DPN-20 Gala Snubbed Jordan, Gally Honored Jordan
Jordan wasn’t invited to DPN-20 Gala, as reported by several sources.
Yet Gallaudet University is funding the Jordan Chair in Leadership
I’ve been pondering over the irony ever since.
During the protest, Jordan renounced DPN publicly, stating that he never supported DPN in the first place. That declaration was a direct slap to DPN protesters and leaders, along with the Deaf Community rallying in its support. Then, of course, he personally benefited by riding the coattails of DPN to become the first deaf president of Gallaudet University. He perpetuated the fraud by celebrating DPN several times. That sure takes the cake.
The joke is finally on him. The most recent DPN-20 celebration snubbed him….. rightfully so, considering the fact he left Gallaudet in a shambles, with its accreditation in serious jeopardy, a fair number of students injured and/or traumatized during the protest over his successor, and its image marred by negative worldwide media coverage as a result of his poor handling of the protest.
Yet it didn’t surprise me in the least when I first heard abut the establishment of the Jordan Chair in Leadership. Ever since Jordan stepped down last December, the Gallaudet administration and its BoT has treated Jordan with the greatest delicacy, not wishing to jeopardize its standing with the Congress and MSCHE. Never mind the damage he created at Gallaudet over the last few years by his administration, along with a no-confidence vote from its faculty members shortly before his retirement.
Only at Gallaudet does this happen. : /
Gallaudet’s First Deaf President Not Invited to Anniversary Celebrations “Saturday evening marked a watershed event, with I. King Jordan (who was chosen to be the first deaf president of Gallaudet University in 1988) not being invited to speak at the 20th anniversary banquet that took place on the Gallaudet campus in Washington, DC. Dr. Angel Ramos, the event organizer, stated going into the event that he and the prominent student leaders of the 1988 protest scheduled to speak ”agree unanimously,” having continued: ”This celebration is not about Jordan and he is NOT going to speak. It’s not even up for consideration.”
Announcement of Jordan Chair in Leadership: “During the meeting, it was also announced that the University has reached its $31 million goal in The Campaign for Gallaudet’s Future to build the James Lee Sorenson Language and Communication Center and to fund the new I. King Jordan Chair in Leadership. as a result of his poor handling of the protest.” http://alumni.gallaudet.edu/?ID=12902
P.S. Personal attacks on other commenters not allowed MZ
email contact: mishkazena@aol.com
Jordan wasn’t invited to DPN-20 Gala, as reported by several sources.
Yet Gallaudet University is funding the Jordan Chair in Leadership
I’ve been pondering over the irony ever since.
During the protest, Jordan renounced DPN publicly, stating that he never supported DPN in the first place. That declaration was a direct slap to DPN protesters and leaders, along with the Deaf Community rallying in its support. Then, of course, he personally benefited by riding the coattails of DPN to become the first deaf president of Gallaudet University. He perpetuated the fraud by celebrating DPN several times. That sure takes the cake.
The joke is finally on him. The most recent DPN-20 celebration snubbed him….. rightfully so, considering the fact he left Gallaudet in a shambles, with its accreditation in serious jeopardy, a fair number of students injured and/or traumatized during the protest over his successor, and its image marred by negative worldwide media coverage as a result of his poor handling of the protest.
Yet it didn’t surprise me in the least when I first heard abut the establishment of the Jordan Chair in Leadership. Ever since Jordan stepped down last December, the Gallaudet administration and its BoT has treated Jordan with the greatest delicacy, not wishing to jeopardize its standing with the Congress and MSCHE. Never mind the damage he created at Gallaudet over the last few years by his administration, along with a no-confidence vote from its faculty members shortly before his retirement.
