WHAT THE HELL???

The approximately 500 people on here do not represent the sentiments of the class as a whole (7000). The whiners are maybe 1% of the class. Think the ones not on here are just grateful that some kind of justice was done. Hey thanks Dennis and lawyers

Peep laps up the spilled milk so their will be no more crying

Well said and I totally agree with teentitan

sad to see Robbie Royal go, but it gets to you after a while....I am just a glutent for punishment and keep coming back, as myself, not guest....LOL

Awesome teen, LOL well said....and thanks above to beleaf67, your support and understanding are appreciated

D

This was sent to me from a former member of the CSAT. He deleted his account because of the conduct of some of the members.


Son of the Earth
A crowd of anxious men rapidly gathered around
Up yonder they cheered worldly adventure to be found
Through the crowd his eyes a glow like fire
Looking onward his imagination fueled an earthly desire
The need to seek this adventure to sooth a heightened joy
A regard of self so intense nothing like a boy
Pushing forward to get a better view
A poster upon a smoky window was at first a suitable clue
There a Canadian Soldier his outfit robust and prim
His helmet seated fittingly from pith to rounded brim
A deerskin tunic emblazed with chevrons sewn of gold.
Oh how the stories would never age in warmth or bitter cold
He stood and volunteered his name initial and age
Everyone stopped and showed him kindness upon the worldly stage
Your time has come young man a time to take your place
Go forth and seek the enemy meet him face to face
Place upon your rifle a battle knife a bayonet at best
Thrust your commitment forward into his heaving chest
When your victory celebrated on that foreign street
They will send you home and here you shall know defeat
There are things that as a boy you could not ever know
Learn very quickly your country respects only those buried row on row
As for your victory parade here is what you have to do
Call upon your Government stand tall in full public view
You will shed a tear your heart will pound and break
But in the end a statement you must lastly make
I volunteered my life a promise that I kept
All these injuries invisible you deny I accept
I stand in front of you the entire world to see
Honour my service the price I paid is free
As for those that recognize my invisible scar
My journey will never end but at least I know who you are.
FOR COUNTRY

Note to all of those who have forgotten why we are here.
It is far from the insults that make us distinguishably ignorant it is our ignorance to each other that makes us undistinguishable from those like us.
Took me maybe twenty minutes to write this, and in those twenty minutes there had to have been over 15 to 20 insults thrown at each other, not acceptable not honourable not even human. I will sit on the sidelines from now on and to some you could care less. Well I do because this is one less voice you will not cripple with your inhuman attacks that clearly puts all disabled veterans back into some foreign era of absolute subjugation. I did not spend 20 years fighting for my rights and freedoms and another 7 years begging to be understood only to be silenced by hateful Son’s of the Earth.
“Soldier Sickness”
Sergeant Steve Robbie Robinson CD (retired)
Diagnosed with PTSD in 2003
“Never was afraid of much but much itself, even that is less intimidating when you say it slow”

Sailor I could delete comments but I prefer to leave them up so people can see the absurdity of the comment and learn to just ignore it or laugh at it. But what was stated earlier they were comments from a registered member who deleted their account on the CSAT.

By the way Dennis and I have had our share of arguments over his conduct and my conduct so if I gave the impression that he is God sorry that was not my intention. He is just a vet that went to court to right a wrong...period. Besides the first step to becoming a God or Saint is death. I don't think Dennis is ready for that first step anytime soon. LOL

May I suggest that if a guest inputs comments that is offensive in nature can it not be removed fairly quickly. Those bits of information is useless to this site.

Teentitan, your sentiments and frustration reflect my own! Mr. Manuge had the fortitude, health, determination and principle to fight on our behalf. He has put enormous amounts of energy and time into this, on our behalf mind you, and for very little in the way of compensation. His health has been compromised and his family, no doubt, has been affected by his being the lead plaintiff in this case. Personally, I filter about 95% of the comments on CSAT as either being unfounded, misinformed, accusatory, insulting and in some cases, completely ignorant in content, style, grammar and veracity! I, and thousands like me, owe Mr. Manuge, his family and the legal team a huge expression of gratitude!
I put the following proposal to those who accuse Mr. Manuge or the legal team of executing any kind of nefarious actions; we knew the overall terms and conditions of the fees to be dispersed when this action commenced! If the legal team had demanded payment up front, win or lose, very few would have had the ability to pay. If they had not been successful and yet demanded that we each pay thousands of dollars in legal fees, people would either not have agreed to be part of the Class or they would have been forced to do the leg work themselves in finding alternate legal representation who would have operated on nearly identical parameters as Mcinnes Cooper!
As stated, your frustration and disappointment with much of the content on CSAT is warranted. That being said, there are also dozens of members who are articulate, informed, kind, sensitive, helping in nature, and truly thankful to Mr. Manuge, Mcinnes Cooper and countless other contributors who have been of assistance to people like myself, who are unable to even attend the upcoming hearings due to multiple physical and psychological challenges!
So, I say to you and many like you, thank you Sir! I can only advise you to disregard the misinformed and filter the sometimes rude and classless comments that flood this site at times. To those who are thankless regarding the efforts of Mr. Manuge, the expertise and professionalism of the legal team, or the many volunteers who give their time freely, I, with all due respect suggest simply, Opt out! That is the only solution to your malcontent!

