The truth or criminal lible?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Every so often someone jumps into this forum to vehemently defend the top management of Transport Canada Civil aviation, the latest defender calls himself/herself diesle-10.

The following is a cut and paste from todays forum and I am going to examine it so as to more clearly point out that the system under Merlin Preuss the Director General Civil Aviation in Canada is long overdue for a house cleaning.

I am starting a new thread so as not to clutter up widows thread.

Before I get into diesel-10's comments I want to pose an example of why TCCA is a rouge out of control government department.

Lets suppose you went out and spent all your savings on a new very high end car and woke up one morning to find the car had been stolen and called the police to report it. The police very quickly found your car and the thief and then informed you that even though they had found who stole it you could not get your car back because the thief was in top management of Transport Canada Civil Aviation and thus is protected from any consequences of wrongdoing and did not have to give you back your car, would you feel utter frustration at the system?

I see no difference between what TCCA did to me and my business and the above scenario on a moral level.

Guido/Cat Driver/./justwannafly - whoever you are today: Your 'single-post" point is what? Because I chose to wait until the real facts were known - as did many others - that makes my comment less valuable or authentic than yours? And I guess none of you started with "0" posts? Perhaps you just don't like others challenging you? It boils down to this: Unless you were there and know first-hand what developed, you have no more understanding of the issues than I. And spare me the indignation

.

We are different posters.

Mr..: You seem to have little idea of the legal test for "criminal libel", and to challenge TC to prosecute you is just reckless bravado and meaningless rhetoric. Were they to actually prosecute, you would be the first to howl about your rights and unfair practices.

They will not prosecute me because what I am stating is true.

Put your money where your mouth is - take those corrupt TC officals to court! Call in the Press! Or simply shut up.

About four years ago I finally ran out of money in my attempt to receive a fair and just resolution to my issues with TCCA, in fact I was spending my RRSP's to keep up my efforts to receive a fair and just resolution until my wife threatened to leave if I kept spending the last of our savings. I did in the end get a ruling from the office of the Director General Transport Canada that TCCA and specifically Merlin Preuss and Dave Nowzek had denied me due process. I would suggest that I understand the significance of denial of due process by someone at the level of Preuss and Nowzek...do you?

The forum rules regarding libel/slander are clear, but only for the rest of us and not you, apparently.

If I were in violation of the forum rules that would be the concern of the owner of this forum, he has not denied me the use of his forum to expose the corruption that I have proven within the top level of TCCA because I have evidence to back up my statements.

Perhaps this is a good indicator of your previous difficulties with TC?

Perhaps you don't know what you are talking about or you are just plain trying to defend the indefensible?

And you have raised another CD gem - the Truth According to ..

When one reviews your many criticisms, it is a common thread to see you attack the critic and not the substance of the post. I do not know what transpired between you and TC, nor do I care, but I repeat, your self-righteous indignation is misplaced in this group.

If you don't know what transpired between me and TCCA why are you attacking me?

Sadly, your own words have shown you are most unlikely to be a constructive critic for the Canadian aviation system, since it is no longer yours. So you just sit back and hurl your abuse to get your revenge. Good Job!

The sad part is I had no choice but to leave Canada to work because TCCA made it impossible for me to work in Canada as a pilot.

The industry, on the other hand, will try make the system better, despite your help. I do apologise for foolishly suggesting that you contribute to the solution; at the same time, regarding your latest instruction for me to "Go xxxx yourself", I am so pleased to see more calm and reasoned thoughts from you. Perhaps you could try it first and let me know how you make out.

My suggestion that you go xxxx yourself stands, however I do appreciate your giving me a reason to once again show the industry that TCCA is morally corrupt and in need of a house cleaning at the top.

And by the way, I recognise that Widow has worked tirelessly for the aviation industry by trying to indentify those short-comings she sees as contributing to the loss of lives in this accident.

The bottom line regarding the engine/aircraft is this - table the facts, analyse them, and draw conclusions. Then go ahead with fixing the identified problems.

Waiting for the facts was worthwhile; speculation was not.

Aviation needs more people like widow and less people like you diesel-10.

[lyncher]

the funny thing is, that i beleive most of us in this forum support you... then you get these type of guys every now and then, that just come in and try to piss you off.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

The funny thing is, that i beleive most of us in this forum support you... then you get these type of guys every now and then, that just come in and try to piss you off

Actually lyncher these posters are helping to prove my position is correct by making these uninformed and outright ignorant accusations.

