Previous blog entry removed
My previous blog entry, "Ryerson Students' Union appoints Eric Newstadt as Chief Returning Officer," has been removed, following my receipt of a demand letter [PDF] from counsel for the Canadian Federation of Students (CFS). I removed this blog entry after noting that The Eyeopener had itself removed the article that I referenced, presumably after receiving a similar letter. The article made certain statements concerning the CFS that The Eyeopener was presumably unable to prove. Under Canadian law, the burden of proof of the truthfulness of an allegedly defamatory statement lies with the publisher of the statement in question.
Accordingly, I should make a correction to a statement that I made in that blog entry. Referring to the 2003 elections at Simon Fraser University, I referred to an article in The Peak by Derrick Harder. I should have stated: "Derrick Harder wrote about his participation in a CFS-BC-backed slate at Simon Fraser University in The Peak last November." To my knowledge, the CFS had no involvement whatsoever in that election.
Likewise, in 2002, the posters for the "Access All-Stars" slate at Simon Fraser University were designed on CFS-BC computers, in the CFS-BC provincial office, during CFS-BC office hours. And the persons who were giving the Access All-Stars candidates campaign advice were employees of CFS-BC. Again, to my knowledge, the CFS had no involvement whatsoever in that election.
Accordingly, I should make a correction to a statement that I made in that blog entry. Referring to the 2003 elections at Simon Fraser University, I referred to an article in The Peak by Derrick Harder. I should have stated: "Derrick Harder wrote about his participation in a CFS-BC-backed slate at Simon Fraser University in The Peak last November." To my knowledge, the CFS had no involvement whatsoever in that election.
Likewise, in 2002, the posters for the "Access All-Stars" slate at Simon Fraser University were designed on CFS-BC computers, in the CFS-BC provincial office, during CFS-BC office hours. And the persons who were giving the Access All-Stars candidates campaign advice were employees of CFS-BC. Again, to my knowledge, the CFS had no involvement whatsoever in that election.
Labels: sfu
49 Comments:
The CFS slogan should be Canada's Litigious Student Movement
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Well this isn't suing or threatening a lawsuit. Its asking you to remove allegedly false information from your site, which in and of itself is not such a terrible thing to ask of anyone. I'm sure you wouldn't like it if you felt you were being libelled.
I'm surprised you still uploaded the .pdf after it specified that stuff about the author not consenting to its publication. It does seem like you are just trying to provoke an angry reaction...
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
Props for posting the letter, something Joey Coleman (www.joeycoleman.ca) shirked from doing when he recently got a letter of his own for viciously slandering the innocent Joey Hansen.
Yes, Joey Hansen is innocent. Joey Coleman is a moron and a complete wimp from not posting his letter.
See how much McMaster students, like me, think Joey Coleman is the biggest moron here: http://msuelection.blogspot.com/
When you try to dam a river, you only make the floods more violent.
The judicial test for for defamation in this situation would be very difficult to prove. They would need to show that not only did you have malicious intent to injure the organizations reputation, but that you actually did so - that they actually suffered some damage from your "attack". And given that they willingly put their organization in the public eye, it would be even more difficult to show the damage YOU specifically caused. They know that. They know legal action would be completely useless. But they know a lawyers letter will do the trick.
The problem with these situations is that even when you know you are right, you'd have to pay a lawyer to prove it. You know you don't have the money for a lawyer (unlike them) which is enough to make you give in. They have successfully used power to put you in a situation where you are powerless to defend yourself.
It's an ironic tactic, because these are the same people who constantly claim to be fighting on behalf of those who are powerless to fight for themselves. To take the power back. Looks like perhaps they've learned from those they so passionately fight against.
It's actions like this that expose their ugly inside. They have no interest in shifting power to anyone except themselves. They use the plight of the oppressed and position themselves as the saviours, simply to maintain their own power. And most of them are privileged white kids...
That's not defamatory, that's just opinion. Disagree with it if you like, but at least think about it...
Well said Juan!
I see that my good friends within the MSU clique are busy here as well. lol
In terms of me not posting my letter. My letter was copyrighted. It would be a violation of the copyright to post it. Joey Hansen's lawyer is a very expensive lawyer who would sue my ass off for violating his copyright. I would have to get Counsel in Vancouver to defend myself and travel to Vancouver. I would not be able to recover my costs. You know, I may be a coward for it. I do not feel good about this but sometimes, it is hard to fight the power.
