SPOKE TO THE FEDERAL COURT THIS MORNING - THE FILE IS STILL WITH THE JUDGE

Guest aka Grasshopper Said-

"Thank you Big Rex - I was sure it was a cursory comment not from a written statement but said nevertheless - that he did not wish to stop the settlement from proceeding because the majority was in favor."

To correct that comment by guest aka Grasshopper - I did during the discussion with the Judge on the 3rd point I raised "Zero Sum Does not cover all" not a comment or discussion of the other 3 points I raised to stop the deal. I state on that 3rd point topic that "I knew and did not expect him to kill the deal over my one concern that could easily be corrected right here with agreement from boths sides and a pen. But I made it clear I thought the deal should be declined clearly for the 1st and 2nd points. "We needed more time" and "We did not get to be involved as we should have" .

Do not confuse a discussion on one point as it pretaining to the other 3 legal arguments. You had to be there to see the context.

I then as now believe the best course is to decline the deal and go back to negotiate a few details.

Now Grasshopper I was not being pompus when I said you have earned some respect from me. You had by returning under same avatar and stating your reasons for your comments. This time you tried to do it right and I appreciated that and hoped you had changed and would stay and live and die by your comments under one avatar instead of the hit and run abuse you had been doing. Its unfortunate it ended the same way again. But I will not let you make false claims or statements about me or anyone else for that matter. Sorry but it is what it is. Return say what you want just be respectful and check your comments for accuracy before commenting about a person.

Rags

Wait a second, do not put words in my mouth please. If it had been up to Rags, who has seen far more truth than many on here, the deal would not have been approved, as it was written. I believe he was still hoping that the judge would simply order the lawyers to re-enter negotiations, and schedule another approval hearing 3-6 months down the road. And just because the majority of letters sent supported the proposal, do not mistake that as approval en masse. There were only 250 letters sent out of the 7500 class members, so most did not feel as if their voice mattered. And also there are a lot of Veterans who are ignorant of the facts, not out of their own fault, but because our legal team did very little to openly explain what we could expect. They do not know about deemed taxes, and the only reason most here know is because Call of Duty has passed on his experience to those of us willing to listen and heed his words. They may also not realize the scope of the legal fees when compared to similar sized class actions, or how the GoC treated those victims with more dignity than they have shown us, by willfully giving them extensive damages and tax free payments as well as paying their legal fees, so there was absolutely no financial loss for being a member of those class actions, and our lawyers didn't fight for similar considerations.

Thank you Big Rex - I was sure it was a cursory comment not from a written statement but said nevertheless - that he did not wish to stop the settlement from proceeding because the majority was in favor. I stand corrected and I will withdraw my statement . I may consider carrying him on my shirt tails.....Naw forget that I am a ......From the song ....................."Sometimes you gotta fight when you're a man."

Ok, I've been asked to weigh in on what was said. Rags did say that the deal should not be accepted, as is, and that instead of rejecting it, that the deal simply needs some fine tuning, with representation from the Veterans community, and that the wording of the deal should be unambiguous, because if it leaves room for interpretation, SISIP will use that leverage against the class. K9 would have asked that it be rejected, but since the judge stated that if it was rejected, it could be a few years before it goes before a judge again, and he said that he did not want to delay resolution that long, but still had to point out the negatives in the proposal. I also did not specifically ask the judge to decline the proposal, but I did rip it apart, as well as point out how our lawyers were being disingenuous in their statements.

Wow, this is getting foolish!

Sum Up People

Rags wrote:

Thanks for returning Lamboveno that earned you my respect tentatively. You can just ask the one who said it K9.

"Tentatively" respect after using the word Coward ... Your patronizing, pompous, name calling I would rather stick a bayonet in my testicles than have your "tentative" respect. Clarity comes with time .

rags as far as i know you have been verry consistant on these issues and even though i asked the judge to accept the deal while at the same time asking him to do anything in his power to sort out the tax issue i do agree with your above points.rags ya see i dont need much to live on and as a 5 year guy i will pay a much higher tax but maybe not the highest rate (to be determined)what i do know is some need their money asap and others dont want to loose over half their retro.im sure the judge knows this and will make the proper disission for the entire class.

i see no flip flop in you in any way shape ore form.

for what its worth.

propat

Sparrow and anyone else that contacts people for little updates.

Why not just let the process unfold we cant hurry the process only cause BS and uncertain on this site it is useless rumors and info being updated here and cause BS and crap. Talk about what you do know facts and if it is not sent By MC and or the Judge himself posted it here. Who cares it means nothing just a Soap Opera. Leave the people alone and let them do their jobs and then we can get back to normalcy.

