their divorce. Peters, she said, had signed over full rights of custody to her at their 1972 divorce in Phoenix, Arizbna. Since then, she said, he has not contributed one cent to Olga’s upkeep and has visited the child only four times. **I’m bewildered at his newly-found interest’, About her future plans, Aleluyeva said she hoped to resume work as a literary translator and to renew her life with her -—_——— International Focus Tom Morris cate Fine words, lousy principles The annual United Nations : ebate on South Africa’s apar- pee System opened last week Beane on the heels of months ‘ loody repression, round- PS, killings and crackdowns y the regime. fra he debate follows the _ Taudulent election, boycotted me the majority of Indian and on Ored”’ voters, but which Be Up A three-house _parlia- FS nt in which whites: still aintain complete control. 03, country’s Black majority x quilion of the country’s 31 10n people) are still disen- Nchized, - One of the first to speak in . debate was Canada’s new i. ambassador, Stephen haa, who denounced apar- ol as ‘‘an unconscionable ation of fundamental Bice rights’. He then held Stil fea ‘peaceful change”’ ag as a chance. As Lewis Speaking the apartheid re- ap i Moved to more strictly Ply its Group Areas Act Ree requires racial separa- ee housing. It continued its S€cution of all dissent Ch has soared since the a Y and police cracked down hun ok townships _ killing And then Stephen Lewis d : ‘opped his clanger: in Cana- da’s name, he defended our country’s recognition of the South African regime and our connections with it. ae soning? ‘This is one mean See can tell the (South African) government, the white minority and the popula- tion as a whole that Canada opposes apartheid and sup- ports social and _ political _ change,”” he offered. ye And on sanctions? Itsn8 -question about which we have thought, and will continue to think, long and hard... Lewis and his employers in Ottawa aren't bothered with ‘the detail that the entire libera- tion movemen t in South Afri- LEWIS: Deplores apartheid while defending ties. ca, the world community through the United Nations, international sporting groups and others have called for a ‘complete boycott of the illegal and inhumane apartheid regime. This means breaking diplo- matic, trade and other ties with Pretoria and branding it public- ly for what it is. It means - squeezing the regime economically, cutting off its trade with the world, and the needed supplies to build up its military force which crushes its own people and attacks libera- tion movements on its borders. Lewis is talking like a Tory (and a Liberal) when he gushes forth about the inhumanity. of apartheid and then defends Canada’s practical aid to it. Anyone who wondered how Lewis would bend his princi- ples to suit his paycheck can stop wondering. Lousy words, lousy principles If Stephen Lewis’ hypocrisy on South Africa wasn’t enough to tarnish Canada’s inter- national reputation, Doug Roche, Canada’s ambassador for disarmament drove in an- other nail Nov. 20. He cast our country’s vote _ against a proposal in the Un- ited Nations for a nuclear arms freeze by the major powers. We, along with the United States and nine other states opposed the motion, 111 na- tions voted in favor, including the USSR. External Affairs Minister Joe Clark defended Ottawa’s position by saying Canada could not afford to violate NATO’s solidarity. He said ‘our voting for a nuclear weapons freeze would ‘‘cause tensions within the NATO alliance’. In plain english, Clark says it would offend the Reagan administration which is em- barked on the world’s largest arms build-up and expects its. friends to support it. To his credit, NDP leader Ed Broadbent called the action . ‘*supine acquiescence’’ to Washington. Roche, in a speech explain- ing Canada’s cowardly posi- tion, told the UN Committee, the no vote ‘‘should not be interpreted to mean that we wish to see a continuation of the present level or a continued increase in the nuclear weapons arsenal. Far from it.”” What garbage. It’s hard to tell if Lewis is coaching Roche in the art of doubletalk or Roche’s experience has _in- spired Lewis. Roche votes against arms control and says he opposes weapons build-up. Lewis slams apartheid then defends PACIFIC TRIBUNE, NOVEMBER 28, 1984 e 9 CLARK: Nuclear arms freeze would hurt NATO. recognition of the regime. The tragedy for Canada is obvious: we and a handful of America’s “‘friends’’ are iso- lated in the world community on the burning issues of our time. We = slavishly lick Reagan’s boots while human- ity struggles to end the danger- _ous nuclear threat and battles for national and social liberation. Little men like Roche and Lewis, carrying out the orders of little men like Joe Clark and Brian Mulroney are spitting in the wind.