Titus is a brave man and this is why I respect him.
In terms of Mr. Hansen, it is presently innocent in the eyes of the law. The courts will be hearing his various suits soon, I await the results.
So, what's the difference between CFS and CFS-BC (except the official administrational blabla) I thought CFS-BC is a division of CFS??
Oh look, could this be a March 16, 2006 article from the MUN student paper about the CFS interfering in local elections by backing candidates?
The spicier bits:If fairness is such a highly protected value of our student elections, then why does the union allow the Canadian Federation of Students to openly interfere?
. . . the Newfoundland and Labrador CFS office provides resources for candidates they want to win the MUNSU election. This year, those candidates were VP external candidate Stella Magalios and VP internal candidate Stephanie Power. Ever wonder why their signs were so similar?
They give their time and money to candidates because they want students to endorse policies and ideas they believe in. Since no one will listen to them on their own, they need MUNSU to do it.
VP external candidate Chad Griffiths is certainly the left-wing type of candidate the CFS normally looks for, but he’s too strong in his own convictions to do what someone tells him. Instead, they went with Stella, the sister of local CFS chairperson Jessica Magalios.
MUNSU didn’t help matters by allowing unofficial slating in this year’s election, which Magalios and Power also capitalized on. I don’t know what they define as unofficial – if we print it here, does that make it official?
The CFS has enough issues of its own to deal with besides interfering with our elections.
No, no evidence of the CFS backing candidates here Ian. Just some interfering interspersed with a bit of meddling.
When can the muse expect the CFS' threatening papers to arrive?
There’s a simple lesson to be learned from all of this. You really can’t go around saying whatever you like without having any proof to back it up. I know that this might come as a shock to many of this site’s readers, but it’s true.
For instance, I might know that Titus is a douche bag and you might know that Titus is a douche bag, but we can’t go around saying Titus Gregory is indeed a douche bag. Because even though it might be the closest thing that we have to an absolute truth there is no tangible proof that he has ever been used chiefly for washing vaginas.
So remember friends, if you can’t actually prove it just shut up.
Salut
Fredo the Heartbreaker
There's only two things in this world - opinion and fact. Apparently Fredo is advocating that we can only share facts, and there is no place for opinion.
There's absolutely nothing wrong with sharing opinion - the problem arises when one puts forth opinion as fact. So don't in fact shut up if you can't prove it, just be clear that you're expressing an opinion.
Boy, if CFS had to play by these rules they'd have a lot less to say...
Dear CFS,
I rely on your letter to Mr. Gregory as further evidence of your malice towards the students you purport to represent. However, I wish to sincerely thank you for the additional proof that you are indeed the litigious organization you’ve been labeled.
Signed anonymouslsy (for fear of being sued)
Anonymous said...
Yes, Joey Hansen is innocent.
Innocent? Of what? He's the one doing the suing, claiming slander and libel. The question is whether those he's suing are innocent or guilty of these charges.
The facts are that during the time Mr. Hansen was the Finance and Services Coordinator at the Douglas Students' Union, they had their fees frozen, a criminal investigation was begun, and finally the courts put the Union under receivership due to the dire state of their finances. Whether or not Mr. Hansen was responsible for this fiasco is not a question before the courts to my knowledge.
Unfortunately.
That MUN "article" -- it's actually an editorial -- someone posted up there is quite childish and poorly written. If that were a news piece, it would have been taken down by now.
Overall, it does a disservice to opponents of the CFS. Calling the federation "crap" won't bring their (assumed) dream of defederation any closer.
You know, it's funny... people have talked a lot about opinions versus fact, allegations, and lawsuits, but not a single post on this site has convinced me that any wrongdoing has taken place. Let's review the facts:
1) An allegation has been made that the CFS-BC made some candidates posters on their computers. I have been presented with no evidence of this. In fact, all that has happened is that this site has posted those words. I could post that "Aliens landed in Regina" on a blog, that certainly doesn't make it true.
2) Two similar posters in the MUNSU election. All that means is that - likely - two candidates worked together on their posters. In fact, I could make two posters look similar using a colour copier and scotch tape - again, nothing proven except similar taste in artwork.