Only at Gallaudet does this happen. : /
Gallaudet’s First Deaf President Not Invited to Anniversary Celebrations “Saturday evening marked a watershed event, with I. King Jordan (who was chosen to be the first deaf president of Gallaudet University in 1988) not being invited to speak at the 20th anniversary banquet that took place on the Gallaudet campus in Washington, DC. Dr. Angel Ramos, the event organizer, stated going into the event that he and the prominent student leaders of the 1988 protest scheduled to speak ”agree unanimously,” having continued: ”This celebration is not about Jordan and he is NOT going to speak. It’s not even up for consideration.”
Announcement of Jordan Chair in Leadership: “During the meeting, it was also announced that the University has reached its $31 million goal in The Campaign for Gallaudet’s Future to build the James Lee Sorenson Language and Communication Center and to fund the new I. King Jordan Chair in Leadership. as a result of his poor handling of the protest.” http://alumni.gallaudet.edu/?ID=12902
P.S. Personal attacks on other commenters not allowed MZ
email contact: mishkazena@aol.com
March 19th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
This chair was established two years ago- before the protest.
IKJ himself gave alot of money for the intial funds. This has nothing to do with the present BoT.
This is a welll known fact on the Gallaudet campus.
Raphael J. St. Johns C-87, G-00
March 19th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
I understand, but if you read this announcement, they added more funds to his scholarship.
March 19th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
Yes-but….legally, Gallaudet could not do anything but go on with the agreement.
Raphael J. St. Johns
March 19th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
They did what the funds required them to do- invested the money, then once it “hit” a certain number, then they could could use the funds. Also, I do not know the details of this fund-but maybe it has a clause or two about Gallaudt adding monre moeny.
Please do not mis-understand me, I am not happy about this. I agree with you and others. But it was a legally binding agreement. So we are stuck with this.
Raphael J. St. Johns
March 19th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Raphael,
That’s exactly what was said about JK’s appointment, yet they went ahead and rescinded it.
With the amount of deception involved, there will be a way to rescind the “Leadership” Chair. The donations can be returned.
Jordan would never in a million years sue the Board to force the chair to stay in place, because then he would have to testify and all the behind-the-scenes deception on how he usurped the authority of the Board would be revealed.
So really, the Board can go ahead and cancel the “Leadership” Chair without worrying about being sued. Jordan would simply not have a case. No jury in America would grant him a favorable verdict. He would literally be laughed out of court.
March 19th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Also Raphael, you don’t have your facts correct.
Look at this Inside Gallaudet annoucement:
http://news.gallaudet.edu/?ID=12921
It says clearly that the “Leadership” Chair was added AFTER Jordan announced his retirement. So your original comment is not credible.
March 19th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
NONONONO, they can’t. I know becuase I have established several funds at Gallaudet.The language is binding and specific.
Ra phael J. St. Johns
PS- Go ahead and see if it can be revoke… You’ll see that the legal aspect says “no”.
March 19th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
interesting… never a dull moment in gally.
March 19th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Raphael,
If there is deception involved, that means fraud and that means there was never binding agreements with the donors to begin with.
There is no such thing as a legal agreement that cannot be questioned as to its validity.
March 19th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
PSS -if it can be revoke, I’ll support anyone who can do this. As I have said before=- I am not happy about this.
Raphael J. St. Johns
March 19th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Brain-’what deception” is there?
You really need to calm down.
Raphael J. St. Johns
Also- do you really think the BoT are happy with this? NO they are not- but they have been told by the University’s lawyers that they cannot do anything about this.
March 19th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Brain- I was there when they made the intial annoucement about this Chair. Two years before the protest. They signed it in front of my eyes. So please do’nt talk like you know evryththing. You DON’t.
Raphael J. St. Johns
March 19th, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Raphael,
Just read the opinion of an outside observer, Elizabeth Farrell of the Chronicle of Higher Education:
“… the board had basically given him [Jordan] carte blanche to do whatever he wanted and that there hadn’t been enough checks and balances in the system…”
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/education/july-dec06/gallaudet_10-30.html
Also Patti Kunkle withheld information from the Board and controlled the flow of information. Even FSSA’s lawyer complained that his first letter to the Board was not given to them.