And it is a given that their agenda is to protcet TCCA's moral degenerates because I'm betting some of these posters work for TCCA.

[lyncher]

no doubt.

[Justwannafly]

Guido/Cat Driver/./justwannafly - whoever you are today:

.

We are different posters.

Actually I was kind of honored to be confused with being . .. He is a very respected member of the aviation community.

[lazyboy]

respected.....no we just tolerate the old fart.

[xsbank]

Without us old farts this site would degenerate into YouTube postings and headset posts. Show some respect.

"Old age and treachery will overcome youth and exuberance."

[. ._]

Without us old farts this site would degenerate into YouTube postings and headset posts.

[shitdisturber]

The tone of his posts point out quite handily that you have a better understanding of libel laws than he does .. It can easily be melted down into this simple truism. "It isn't libel if it's true." Considering that TC is going after us deadbeats for not paying our illegal, discriminatory medical fees but ignoring your so called libellous remarks speaks volumes.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

This is the most important issue in this thread....read it again and let it sink into your thought process....

A renegade regulatority body such as we now have with TCCA is making a mockery of the basic rights that we as Canadians are supposed to have guaranteed when we elect our government.

I am starting a new thread so as not to clutter up widows thread.

Before I get into diesel-10's comments I want to pose an example of why TCCA is a rouge out of control government department.

Lets suppose you went out and spent all your savings on a new very high end car and woke up one morning to find the car had been stolen and called the police to report it. The police very quickly found your car and the thief and then informed you that even though they had found who stole it you could not get your car back because the thief was in top management of Transport Canada Civil Aviation and thus is protected from any consequences of wrongdoing and did not have to give you back your car, would you feel utter frustration at the system?

I see no difference between what TCCA did to me and my business and the above scenario on a moral level

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Considering that TC is going after us deadbeats for not paying our illegal, discriminatory medical fees but ignoring your so called libellous remarks speaks volumes.

Shitdisturber, you of course are 100% correct in your observation.

Just imagine the feelings of frustration and embarasement Preuss and Nowzek must feel reading these statements that I am free to post because they are true and provable.

What does it say about the regulator when someone can describe some of their top management as moral degenerates and they dare not try and defend themselves because they know the news media circus that would generate if they came after someone with my track record in aviation.

And oh yes, they read my posts.

[diesel-10]

Mr.., thank you for responding on another thread. Putting aside the acrimony of our exchanges, and of the others who rose to your defence, I want you to understand my point of view.

I am aware of your background and of your profound contributions to Canadian aviation. And that cannot change. Which is why I was disheartened to read your extremely negative comments about the system - not just about certain TC managers, but by inference about the many dedicated folk who try and work in a challenging environment. You yourself commented that all was going well with you and the regulator until one specific incident. It looks like that one incident has soured your relations with TC, and that's a shame considering what you could offer the rest of us who still have to work in aviation.

I know you have valuable insight into the systemic problems in aviation - not only Pacific region management - and your contribution to Canada would be invaluable. But I saw your words as particularly dismissive, and that was not the response I would have hoped from one with knowledge of a system with flaws to be fixed.

In essence, I issued you a strong challenge to put aside your upset with TC Pacific and pursue issues within a collaborative framework, drawing upon your colleagues for more support, to make the industry a better place for us all. You certainly rose to the bait - but not in the direction we needed.

At the same time, I maintain that such antagonistic comments about TC and the system were not helping the Widow's forum, or our pursuit of change. Much is left to do.

[Kelowna Pilot]

Cat for the most part is preaching to the choir on this site, although the verve with which he delivers his message is perhaps more suited to some kind of Exorcism than the sort of calm, rationale debate that beaurocrats like the above tend to listen to.

I'd still like to see Cat publish a book with documented evidence of TC corruption.

[the_professor]

The tone of his posts point out quite handily that you have a better understanding of libel laws than he does .. It can easily be melted down into this simple truism. "It isn't libel if it's true." Considering that TC is going after us deadbeats for not paying our illegal, discriminatory medical fees but ignoring your so called libellous remarks speaks volumes.

How is it illegal if it is being done under the laws passed by the MPs that WE elected?

(Answer to my own rhetorical question: It's NOT illegal.)

[Kelowna Pilot]

In essence, I issued you a strong challenge to put aside your upset with TC Pacific and pursue issues within a collaborative framework

Somehow I don't think Cat operates in the same framework you guys do... He's not in your army and he doesn't drink your Kool-Aid.

Remember that 70's war movie, Apocaplpse Now. Well, Cat is Colonel Kurtz.