3) A staff person at a BC student union has been accused of wrongdoing. I might be wrong, but I believe in this country, allegations and inveinstigations are not an indication of guilt. We presume people to be innocent until a sufficient burden of proof is brought forward to prove them guilty.
In a lot of ways, this site is no similar to those fellows in New Mexico and Montana who keep posting about the aliens that kidnap them at night. We see no proof, and how seriously we do take them as a result? It's unfounded, unproven, and in this case, hurtful to the people being accused.
Should organizations sue one another for sport? Of course not. Should an organization or individual have the right to defend it's reputation if someone is lying about them? Definetly.
Please people. Let's start asking tough questions about the "proof" of conspiracy being presented on this webiste.
You know, it's funny... people have talked a lot about opinions versus fact, allegations, and lawsuits, but not a single post on this site has convinced me that any wrongdoing has taken place. Let's review the facts:
1) An allegation has been made that the CFS-BC made some candidates posters on their computers. I have been presented with no evidence of this. In fact, all that has happened is that this site has posted those words. I could post that "Aliens landed in Regina" on a blog, that certainly doesn't make it true.
2) Two similar posters in the MUNSU election. All that means is that - likely - two candidates worked together on their posters. In fact, I could make two posters look similar using a colour copier and scotch tape - again, nothing proven except similar taste in artwork.
3) A staff person at a BC student union has been accused of wrongdoing. I might be wrong, but I believe in this country, allegations and inveinstigations are not an indication of guilt. We presume people to be innocent until a sufficient burden of proof is brought forward to prove them guilty.
In a lot of ways, this site is no similar to those fellows in New Mexico and Montana who keep posting about the aliens that kidnap them at night. We see no proof, and how seriously we do take them as a result? It's unfounded, unproven, and in this case, hurtful to the people being accused.
Should organizations sue one another for sport? Of course not. Should an organization or individual have the right to defend it's reputation if someone is lying about them? Definetly.
Please people. Let's start asking tough questions about the "proof" of conspiracy being presented on this webiste.
I have no "proof" that Stephen Harper is the Prime Minister of Canada
I fail to see how a mere "douche bag" would warrant the weight of a legal letter.
Seriously, if Titus' words and opinions are so inconsequential, sordid, or uninformed, then why this heavy-handed threat of legal action? Since when did negative coverage justify a recourse to the courts? Does the NDP sue the blog Small Dead Animals for posting bad things about them? Does the Fraser Institute sue the BCTF for slamming their policies? What gives?
If speculation without empirical evidence is worthy of official condemnation, then so is more than half of the blogosphere. People throw out even harsher opinions everyday with little consequence. Whatever one thinks of Titus, his blog posts, and the commenters he harbours here, there is really no justification for such overbearing, draconian moves.
I particularly liked the part in the cease and desist leter where it said "if you publish this letter, it will be taken as evidence of malice".
Got that everybody? It's not just that saying bad things about CFS is defamatory and worthy of a SLAPP-suit. *Providing evidence* that CFS is engaging in SLAPP-like behaviour is apparently defamatory, too.
Highly amusing, especially given the parts of this thread demanding "proof" of CFS chicanery.
But why are the fed-heads all coming out now on this blog? Why did they lurk but not talk when this blog and its threads were asking for information about possible criminal wrong-doing at the CFS board over the matter of the Link-approved "loan" to Douglas College?
Maybe CFS's slogan should actually be: "Canada's Least Transparent NGO ".
Hey, hey, ho, ho, this CFS furtiveness has got to go!
As someone involved in the SFSS election mentioned by Titus, and as someone who was deeply involved in the BC-CFS, I just wanted to respond to an earlier post citing lack of “proof.” The reasons those of who were involved don’t come forward to make statements about the CFS (BC or otherwise) interference in local elections and with local autonomy, are twofold. First, we’ve gotten on with our lives, have real jobs, and have realized the culture of paranoia and manic desire for control manifest in the leadership of the CFS is pointless to try to change from the inside. But most importantly, we don’t have the same access to the financial resources that the CFS has. I don’t collect millions in membership fees. I have only my wages. And lots of that goes to student loans. So when they sue me because they don’t like what I have to say, I have no way to defend myself.