Thank you RCN I appreciate that.

For Lombaveno, This is a abstract from what I presented.

6. I am thankful for the efforts of the lead plaintiff Dennis Manage and the legal team McInnes Cooper for bring this to a proposed settlement to be laid out for the class here today. And I thank the honourable court for giving the class this chance to become involved in its class action for the first time. But unfortunately I do not support this class action settlement as proposed. The proposal in general on many of the common and basic issues I can support but there are several areas which require change before the proposal can be considered fair and reasonable to all parties. Furthermore there has been very little time to digest the proposal as a class since gag orders and little information on the details has been brought forward till know. Even at this late point there has been no information forth coming from SISIP as to where a class member fits in and absolutely no time for proper information to seek proper legal, tax or medical advice on the issues before acceptance of the proposal.



7. With this in mind there are four specific issues which must be addressed before acceptance of the proposed settlement, these are:
A. More Time Needed - More time needs to be allotted to review the proposal so class members can make informed decisions on negotiations to date. The Class has had less than 30 days to receive, review and craft a response and be here today;
B. The Right to Participate - The class has not been given the right to participate in the decision making process until now. Contrary to Federal Class Action Law 334.23;
c. Key Wording Leaves Out Vets - The use of Zero Sum as a criteria to define vets that should be given special access to reassessment or immediate early cash payments is flawed as it cuts out non zero sum vets who are more severally disabled from the settlement; and
D. Legal Fees for Action - The legal fees for the Class should be paid in whole or in part by the Defense. Furthermore the fees don't reflect the typical results of past similar cases. Fees should be 3% to 4% on total payout.

Only the intro of a 26 page document to the judge and presented by me at court.

Over the past few weeks it has been so enjoyable to come on and read every post and not have to read all the personal attacks and would hope that those on CSAT can leave the personal attacks out. I was not in Halifax so do not know what Rags said or did not say, I can only go by what he has written and he has been providing in my view very articulated rationale opposing the deal. From the comments that I have read from Rags postings I believe him to be a very honourable person and one that has given very good insight from his point of view. I do not know Rags but do respect his point of view and reading his comments.
I too grow weary on the time that it is taking as if it was as simple as determining legal fees and signing the agreement one would think that this could have happened very quickly. There are some very good comments on the various posts especially regarding appeals and the case of law, I surely trust that Justice Barnes is doing his best to ensure that the law is being followed and that the veterans are the ones this time being served. The deal may be good but is it fair? We should not lose perspective on who could and should fix the situation, the GOC can and they should provide leadership rather than the lip service that they have done to date. All politicians should hide their heads in shame because in the end they are the ones that illegally stole from those that proudly went where they were told in the name of Canada. When I say all politicians it means all parties, we have had liberal and conservative and minority where the NDP held the balance of power. The CDS and his Flag Officers must also take some of the responsibility as they too could have fixed this many years ago when it was first brought to light but they failed in providing the leadership needed in this particular situation. Like many of you it pains me to recall some of the conflicts that one was sent into, the fear and horror that was witnessed and at times injuries and even death. Each and every soldier needs to recognize their contribution and be proud of it, for some of us we gave so much while serving we have little to give today. But the fact remains; we were once soldiers and served our country to the best of our ability. We are and were difference makers! The deal at this point is beyond any of our control and it does no good to begin pointing fingers at each other after the fact, what "he said" or "she said" does not matter today; what matters is that the veterans receive what is fair and that they are the ones now being served. “Ready Aye Ready”

Nicely said teen.

Thanks for returning Lamboveno that earned you my respect tentatively. You can just ask the one who said it K9.

Chuckle. "MFWIC" Haven't heard that title in a while.
Thanks for the reality check.

Lamboveneno thanks for registering and explaining your comments.

One thing I have noticed that tempers are higher, brain filters focusing on "respect" are getting thin.

So lets remember that we respect each others opinions and statements.

We all have our own interpretaiton and opinion of this lawsuit so let's show more courtesy because it's obvious that the only respect we are getting is and always will be from each other only!

Thank you everyone!

Teentitan aka Ron aka MFWIC of the CSAT

I will ask one person who will speak the truth on this matter Rags ....Bigrex he was there ....i would humbly ask him if my take on this situation was real. I notice Sparrow has agreed . Lets give you the benefit of the doubt but you insult people so often it gets in the way. BTW I like Grasshopper but I sense it was mean spirited! Now a "Coward". I guess I don't need to like you but I forgive you because your as ill as many of us.


Bigrex did Rags say "I do not want you your honor to reject this deal"? (if not what did he say?)