Sailor I am glad you wrote. regarding "guests" every time someone closes their account they become guests EVERY word they typed becomes "guests"- I have seen the best of the best get overwhelmed here and close accounts only to return with a new handle. It allows them to speak and not to be hassled.It gives them a time out. So remember the "guest" isnt one individual writing its hundreds of people. After the 30th of April they will call the sisip forum -The silents of the lambs" it will be a echo chamber :)LOL

On the note from Dennis which is well explained, I fired off an email to Peter Driscoll letting him know that I was for them from the beginning. I asked him how he wanted the letter done up and he replied "what you just sent is fine". On another note anyone signing on here under the name guest in my opinion are instigators from an outside source who I wouldn't take them at face value. Adults inputting such dribble are definitely not veterans in the real sense of the word. They wouldn't be going after another veteran in such fashion unless to defend themselves and give reasons why. Not all guests are outsourced instigators, some bring in valuable information but give yourselves a name at least and maybe even a province. Not your real name however I have mentioned my name on here before. So teentitan and Dennis i'm sure your already aware of what goes on in the real world of someone from outside waging war on a group by waging war through propaganda just to demoralize a large group such as ourselves

Smitty Rtd Cook

“Gossip needn't be false to be evil - there's a lot of truth that shouldn't be passed around.” -Maybe the truth should remain silent

""Only in quiet waters do things mirror themselves undistorted. Only in a quiet mind is adequate perception of the world.""

-Hans Margolius

dennismanuge wrote:Points I would like to make regarding legal fees

The implementation of the new veterans charter in April of 2006, means that there are still a number of still serving CF members that may have had injuries before that date, or more to the point, applied for and received a VAC monthly disability payment....

stay with me here:
If they are medically released today, or moving forward until the last CF member(who is in receipt of a VAC monthly disability pension), over time, gets released and gets SISIP LTD/ELB, they will not experience the clawback, they will get their VAC monthly and their complete SISIP LTD. Should Peter and legal go after these people to get legal fees? Absolutely not, nor are they going to. So there will be people among this group that benefit from our collective actions on behalf of the class. AT NO COST TO THEM, ever! For that I am thankful, not jealous because I had to pay legal fees.

People like me who benefit from an end to the ELB clawback, do not have to pay legal fees, nor should we......2000 of us got a phenomenal deal because of Peter and legals efforts on behalf of the class.....Again I am thankful...

So none of you will be paying legal fees moving forward if you continue to get monthly checks from sisip until age 65.

Thank you

Dennis Manuge

This is an excellent point. The soldiers still in still serving, receiving monthly VAC pension, plus 100% salaries from DND will pay no part of the legal fees.(VA Pensions are tax free) The legal fees for these individual will be paid by those veterans who were booted out 3B. For the still serving veterans Dennis I agree with you its a phenomenal deal.
For those that are already released 3b Medically released Veterans that have waited for this matter to wind its way threw the courts I am not so sure. When they look at the worksheets and see what actually ends up in their accounts. For me this is a sad situation I am losing 58%. Lets not give up the fight and hammer at our government to pay the legal fees.

If the PM told Judge Barnes "Yes we had a change of heart and will pick up the legal bill". It likely too big of a dream at this point. Then again 6 years ago Dennis you had a Dream very few Supported you! I am one of those that thought you didn't have a hope in hell. We have 16 days! I will keep asking! -Red horse out!

Strong Visible Advocates:
Class proceedings require a strong person willing to take on the challenge of representing a group as the representative plaintiff, the voice and face of a class action. Plaintiff’s class action lawyers know that one of the most difficult challenges in most class actions is identifying a suitable representative plaintiff willing to expose themselves to significant risks, stress and loss of privacy in exchange for little or no reward.