I’ve made statements to Titus based on my experience working with the CFS. I have been at the BC provincial office while office staff and elected representatives worked on my slate’s campaign posters. I used their equipment (such as a digital camera). I was told to keep it a secret. Later I was told to say that “any member can access the resources of the provincial office.” After my election I was told by the powers-that-be who to hire for vacant staff positions at the local. I have been in the room while these same staff people received their orders from BC and CFS National headquarters. Or maybe it was just advice? My point is the CFS does interfere with local politics. The loans to Douglas are another example. At NO TIME did the Douglas Representative Committee ever agree to accept a loan or agree to the terms of a loan from the CFS. I know, because I went to nearly everyone of those meetings. And there are no minutes to reflect such an agreement. Nearly a year later a document was produced displaying the signature of one former board member, Jeremy Gervan. Coincidentally, the basement suite tenant of Mr. Joey Hansen. Dodgy? Yeah.
There are many more people like me. People who served on the BC-CFS executive committee, or who got involved through their student unions. We know what kind of shady goings-on the CFS gets up to. We have experienced their terrible tactics and manipulations, and sometimes to our shame, we have participated in same. But student unions are nothing if not a learning ground. It saddens me that an organization whose goals I support so completely has done nothing but alienate and disgust students. Look only to the pathetic turn out at today’s National Day of Action at SFU as an example of how students are feeling.
So, for the time being and until Titus needs me to defend him in court, I will remain anonymous. And if the CFS thinks that they can bully Titus into silence, they will be sincerely surprised at how many people are waiting for their opportunity to give a little back to such a repellent organization.
I wish I had subpoena powers to demand the name of this annonymous tipster above. You should talk to newspaper people.
Google the Peak's website with the terms "CFS" and "election". Lots of juicy stuff right there.
If you're as lazy as I am, though, you'd probably want to click here: http://www.google.ca/search?hl=en&q=site%3Awww.peak.sfu.ca+CFS+election&btnG=Google+Search&meta=
Oh yeah, and on the previous thread, the CUP president was, I think, looking for tips on CFS-backed slates. You can send your tips to her here: http://www.cup.ca/contact.php
For you SFU students, be sure to read the "CFS files" article on that link above; lots of fascinating facts there (for example, did you know that Joey Hansen used to be SFSS president?)
If CUP had a Phil Link the CFS would be f#%ked.
Yes, I am looking for tips (as stated in my "libelous" comments removed from this site). Please email me with yuor experiences wit slates and so on. Even if you want to stay anonymous, that's fine.
president@cup.ca
One thing that I don’t understand is what exactly is a Canadian Federation of Students backed slate? Does that mean that all 450,000 members back a particular slate at a particular students’ union? Or is a Canadian Federation of Students backed slate when every member local sends a financial contribution to a particular slate at a particular students union?
Do you see how stupid it looks when you type out the actual name instead of just using the acronym? By saying a “CFS backed slate”, are you referring to the support of just its elected representatives, like Amanda Aziz and Brent Farrington? Or is a “CFS backed Slate” one that has the support of Philip Link and the guy that does the photocopying in the Manitoba office? I really want to know the answer to these questions.
As for the people who claim that they were a part of a “federation backed slate”, what does that say about you? You were fine with breaking the rules when it benefited you but now you have a problem with how things were supposedly run. As far as I’m concerned, anyone like Derrik Harder has zero creditability on this issue. If it turns out that Federation fees were spent on a slate’s campaign then these jackasses are just as guilty as anyone employed by the Federation.
But again, I’m still waiting for even a smidgen of proof (yes, a smidgen), which is something that no one has yet been able to produce.
Salut
Fredo the Heartbreaker
P.S – Titus, kudos on the Day of Action coverage. Way to keep your finger on the pulse on student union issues.
Fredo,
I don't know what exactly what you need in order to consider it "proof". There are people who have said they were part of a CFS slate. It has been documented in many student papers and blogs.
Obviously, the concept of the "CFS backed slate" doesn't mean that the membership supports the candidates. Does the membership all support the CFS threatening to sue Titus and other student journalists? Does all the membership even support the Day of Action? (See the Muse at Memorial and the Cord Weekly at Laurier.)