March 19th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
Raphael, They signed in front of your eyes? No way, I knew the board back then, under King’s control. There was no way the board would have allowed any public viewing of such legal-binding paperwork to be signed. This is probably done at the closed meeting where NO ONE other than the board members and Jordan was allowed in the room.
They may have made announcements about the decision but the deliberation and the signing has always been done in private.
March 19th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
Well,
Will I King Jordan and the BoTs be back on the DPN’s Silver Anniversary Gala?
Just wonder…I find this situation really sarcastic.
March 19th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
I see that the Inside Gallaudet article hints that the idea of the chair might have been pre-existing, but that it was added to the campaign after Jordan’s retirement. None of those details makes any difference in this case.
The Board can go ahead and rescind the chair and return the donations. Jordan would never, ever sue. So it’s all a moot point anyway, in that respect.
March 19th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Curious, Jerry Covell show up to DPN-20 Gala?
March 19th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
No, he didn’t show up
March 19th, 2008 at 6:06 pm
I went to the local furniture store, and couldn’t find the Jordan chair on sale, the sales associates asked me if Jordan is Amish?
March 19th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Brian,
Please show us what __deception__ it is in there.
March 19th, 2008 at 6:52 pm
How an interesting online conversation going on this blog posting! I enjoyed all your comments.
I am really glad that someone like Tom Green jumped in and share his personal knowledge what really happened on Gally campus. Tom is very reliable source of information. I definitely trust him in many ways.
Something saucy about IKJ’s stuff lately at the Gallaudet Archives which hasn’t been officially confirmed.
Robert L. Mason (RLM)
RLMDEAF blog
March 19th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
The deception is that Jordan filtered the information going to the Board and prevented the Board from being fully informed. This is well known. Who knows what other tricks and techniques of manipulation he used.
Please read the quote by Elizabeth Farrell in comment #13 above which shows that she said: “…the [Gallaudet] board had basically given him [Jordan] carte blanche to do whatever he wanted.”
She was an outside observer. If a respected reporter says that on major, national television news program, then that is incredibly important and cannot be ignored. Gallaudet, therefore, needs to reestablish its credibility by rescinding the Jordan “Leadership” chair.
ANY contract in the world is subject to review and possible revocation. There is no such thing as a “permanent” agreement which cannot be challenged on its validity.
In fact, Jordan had a seat on the Board, so that means he granted himself an endowed chair. THAT is preposterous and cannot be allowed by any respectable, authentic university.
March 20th, 2008 at 12:32 am
Brian,
Good Lord! Jordan had a seat on the Board.
Hopefully, the BoT will rescind the Jordan
Leadership Chair. He has never been culturally
Deaf.
March 20th, 2008 at 1:54 am
attn: Mishka Zena
IKJ was bad for all of us. Now, read the factual material below demonstrating what kind of a leader and administrator Ammons is ( Ammons was one of the protest leaders vs. IJK and Fernandes in 2006 ). Do share this material with your colleagues and truth-lovers.
[deleted. MZ: I cannot let the remainder of the very lengthy comment be published as this is irrelevant to the topic. What’s more, Rafael’s lawsuits against Ammons have been repeatedly turned down by the U.S. judicial system]
March 20th, 2008 at 7:46 am
To all:
This is a legally binding agreement. I am not happy about this-but there is nothing no one can do. To Tom Green- I do not know you, nor you do you know me. I was there at the time that IKJ sign the papers. The Development office at Gallaudet even had glossy folders announcing this new “Chair”.
To Brain Reilly-you have been good in the past-but not on this one. I repeat what I said before-this is a legally binding agreement made 2 years before the protests. Regardless of all our feelings about IKJ-we need to understand that this BoT cannot do anything about this fund.
If anyone doubts about what I just said-ask yourselves this: This BoT understands the fact that IKJ is not popular with community. DO you really think that BoT would have preferred that the IKJ Chair did not exist? And in fact they (according to several sources who have told me) went to their lawyers…and asked them if there was anything that could be done without exposing Gallaudet. The answer come back: NO. Gallaudet has honor this agreement.