You're going to have to send Martin Sheen to go terminate his internect connection, because that's the only you can stop him...

[carholme]

Ladies/Gentlemen;

. has been abused by a system which uses it's mandate to suit itself.
Many people on this forum who have worked as pilots and mechanics have never been in a posiiton of ownership of a company or in management positions which cause them to deal with TC. Many of you on the other hand have been in these positions and know the problems which exist.

TC may have many good people working for them but they are in posiitons to toe the management line. In our recent visit to the Bill C-6 committee hearings, we had many personal emails from inspectors telling us to go for it but that they could not speak openly.

As they are trying to shove Human Factors and SMS further down our throats, why are they not utilizing the system of openess described by these programs? They are valuable programs in and of themselves but when they are going to be used as a scapegoat for oversight by TC, question what you are being forced into.

We have, in the last few days gone directly to the top to get a definition from the people in charge of CARs, concerning TC's use of policy documents and information notes when addressing their interpretation of CARs. The answer we recieved was so protective of their system, with more implication than definite response and a complete shoulder slope.

So when you want to knock . off the block, just ask yourself what you have done today to better the system. If you truly think you know CARr, closely examine your next audit findings and rather than except them, challenge the system. Then you may have some idea of the frustrations of dealing with TC. If the findings are glaring deficiencies then you are not in touch with CARs. If you blindly accept the findings wondering where these guys are coming from, yet buckle under just to get them off your back, then you have the system you deserve. Don't blame . for that or try to crucify Widow with your new found knowledge. They seem to be of a minor category on this forum who will not give up until there is change.

Just read this forum and ask yourself why nobody is doing anything about the problems which are continuously raised here. ARE YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

carholme

[Hedley]

A Transport Inspector anonymously wrote:

such antagonistic comments about TC and the system were not helping

um ... my understanding is that what . is saying is true. I can certainly understand why Transport might be ashamed of their actions in .'s case, but because of Transport's embarrassment are we politely supposed to pretend it never happened?

I can certainly understand Transport's desire to sweep their misdeeds under the carpet. But given that Transport has never compensated . for the damage that they did to him, should we let them? Not a good precedent, I am sure you would agree.

[xsbank]

Professor, there are bad laws on the books that contradict other, better laws. The purpose of parliament is to make the laws and the courts, by evolution and precedence, interpret them.

I think that singling out pilots to pay medical fees and then further singling out older pilots for higher fees is discriminatory and contradicts what I understand the Charter to state on age discrimination. There are other recent laws of user fees too, which I do not know enough about to comment, except that I believe they also contradict the fee situation.

Bad laws have to be changed and a powerless group like a collection of pilots has no other means available to affect change than ultimately civil disobedience.

Don't just blindly accept the application of bad laws.


This is the American definition - If you want Canadian, have at it:
What is Libel?

Libel and slander are legal claims for false statements of fact about a person that are printed, broadcast, spoken or otherwise communicated to others. Libel generally refers to statements or visual depictions in written or other permanent form, while slander refers to verbal statements and gestures. The term defamation is often used to encompass both libel and slander.

In order for the person about whom a statement is made to recover for libel, the false statement must be defamatory, meaning that it actually harms the reputation of the other person, as opposed to being merely insulting or offensive.

The statement(s) alleged to be defamatory must also have been published to at least one other person (other than the subject of the statement) and must be "of and concerning" the plaintiff. That is, those hearing or reading the statement must identify it specifically with the plaintiff.

The statement(s) alleged to be defamatory must also be a false statement of fact. That which is name-calling, hyperbole, or, however characterized, cannot be proven true or false, cannot be the subject of a libel or slander claim.

The defamatory statement must also have been made with fault. The extent of the fault depends primarily on the status of the plaintiff. Public figures, such as government officials, celebrities, well-known individuals, and people involved in specific public controversies, are required to prove actual malice, a legal term which means the defendant knew his statement was false or recklessly disregarded the truth or falsity of his statement. In most jurisdictions, private individuals must show only that the defendant was negligent: that he failed to act with due care in the situation.

A defamation claim -- at least one based upon statements about issues that are matters of public interest -- will likely fail if any of these elements are not met.