What it means is that the CFS and provincial bodies offer their support and time to helping a set of candidates win. In Harder's case, that meant designing and printing posters. In some candidates case that means bringing people in help campaign. The CFS doesn't have to write the slate a cheque to support them financially and otherwise. Printing posters and so on should count.
And it makes sense for the CFS to do this. There is so much money tied up in these schools between membership fees and health/dental contracts, that it is a logical thing to do from a financial perspective.
This happens. It does. I started asking about the proof last week (on the blog entry that was removed) after getting an angry call from Ian Boyko where he denied slates and demanded CUP remove the Eyeopener story. (Which was removed, but not because of libel despite the letter posted on this site.) I have received enough information now that I feel comfortable saying that the CFS does back slates.
And for your pathetic ad hominem attack on Harder... because he realized, while working with the CFS, that their tactics are nasty, he loses credibility? He's one of a few people who have the balls to speak out about this and attach his name to it. (Not that I blame you guys; I don't want to get sued either!)
Come on, Fredo, come up with some better arguments than claiming ignorance around a simple concept and personal attacks.
-Erin, CUP Pres
Fredo’s nastiness is just the tip of the iceberg.
The CFS is one of most viciously vindictive organizations I have ever encountered.
I could use numerous examples to illustrate this. Here is one that frequently comes to mind.
Ten years ago, in 1996, a former CFS chairperson named Carl Gillis, who was then a Parliament Hill Liberal staffer, died tragically at the age of 26 in an inline skating accident. A certain CFS staff person who I won’t name (hint: they are still working for CFS) showed up at the next national meeting after Gillis’ death wearing a pair of inline skates and a CFS-BC t-shirt that featured an anti-BC component email written by Gillis during a feud in the early 90s.
To the shock of some, a great many of the delegates at the general meeting thought this was funny, funny, haw, haw. Now if this doesn’t make you cringe kids I’m not sure what would.
These.Are.Nasty.People.Period.
Erin
You seem a little slow on the uptake, things must be rough at CUP these days. But hey, in the spirit of fairness let me help you out:
Proof: evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true.
Hmm, are a few people merely saying that they were in CFS backed slates evidence enough to establish it as proof? I guess we’ll leave that up to this audience but it seems to me if all you need are a few wackjobs and a couple newspapers to report what they say, then Elvis is still alive, Jimmy Hoffa’s working at 711, and the bat-boy just graduated from university.
You run a powerful newspaper empire and you’re trolling on comment boards to find this proof? Surely if the CFS is running every election there must be at least one disgruntled person with an email, chat log, text message, phone bill, retinal scan, or DNA evidence that concretely proves someone in the CFS helped support a slate either financially or with much needed backrubs at the end of the day. If you have this information, please for the love of God make it available. But if the best you can offer is a few people who say that it’s so, well, that’s not nearly good enough.
And Harder lost credibility because according to him HE KNOWINLY BROKE THE RULES AND LET THE FEDERATION HELP HIS SLATE.
That might make him a hero in your book, but if it’s actually true it makes him a cheater in my books and just as guilty as those he’s now calling out. This is the same reason that in criminal trials they look for witnesses who aren’t criminals themselves. Geez, don’t you ever watch Law and Order?
Happy Hunting
Salut
Fredo the Heartbreaker
Dear Fredo,
You obviously didn't read my post very carefully. I never said that I was considering the information I get trolling blogs as conclusive evidence of CFS backed slates. I said that I had been soliciting information and felt that I had enough to be proof. The information will be made available so keep an eye out for it. I am sure your good friend Titus will comment on his site when the information is published.
I also wanted to sincerely thank you for your definition of proof. Even though I regularly edit and advise on CUP pieces for libel issues, I wasn't sure what to consider proof before. (BY god, if we needed DNA evidence to publish something, no paper would ever get to production night!)
I didn't comment before because of legal issues. As you know, this blog entry is about a legal issue to do with a CUP paper and was filed by a CUP lawyer. This required me to resolve a number of legal issues and keep my mouth shut for a couple of days. That is my job, after all.
Look: Harder is a great example to illustrate my point. He was a young, green student politician and a big powerful organization offered to help him out in the name of student issues. The CFS preys upon people like him. I didn't call him a hero; I said that he shouldn't lose all credibility because he once broke some rules or because he changed his mind as he developed his own idea about what was appropriate for student organizations to do.