March 20th, 2008 at 9:00 am
That is the whole point of this discussion. The Board needs to have the courage to focus on the extenuating circumstances. There might be some legal risk involved, but the risk is small compared to long-run consequences of doing nothing about it.
March 20th, 2008 at 9:02 am
The BoT cannot do anything about this. Period. Move on.
March 20th, 2008 at 9:52 am
Saying “move on” does not solve the problem, it just allows the problem to become worse and become harder to solve later.
March 20th, 2008 at 10:35 am
Ok-so?????????
If you are so sure about this…then do something.
You like to “talk” a lot-if you so sure about this, then start something, e.g. start a petition drive to the BoT, write letters to the media, etc.
Anything short of a actual physical protest.
(Because of the accreditation situation).
I bet you would have a lot of supporters.
(And I would be one of them!)
Otherwise, you are causing a lot of feelings up for the sake of just causing up feelings.
March 20th, 2008 at 11:51 am
Sources told you that the BoT consulted lawyers.
My question is: were the lawyers “independent lawyers”? Jordan’s VP Paul Kelly, who is a lawyer,
was not consulted at all, correct?
March 20th, 2008 at 12:15 pm
The University, like most (if not all)universities and colleges has a law firm to provide legal advise, etc.etc.
Why would you think they would even ask Paul Kelly? As I have said-this BoT understands that fact that IKJ has most no support in the community. They do not wnat to risk any creditbility by asking one of IKJ cronies.
March 20th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
“almost no support” sorry for my typo.
March 20th, 2008 at 1:08 pm
This is a deeply rooted problem that will not go away by sweeping it under the carpet and telling people not to stir up feelings. The feelings are already stirred up, and Jordan is the person who is doing the stirring.
Emotions will continue to be stirred up every year when a new person is announced as the person being invited to accept the position of the IKJ Leadership Chair.
It’s a horrible idea to allow a university president to push through an endowed chair in his own name. This is America, not East Germany. Jordan, by has nefarious actions, virtually caused a major protest to occur single-handedly. He already KNEW that if he pushed through JK as president then a protest would probably happen.
This is not a legacy that deserves the honor of an endowed chair, especially when HE is the person who created the endowed chair, and when HE is the person who has caused major, major problems that affect no only Gallaudet but the whole American university system.
March 20th, 2008 at 1:13 pm
And again- what do you want to do about this?
I agree with everything you said.
But the BoT has thier hands tried.
I asked you before…please start something….a letter campaing to the BoT, letters to the media…etc.etc.
March 20th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
#18 Thanks! to MZ,
Snap! I understood went why Jerry Covell not show up the Gala. Reasons in past times and I knew it in 20 years ago also I met him privated he was so popular in all over so I got chance talked him more specifically things happened in DPN. Jerry Covell good of my friends well. I respected him as wishes. Now I want share with you why went on?
I read on news that I was first new jobs during that happened in 1988 during DPN. I didn’t think Greg Hlibok was much of a leader. Had he been SBG President at the time after Tim Rarus’ one-year SBG term, I guarantee he would not have been seen as one of the main leaders. He surely done a lot of things behind the scene during the DPN protest. We normally did not see what was really going on with the heated discussions among other student leaders and participants.
Greg Hiblok displayed his cautious personality again and again during the recent Gally protest before it got erupted on May 1st 2006. He and his brother privately expressed such concerns about JK’s leadership ability during the National Press Club. Greg and Steve wondered how JK could manage to interact with people in general from their close observaton at the table. That was his own style.
You have to remmy that Greg Hilbok as just a kid during the DPN protest as compared to other two student leaders - Tim Rarus, former SBG president and Jerry Covell, most outspoken and emotional in best way leader. I have see to appreciate Greg Hlibok’s DPN’ 88 leadership style as a cool-headed and reserved up to the present time. Nobody is perfect anyway.