While on many of these issues the burden of proof is on the plaintiff, the primary defenses to a defamation claim are that the statements are true, are not statements of fact, or are privileged. Some defamatory statements may be protected by privilege, meaning that in certain circumstances the interest in communicating a statement outweighs the interest in protecting reputation. For example, most, if not all, jurisdictions recognize a privilege for fair reports of what is said, done, or published out of government and judicial proceedings, and for reports of misconduct to the proper authorities or to those who share a common interest (such as within a family or an association). Privileges do vary somewhat from state to state in their scope and requirements. They generally apply to non-media defendants to the same degree as to media defendants.

A successful defamation plaintiff may be entitled to a jury award of money damages. In some instances, the plaintiff may also be awarded punitive damages for particularly reprehensible conduct. The parties to the claim are entitled to appeal and cases are carefully scrutinized on review to protect the defendant’s First Amendment rights.

Defamation claims can be brought by living persons and entities that are considered "persons" under the law such as corporations, unincorporated businesses, associations and unions. Governmental entities cannot maintain actions for libel or slander, although a government official can bring suit for statements about the official individually.

Libel and slander are civil claims, but a handful of the states recognize an action for criminal defamation. Prosecutions are rare, especially against the media.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

In answer to diesel-10's post.
______________________________________________-

Mr.., thank you for responding on another thread. Putting aside the acrimony of our exchanges, and of the others who rose to your defence, I want you to understand my point of view.

I am aware of your background and of your profound contributions to Canadian aviation. And that cannot change. Which is why I was disheartened to read your extremely negative comments about the system - not just about certain TC managers, but by inference about the many dedicated folk who try and work in a challenging environment.

Would it be better if I sugar coated the reality of what the problem is in TCCA and buried our heads further in the sand by ignoring the indisputable fact that TCCA is tightly controlled by people such as Merlin Pruess and Dave Nowzek who have no respect for the law or the very regulations and policies it is their duty to uphold?

It is my hope that by being persistant in exposing the rot is festering unchecked at the top levels of TCCA sooner or later the dam will break and people both inside and outside of the regulator will step forward and demand that our elected officials remove this rot from their positions. Unfortunately the fear of reprisal is so rampant both within and outside of TCCA that I will in all likely hood not live long enough to see this happen.

You yourself commented that all was going well with you and the regulator until one specific incident. It looks like that one incident has soured your relations with TC, and that's a shame considering what you could offer the rest of us who still have to work in aviation.

Think about this in its true context diesel-10, this one specific incident was my following the dictates of TCCA’s own requirements that we in industry are supposed to follow.

I went to my Regional TC office for help with a problem I was having with a rogue TC M&M inspector who was acting outside of the rules and policies of the regulator. TC decided to protect said inspector, it escalated up the chain of command to the office of the DGCA and finally to the Office of the Director General Transport Canada.

The Director General finally came to my home to solve this issue, he spent eight hours in my home with three other people there and after I gave him a sworn affidavit concerning the actions of the inspector in question the inspector suddenly resigned three days later.

I had two meetings with the director General which lasted sixteen hours in total….

In the final analysis all my allegations were found to be true and the final report from the Director General found that I was denied due process.

However one issue is still outstanding, the Director General told me in front of witnesses that if his investigation found that my allegations were true I would be compensated on an agreed amount namely $250,000 for my losses.

To this day I have received zero.

I know you have valuable insight into the systemic problems in aviation - not only Pacific region management - and your contribution to Canada would be invaluable. But I saw your words as particularly dismissive, and that was not the response I would have hoped from one with knowledge of a system with flaws to be fixed.

True my insight is valuable through proving how corrupt the regulator is under its present leadership and by exposing this without fear it is my hope that our elected officials will fire those who are making a mockery of the office of the regulator.

In essence, I issued you a strong challenge to put aside your upset with TC Pacific and pursue issues within a collaborative framework, drawing upon your colleagues for more support, to make the industry a better place for us all. You certainly rose to the bait - but not in the direction we needed.

I’m sorry you see it that way. Do you truly believe that accepting corrupt management at the top of TCCA is the best way to cure the problem?

At the same time, I maintain that such antagonistic comments about TC and the system were not helping the Widow's forum, or our pursuit of change.

That is utter nonsense, my exposure of corruption within the top level of TCCA management supports widows position.

Much is left to do.

How true.

And until these moral degenerates who are running TCCA are removed I would council every member of the aviation industry to remember that when being approached by any TCCA official you are at far greater risk than if you were being approached by a common street criminal.