If we say that every person that comes forward has no credibility because they participated in it, we will never gather the conclusive evidence that we are all looking for.
doesn't CUP have access to one of the best libel lawyers in Canada and a rather large legal defense fund?
Yes, one of the best lawyers in Canada and modest legal fund (in comparison with the CFS'). However, you may have noticed that the CFS also uses the same firm occasionally, be the letterhead that the letter to Titus is printed on.
To address the comments about cheating, let me just say that technically no rules are broken when the CFS provincial "office collective" backs a slate. SFSS elections rules insist that all posters are printed in-house and are signed by the Chief Electoral Officer. There is a spending limit that is strictly enforced. However, there are no such rules pertaining to Senate and BoG elections which happen at the same time, and until recently, the same slate was allowed to run in both sets of elections, with exactly the same material. This senate/bog material can be, and has been, printed at provincial office. Full colour, glossy posters. It's a technicality, but it does not break any electoral rules at SFU.
The issue is not, and never has been, cheating. The issue is how extremely unethical it is for the CFS provincial "office collective" to back their own candidates in local elections. The inexperienced 19 year-old can hardly be blamed for not discerning such political manipulations.
Not to mention the manufacturing of elections for positions on the national and provincial executives. Holy manipulation by staff people Batman.
Talk about knowing what side you bread is buttered on. The CFS staff “compliment” butters it own damn bread. They don’t need any students doing the buttering it for them.
In fact, many of the delegations coming from the serious FEDhead student associations are actually include staff anyway. And, look into their backgrounds and you will see that many of them started out on the payroll in paid provincial and national elected positions.
Anyone in the student press check the last time any of these positions were ever contested?
I wonder which provincial office Ms. Aziz will end up in?
This is all about power and always has been. The only difference is that people got sloppy and now they're getting caught.
CFS doesn't know how to do anything but fight which is all they've ever done. Expecting anything from them but bitterness, anger and hatred is a pipe dream.
Sadly, students will continue to pay the bill for grudges, vendettas and corrupt leadership but what can they do? The cards have always (like the lawyer's letters) been stacked against them.
How many CFS Chairperson's have come from the Graduate Caucus?
How much of CFS's revenues come from Grad students vs. undergrads?
How many of those Chairs have been white, heterosexual males?
Think about those realities for a second and then ask if there's a real interest in leveling the playing field.
CFS spends - I think, though I would know for certain if Titus would ever respond to the legion of fan requests to put up some documentation on CFS financial statements - something in the region of a million bucks a year on salaries (far more than that if you throw in CUTS, of which it owns 75%).
Chairs are responsible for negotiating collective agreements with staff.
Most chairs become staff members after their terms are up (hel-lo White Male trio of Michael Conlon, Ian Boyko and George Soule!).
Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that staff have a say in the hiring process.
Tidy arrangement, huh? A Chair that tries to keep staff costs in line might find it difficult to get a job afterwards. A chair that plays nice with staff gets a cushy job afterwards - at inflated pay rates to boot!
Such a cushy arrangement, in fact, that one might reasonably assume that staff would have a motive in making sure member associations would not ask too many questions. And that they might as a result "back slates".
By the by - Phil Link has been paid by CFS for over 25 years. That means he must have recieved well over a million dollars from students. He's CFS' own Million-Dollar Man. Maybe Joey Hansen was just trying to catch up...
And now that we know that CUP-folk are indeed lurking...can we ask Erin to finally ask CFS the questions that were posed on this site a couple of months back? Namely:
1) Did Phil Link actually have the authority to sign for a $275,000 "advance" to the DSU on his own, without informing the CFS Board?
2) If not, how does this man still have a job?
3) If so, was this done with the kowledge of the Board, and is there a documentary record of the decision?
4) Regardless of the answer to 3, when did it come to the CFS' attention that Douglas Student Union was unable to pay its bills?
5) When it came to the attention of CFS that Douglas was in trouble, what steps did it take to tell its own members at Douglas of the situation? More specifically, did either George Soule or Amanda Aziz actually vote to give this money to cover Hansen's trail rather than inform the students of Douglas College of what was being done?
6) What, exactly, were the terms of the "advance"? How is it recorded in CFS' budget (assuming it is at all)?