Jerry Covell was the real leader of DPN.
He did all the talking and guided than the 3 others ( Greg,Tim and BB). He knew the procedures and law/policies/procedures far better than the others 3. The was the brain…the other 3 were more personality figures to draw supporters. These 3 were handpicked to draw people - they were popular and well liked and well known. They had stage/platform presence while Jerry did not. He was homely looking and skinny and spoke in a style that not everyone could follow, so he tend to stand in the background while engaged in assemblies, but there could not be any protest without Covell, that is for sure.
Greg has no personality but he is nice looking and had all right credentials at the time…Rarus has plenty of personality but poor understanding of the politics so Covell was his mentor and coach on how to speak at assemblies. Bourne was there to draw the female body - female tend not to too interested in politics and the protest needed large number, so Bourne was there to draw the women to help strengthen the protest. Helped women relate to the protest in language that they understand. Her cuteness helped, too!
If you remember, Covell wrote an excellent open letter to Jordan back in October 2006. I loved his “This is not a threat but a promise.” There emerged the real Jerry Covell. Rarus sacrifriced and got himself arrested on Black Friday - something the other 3 would never do. There emerged his dynamic personality and guts - the only one with any real guts, really. Bourne did turn out well and took to giving speaking engagements on her own and quite a leader at CSDF. She came into her own during the protest. It is not so surprising that Hlibok largely stayed behind scenes all these years…that is not his nature to thrust himself in the spotlight. He contributed his part and he did his part and he left that back in ‘88. There emerged the real Greg - not a real leader. He was interviewed by the media largely because he was the SBG prez - that was all. They should’ve interviewed Covell. He is much more eloquent and articulate and knowledgable. But you know media - they’re more interested in superficial stuff - Greg had the looks and status.
I see compared the ‘88 leaders and the ‘06 leaders…I think Ryan Commerson is the Jerry Covell, although he was much more visible which ones than Jerry was ,but he knew his stuff and was the driving force behind the protest…
I just want to remind everyone that not all of us supported the direction the protest went into and many didn’t support the protest at all. That’s a big difference between DPN of 1988 and this protest 06. In ‘88, everyone was united with the same goals. Not so this time around. Many people of color were especially disgusted and felt used. This protest didn’t unify Gallaudet, it did the opposite. I cringed when I heard about this DPNS 20 Gala event. This was a celebration of an event that tore our community apart. Shameful. I asked you why they pick IKJ first place before? Jerry Covell wants start all over pick the correction prez Gallaudet what I think?
March 20th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
#34,
Things are being done.
March 20th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
Wow, you sure do know how to spin a story a 100 different ways from the right way.
March 20th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
The truth is easy enough to see:
1) The Jordan “Leadership” chair is a deeply, deeply misguided and counterproductive idea which will harm Gallaudet and American academia in general.
2) What is needed is deep courage on the part of Board members to fight to rescind the chair, regardless of potentially difficult legal issues that might arise.
It’s a fight worth fighting.
March 21st, 2008 at 12:19 am
Not only that, but no one has so far objected that
while Jordan was president, he had christened
SAC as “.King Jordan Student Academic Center” as
well as “Linda Jordan Art Gallery”. Both Jordan and the BoT did not play by the rules because all
buildings are named for the retirées or the dead.
Buildings were named for Eisenhower, Kennedy,
Reagan after their deaths.
March 21st, 2008 at 2:04 am
Remember, it’s not just the DPN20 gala that snubbed Jordan. Really, the DPN20 gala was a watershed event that showed that Jordan is not a leader, because the Deaf community is not following him. Therefore, it’s ludicrous to have a “Leadership” Chair in his honor.
March 21st, 2008 at 7:13 am
To Jean Boutcher:
Yes..in general you are correct…but there are exceptions…like Ronald Reagan airport in the 1990’s. And there are other examples as well.
I don’t see how this can be re-voked. I agree with all of the sentiments being written here. But -you will all see….there is nothing can be done-without exposing Gallaudet.