[sameasyou]

Let me start with a disclaimer. I do not know the full story of Mr. . and his battle with TC. Having said that, I have read the many of the rants he has posted on this forum. My question is, If he has these undisputable facts in writing of corruption at the top levels of TC why hasn't the media or the courts acted upon it? It seems to me the media would be all over the government corruption angle. Number two, he has said he has run out of money to pursue his legal battle against the aforementioned. Why haven't all the people who say they support Mr . on this forum started a legal defense fund for him to continue his battle? I am not trying to stir up doo-doo, I 'm just asking the questions for my own benefit. Any and all feedback is welcome

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Let me start with a disclaimer. I do not know the full story of Mr. . and his battle with TC. Having said that, I have read the many of the rants he has posted on this forum.

Sameasyou, I have no problem discussing this issue but I take offense at your describing my posts on this subject as " Rants "

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
rant /rænt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[rant] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used without object)
1. to speak or declaim extravagantly or violently; talk in a wild or vehement way; rave: The demagogue ranted for hours.
–verb (used with object)
2. to utter or declaim in a ranting manner.
–noun
3. ranting, extravagant, or violent declamation.
4. a ranting utterance.

My question is, If he has these undisputable facts in writing of corruption at the top levels of TC why hasn't the media or the courts acted upon it? It seems to me the media would be all over the government corruption angle.

Well I don't have all the documentation at this time as widow has a fair amount of the file, but I'm sure I will get them back when she is finished with them.

Number two, he has said he has run out of money to pursue his legal battle against the aforementioned.

Are you calling me a liar that I ran out of money during my attempt to get fair treatment from TC?
You obviously haven't the faintest idea of the futility of trying to fight a government department through the court system.

Why haven't all the people who say they support Mr . on this forum started a legal defense fund for him to continue his battle? I am not trying to stir up doo-doo, I 'm just asking the questions for my own benefit.

That is an interesting question.

Any and all feedback is welcome

There is some feedback.

[CD]

Sameasyou, I have no problem discussing this issue but I take offense at your describing my posts on this subject as " Rants "

True... but that character, "Cat Driver", has on occasion...

Note the last line...

(sorry, couldn't help myself... hope ya can forgive me...)

[sameasyou]

My apologies for the use of the word rant if it offends you and no I am not calling you a liar for saying you ran out of money. The questions were just that, nothing more, nothing less. I do have experience dealing with govt depts and I think everyone can express frustation at dealing with them at some point in their lives. Thanks for your feedback.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Thanks for the nice response sameasyou.

When I decided to do something about the way TCCA is being allowed to degenerate from a fair and just over site body into what should make every Canadian citizen concerned enough to demand that our elected officials do what they were elected for, govern, I knew it would be difficult.

In fact in my file is a letter to Art LaFlamme expressing my belief that my business would end up bankrupt trying to receive just over site from TCCA, he assured me that that would not be the case.

In the final analysis I went through a process that I would never want anyone else to experience. It took several years but when the use of stonewalling and buck passing from department to department failed to stop me from forcing TCCA to live up to what they claim they will do in their " Quality Assurance " department they just went into the the bunker mentality. In the end I had enough documentation of mismanagement sliding down hill into outright lying and ignoring the very laws they are sworn to uphold to without fear state that they are morally corrupt at the top.

I may have lost a lot of money, but I retained my personal self worth and if nothing else I can stand up and state without fear of being further penalized that TCCA under the present DGCA is a rouge government department that has lost sight of the very foundation on which this country was built on...rule of law and the rights of every citizen to fair and just treatment by a government department such as TCCA.

We never really know what awaits us down the road when we make such serious decisions as I made when I said enough is enough and stood up to this corrupt system.

Since I decided to take this path and ended up having to work outside of Canada I have experienced things I would never have dreamed of doing from flying in over forty countries to working with Air France and Airbus Industries for two years and flying for the television industry and finally one of the biggest companies in the movie industry Mirimax. While flying for these people I managed to fly for around six years as an air display pilot in Europe and still held a Air Display Authorization for Europe until I was 70 years old when I quit to go into retirement.

And now I'm un retired and working for a new European Airline and have been asked to work with the Greek CAA as an advisor, all this because I left Canada.

So even though I may seem to be completely dissatisfied and bitter about what transpired between me and TCCA all is not lost and I feel a sense of awe that I actually made it this far in aviation.

So please do not think that I am looking for sympathy because that is far from what I am after...what I want is exactly the same thing that widow is seeking...." Justice "

[canpilot]

.,

Thanks for exposing the rot that exists in Canadian aviation!

XS/ . or any other so called " old farts"

Stay! As you guys said, without your collective experience this site would go to shite! Don't let anyone allow you to think otherwise!