Erin, we're counting on you to ask the tough questions...
Douglas?
Transfer?
Money?
Advance?
WHAT’S YER PROBLEM?!?!!
It heartening to see CUP heavyweights trying to keep CFS honest.
It would be even more so if CUP's high-powered correspondents spent more time covering Canadian uni. student issues rather than offering us dumbed down versions of stories we've already read in the Star or the Globe [Exhibit A: http://cup.ca/livesite/view.php?aid=27781 ; where's the student angle in that?!].
That's why I look forward to the day when the one they call "W3" goes to Ottawa to become CUP national bureau chief.
It's heartening to see CUP heavyweights trying to keep CFS honest.
It would be even more so if CUP's high-powered correspondents spent more time covering Canadian uni. student issues rather than offering us dumbed down versions of stories we've already read in the Star or the Globe [Exhibit A: http://cup.ca/livesite/view.php?aid=27781 ; where's the student angle in that?!].
That's why I look forward to the day when the one they call "W3" goes to Ottawa to become CUP national bureau chief.
hi everyone;
derrick harder here. as flattered as i am to be a sort of poster boy here, i'm not going to wade in to this discussion. i am, however, happy to answer questions anyone may have re. my experiences in campaigns at SFU: contact me at pres@sfss.ca if you are curious, congratulatory, or would simply like to berate me directly.
Dear CFS,
HO HO HO HO HO
HA HA HA HA HA
HEE HEE HEE HEEEEEEEE
This is hilarious. Someone says something bad about the CFS, and you boys go off threatening to sue - who? Titus Gregory?
Blood from turnips, blood from friggin' turnips.
One has to wonder why big corporations or big organizations even try these tricks at all. In the old days (read: prior to ~1995) this might have actually worked to shut someone up. Now, with the advent of computers and the fact that anyone can pull up archives of the old information, it just looks freakin' lame to try lying, covering up, and jumping all over someone.
Anybody reminded of 0.002 cents per kilobyte? :P Verizon looked REALLY stupid after that.
[I posted this on another conversation, but it is also relevant here.]
Robyn Doolittle, editor of the Eyeopener, sent the following response to Titus after the letter was posted. (It was never posted for some reason. Titus...?)
"I'd like to thank you for posting the legal letter the CFS sent you on your site -- if you hadn't, we never would have found out that our own law firm was advising the CFS on this issue AFTER they had advised us. Just to clarify, we did not take down our story because we believe it to be defamatory. The debate as to whether the CFS-backs slates at universities isn't a question for me. I was surprised when Ian called denying it. However, as he pointed out, I was unable to point to a document which proved it at that time and, as they say, you have to pick your battles. I happily reached a clarification agreement with Ian. That said, The Eyeopener -- editor@theeyeopener and my cell is 647-404-4740 -- is now accepting documents.
Lastly, I am happy to report I have been assured by our law firm that, in the future, they will NEVER again deal with the CFS if it relates to a CUP member in any way.
Sincerely
Robyn Doolittle"
To be clear, the article was not retracted; rather, there was a clarification published. (These are very different things.) The clarification made clear that the Eye was not suggesting that the CFS financially backs slates but that there are groups of people that run on CFS issues.
Secondly, I am not convinced that saying that the CFS backs slates could be proven libelous even if it was found to be untrue in court. But that's a discussion to have over beers at a CUP conference.
-Erin, CUP Pres
Titus,
Congratulations on having the strength of character and morality to post the letter. It is quite heartening to see.
I noted references to the Douglas Students' Union scandal within the comments. While it has never been proven that Joey Hansen participated in any wrong doing at the Douglas Students' Union there is always the pesky little matter of the forensic audit. Joey Hansen is also hated enough at Douglas College that a petition calling for the impeachment of the entire Representative Committee Board received over 1,200 signatures based on Joey Hansen and the Forensic Audit. This in contrast to the fact that the Douglas Students' Union has failed to obtain quorum at any Annual General Meeting or Special General Meeting since 2000.
I find it ironic that the Canadian Federation of Students sees fit to send such a letter. Were that you were not such a well-known and respected critic I doubt such a letter would have found itself in your possession.
For now, I muse that the Canadian Federation of Students is taking issues such as these a little too far.
Andrea
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home