This problem is often magnified for marginalized groups. In some cases, people living in marginalized communities may not have strong advocates or leaders who are willing to advance the concerns behalf of the disadvantaged groups and become a representative plaintiff. In some environments, such as prisons, there may be an on-going relationship of vulnerability with the defendant that makes individuals fearful of retaliation for advancing a claim. In other cases, there may be stigma involved in disclosing membership in a marginalized group that might otherwise remain a private matter, such as revealing oneself to be HIV positive.
This can make it difficult to find a person who is willing to advocate on behalf of the marginalized group. On the other hand, if a representative plaintiff can be found who will champion the rights of such a group, this consideration should operate to favour certification. All members of the class will benefit from a cloak of anonymity, at least until the action is successful and claims must be paid. At that point, of course, there is an incentive for class members to identify themselves and the Court overseeing the matter can take steps to protect their identities where possible. In Hislop, for example, claimants were allowed to file their claim with a central office in Ottawa rather than having to deal with local officials who might know them but be unaware of their sexual orientation.
Poor prior experiences with the legal system:
Many marginalized groups may have previously encountered bad experiences with the legal system leading them to view the law as the source of their problems and not the answer to their problems.
The LGBT community, for example, has had an outstanding record of victories in the Courts. However, historically their interactions with the legal system had mostly overseeing the matter can take steps to protect their identities where possible. In Hislop, for example, claimants were allowed to file their claim with a central office in Ottawa rather than having to deal with local officials who might know them but be unaware of their sexual orientation.
Poor prior experiences with the legal system:
Many marginalized groups may have previously encountered bad experiences with the legal system leading them to view the law as the source of their problems and not the answer to their problems.
The LGBT community, for example, has had an outstanding record of victories in the Courts. However, historically their interactions with the legal system had mostly involved finding themselves targets of oppressive laws and discriminatory enforcement of the law. For example, thirty years ago the Toronto police descended on the gay bath houses purportedly to enforce Canada’s bawdy house laws, generating the largest mass arrests in the city’s history. In more recent times, an LGBT bookstore found its shipments of books repeatedly seized by Customs as being in violation of the Customs regulations. By the time of the hearing of the case that became known as Little Sisters Book and Art Emporium v. Canada (Minister of Justice)46, Canada Customs admitted that their officials had deliberately targeted the bookstore because of their LGBT clientele. It took many years and a track record of success for the LGBT community to become persuaded that the Courts could be trusted to protect their rights. Other marginalized groups who have either had less experience with the Courts, or less success, may perceive the Courts as part of the system that oppresses them and not as a dispenser of justice.

Although class actions cannot completely overcome this barrier to access to justice, they ameliorate the problem somewhat as most class actions operate on an “opt out” basis. As a result, it is usually only the representative plaintiff that needs to overcome any mistrust of the Courts. Lack of access to lawyers: In some communities, it may be difficult to locate a lawyer who will understand and be able to represent adequately people with certain types of disadvantages. For example, a group of deaf litigants may have more difficulties than others in locating a lawyer with the appropriate expertise or the ability to properly represent them in litigation.

Historically, where marginalized groups have been able to find similarly situated members of the Bar, the chances of a sympathetic ear have increased. The increasing diversity of our Bar has helped to ameliorate this barrier; however some marginalized groups continue to be under-represented in our ranks. In the context of this barrier, class actions can serve to either reduce or increase this barrier. On the one hand, if a class action lawyer can be found who will take on the case, this can eliminate the need for legions of lawyer to represent individual claimants. On the other hand, given the relatively modest size of the plaintiff’s class action bar, the chances of a member of a marginalized group finding one of their own practicing in this specialized area is much reduced compared to the Bar as a whole.

Reference: FRINGE BENEFITS: CLASS ACTIONS FOR MARGINALIZED PEOPLE IN CANADA

Manuge v. Canada, [2010] S.C.J. No.67 (S.C.C.):
In a recent Supreme Court decision in Manuge v. Canada82, the court, for the first time, upheld the certification of a constitutional class action.
In this case, Manuge, a member of the Canadian Forces, was injured and awarded a monthly disability pension under the Pension Act83. In the 24 months following his injury and his involuntary, medically required release from the Canadian Forces, he received both a disability pension and long-term disability benefits. However, pursuant to the Canadian Forces’ Service Income Security Insurance Plan Long Term Disability Plan, each of the long-term disability payments was reduced by the amount of disability pension he was receiving. Manuge brought proceedings in Federal Court seeking constitutional remedies, damages, declarations
80 Barbour v. University of British Columbia, [2010] B.C.J. No. 219, 2 B.C.L.R. (5th) 240, at para. 39 (B.C.C.A.). 81 Barbour v. University of British Columbia, [2010] S.C.C.A. No. 135, [2010] C.S.C.R. no.135 (S.C.C.). 82 [2010] S.C.J. No.67 (S.C.C.), [2010] A.C.S. no.67 (S.C.C.). 83 R.S.C. 1985, c.P-6.
32
and restitution in relation to the these deductions, and brought a class proceeding on behalf of approximately 4,000 other former Canadian Force members who were similarly affected.
The Federal Court certified the class action.84 However, the Federal Court of Appeal overturned certification, concluding that the lawfulness of a decision or administrative activity could only be challenged in judicial review proceedings.85 Manuge appealed this decision.
The Supreme Court, in a decision written by Justice Abella, allowed the appeal and re-certified the case. The court concluded that the Federal Court had jurisdiction to hear this type of action, and that the residual discretion to stay the proceeding should not be exercised in this case.86 Although this case is important in assessing the jurisdiction of Federal Court, it is also very significant as it is the first time that the Supreme Court of Canada has ever expressly supported the certification of a constitutional class action. If Guimond may not yet be directly overruled, it is of limited precedential value compared to this more recent ruling and in light of Hislop. Vancouver (City) v. Ward [2010] S.C.J. No. 27 (S.C.C.):