Many years ago, when former Toronto Maple Leaf owner Harold Ballard was asked to comment on the death of his former colleague Stafford Smythe, the outspoken Ballard made his feelings quite clear.

"I never said anything good about the little prick when he was alive," said Ballard. "I'm not going to start now just because he's dead."

Fast forward to former Tory prime minister Brian Mulroney's soon-to-be-released memoirs in which Mulroney has raised the hackles of various Liberals - and others - by denouncing the late Pierre Elliot Trudeau, accusing him of being morally unfit to govern because of his pro-Nazi activities early in the Second World War. Mulroney and Trudeau, of course, were never friends. Far from it. Indeed, there is little question that Mulroney still harbors a mammoth grudge against Trudeau for his devastatingly effective critique against Mulroney's failed Meech Lake Accord.

It's also an arguable point to debate the wisdom of dumping on somebody who is dead and who many Canadians - although not this one - greatly admire for the things he did while in office.

But one part of the counterattacks against Mulroney jump out for more critical review. And that is, in all the outrage from Liberal Leader Stephane Dion and other prominent Grits, one thing is abundantly clear: nobody is denying the truth of Mulroney's tough-minded attacks against Trudeau.

For those who may have been visiting Mars during the past few days, Mulroney has upset various Liberals by pointing out that while literally millions of Canadians were directly involved in the fight against Adolph Hitler, Trudeau, a 22-year-old wealthy dilettante, was riding around Montreal on his motorcycle wearing a Nazi helmet.

This was at a time when it was well known that Hitler was not only attempting to wipe out European democracies, but was well into his socalled "Final Solution," his murderous scheme to eliminate all Jews from the world. Mulroney says that for this outrageous behavior, Trudeau was not morally fit to govern the country, even though it was about 30 years later before Trudeau became a politician.

There is no doubt that most Canadians voting for Trudeau during the 1960s, 70s and 80s, would not have had any idea about what their hero did during the war at a time when so many Canadians his age - and younger - were putting their lives on the line to fight Hitler.

Whether this means he was not qualified to govern is a judgment call - not one I agree with - but the fact is, Mulroney's accusation against Trudeau are true and that's the part that those now attacking Mulroney have either ignored completely or made lame excuses on his behalf.

But the most ridiculous argument of all comes from those - Dion being a prime example - who say that Mulroney should not have criticized Trudeau in his book because - wait for it - Trudeau is dead.

Well, so is Hitler. And Stalin. This in no way is meant to compare them to Trudeau, it is only to underscore the absurdity of arguing that just because somebody is dead you can no longer criticize what he did during his lifetime.

Dion, however, said that if Mulroney "wanted to fight with Mr. Trudeau when he was alive, that's one thing. But Mr. Trudeau is not there any more and Mr. Mulroney should respect the man and respect what he did for the country and for the

world."

Utter nonsense. For one thing, if Dion thinks that Trudeau and Mulroney didn't fight when Trudeau was alive - and that Trudeau was given to even harsher language to describe his political opponents than Mulroney is - we have to ask where Dion was during all the time the two men were regularly in the public eye.

But just because Trudeau is dead does not mean that he is no longer fair game for either critics or fans alike. Of course he is.

And then there's the argument from assorted Trudeau apologists that his pro-Nazi activities don't count because he was only a young student at the time. He was 22. He was well educated, brilliant, and a man who enjoyed all the advantages of wealth afforded to him by his native country. He wasn't a little kid. He was a young man. What's more, Trudeau's adoration of dictatorial figures didn't end there. One of his best friends, during his later years, was Cuban dictator Fidel Castro, again hardly the equal of Hitler, but also hardly an example of democratic respect for people.

I think Mulroney, for his memoirs to be taken as seriously as they should be, would have been better to avoid the strong personal attacks, but that's up to him. And if his accusations against Trudeau were wrong, well, that would be completely unacceptable.

But since Trudeau's apologists know that Mulroney was right about their hero, they're doing what Trudeau would have done: attack the critic and ignore the valid criticism.

Neat.