March 21st, 2008 at 10:39 am
Raphael,
You are simply making an assertion without giving us any argumentation or reasons to support your conclusion.
You are making what is called a “bald assertion.”
March 21st, 2008 at 11:08 am
Brain:
You have continue to say thing that are really, really off the wall. I have stuck to the facts.
You need to get off your high heel-ivy tower seat…and get into the real world.
Fact: This “Chair” was est. two years before the UFG protest.
Fcat: It was singed into a legal agreement bewteen IKJ and the BoT.
Fact: Gallaudet cannot “break” this legal agreement without suffering damamges.
I have kept saying these facts.
You, howver, have odone nothing but said alot of things that are stirring up alot of emotions.
Perhaps that is your goal- since you have presented no course of action to deal with this situation.
March 21st, 2008 at 11:27 am
Read Posts #29, 34 and etc.
I have been very consistence. IF you really think you can do something-then by all means do it!
Otherwise, you are stirring up a lot of feelings over something, that legally speaking, is done.
March 21st, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Raphael,
You are making an ASSERTION that Gallaudet would suffer damages, but you are not giving any argumentation or rationale. In order to avoid making a bald assertion, you must give us a reason WHY it is a legally binding agreement.
Not only that, you did not tell us WHO to Board made the agreement with. Did they make an agreement with Jordan? If so, HOW? Jordan himself had a seat on the Board. How can he make an agreement with the same Board of which he himself has a seat.
Really, you have given us nothing, but a vague reference to something that you claim to have seen with your own eyes, but you are not even telling us what you saw.
March 22nd, 2008 at 12:17 pm
[Deleted to the negative smear on individual’s character.
Address to the topic, please. ]
March 22nd, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Brain:
Have you read anything I have posted?
This was a contract.
I have also singed similar contracts with Gallaudet.
THis BoT was told y thier OWN lawyers that they
cannot break this.
Stop playing around- and stick to the facts.
This BoT does not like IKJ, yet they went ahead and annouced the Chair-because they had no choice.
AND AGAIN- IF YOU ARE SO SURE- THEN START SOMETHING.
tHIS WAS A CONTARCT-IF ANYONE BREAKS ACONTRACT HYOU CAN HELD LAIBLE, correct?
Gee whiz.
Stop causeing up alot of emotions.
March 22nd, 2008 at 2:50 pm
so sorry about my “yelling”
I am in my car now- and for some reason- my keyboard is given me a lot of problems. stuck.LEtters are
March 22nd, 2008 at 7:29 pm
Raphael,
You must tell us WHY the contract cannot be broken. What is the REASON? What are the legal points A, B, C, etc?
WHO are parties to the contract?
March 23rd, 2008 at 1:34 pm
UUGH!!!!!!!!
I am not goiNG to spend any more time on this…Brian…you have NO CASE.
oa CONTRACT CANNOT B E BROKEN WITHOut suffering any damages. asK ANY GOoD LAWYER.
and again…sorry for my keyboard..it keeps jumming up on ME.
And really…. you have not read any of my posting, Brian…You SEEMED to just want to stir up emotions just for the sake of stiRRING UP emotions.
March 23rd, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Raphael,
You want us to BLINDLY believe what you say and you give NO LOGICAL SUBSTANCE to back up your claim.
Your claim is that the university cannot break the contract. WHY? You cannot ignore this question and just point at the lawyers. You must give the reason that the lawyers give. If you do not know, then YOU are the person who is stirring up emotions.
You must put yourself in the shoes of the lawyers and explain WHY the contract cannot be broken.
But first you must tell us WHAT the contract is. You are not even telling us WHAT the contract is, WHO signed it, what the TERMS of the contract are, etc.
You are not taking a credible approach.
March 24th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Raphael and Brian, please stop splitting hairs!
March 24th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Brian,
We all know contracts can be broken. Just like the contract that was broken when the BOT terminated Fernandes. It just costs money to break them. Get over it!!!
March 24th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Thank you “Contract Talk”.
Brian- you obvisouly has not read anything at all. And again- if you feel so strongly about this-then start something!
You accuse me of stirring up emotions-yet I am the one who keeps saying that unless Gallaudet wants to suffer damamges, then they should just accept this-and move on.
You keep on making false statement, Brian…because you have no case.
I have said that I have signed similar contracts with Gallaudet-so I know what I am talking about.
Look it up…The Yoland V.Glower Memorial Scholorship is the one that I est. in honor of my late mother. Call the Office of Development..they will informed you that I started that…much the same way that IKJ started his Chiar.
I am in the process of est. my scholorship fund at Gallaudet….
THis BoT does not like IKJ-yet they announnced th e news of the CHair-does that tell you something?
I do know that they contacted thier own lawyers about this …and was told that they cannot break this without suffering any damages.
YOU have not done anythning except to attack me.
so …”what will go around will come around”.
March 24th, 2008 at 7:07 pm
Raphael,
You want us to accept your statements on blind faith? You are telling us NOTHING about the contract involving the IKJ Chair. Nothing.
If you give us SOMETHING, then we can discuss it. Right now, you are saying NOTHING but “trust me” and “have blind faith in my claim.”
Sorry. I will not grant you the blind faith that you are asking for, and it is naive in the extreme for you to seek such blind faith.
March 25th, 2008 at 7:22 am
Again- YOU have not read any of the postings.
Do your homework.
Calll the Gallaudet Office of Developemnt.
“Blind Faith”-? YOU are the one that cause up emotions- I have stuck to facts-if you have bother to read my postings.
Look at what happened to Fernandes-like “Contract says”.
Gallaudet broke her contract-and had to pay her.
If you so smart and analytical- you should read what a contarct is.
I have stated all I can.
You have done nothing but attack me- and still refuse to do anything constutive, e.g. start a pettition to this BoT about this situation.
Instaed you have found it fit to be short-sighted.
Some day, it came back to hunt you.
March 25th, 2008 at 9:43 am
Raphael,
If you have information from the Development Office, then you should tell us what it is. Otherwise, you are just making a claim without giving a REASON to support your claim.
If there is a public debate and a person on one side of the debate makes claims without offering any reasoning to support the claim, then the person on the other side says “What is your reasoning?” then that is not being “short-sighted”. On the contrary, the other person is attempting to get deeper into the issues and have a productive discussion.
If you can present the reasons why Gallaudet would be exposing itself financially and why you think the financial risk is not worth taking, then we can discuss that and all of the other related issues and have a productive discussion.
March 25th, 2008 at 11:55 am
Brian and Raphael,
This has been an interesting discourse, but it appears that you both are stuck in an argument. Would you mind continuing this privately via emails?
March 25th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
What’s the harm in letting this continue? The discussion was actually just getting started, in my opinion.
The real point of the whole thing is not whether or not Gallaudet would be exposing itself to risk, but the question is: how much risk?, and: is it risk worth taking?
March 26th, 2008 at 11:09 am
Elizabeth- I am not the one who has refuse to let it die.
Brian is intent on continuing this- and I have refused to go down to his level.
If he wants to, he can do his homework-and stop attacking me by saying things that, obviously, are inflammatory.
He haS NO LEGAL BACKGROUND- and no intentions (apparently) to study what is a contract, and so forth.
I have stated many times-if he has bother to read my postings- that IKJ est. this Chair be 2 years before the protest, and that Gallaudet cannot break this unless they are willing to pay.
I know this because I have est. a fund at Gallaudet.
His assertions are folly.
Raphael.
Ps I am having trouble with my keyboard (again)-so sorry for the yelling
Elizabeth- pls contact me thru e-mail. thanks.
March 26th, 2008 at 11:39 am
Raphael,
You are distorting what I wrote. I acknowledge that there might be legal risk. The REAL issues are:
1) How much risk?
and
2) Is the risk worth taking.
That’s why this discussion never really got started.