To the Editors of the CRIMSON:

Last Monday night two students appeared at my door with a Xeroxed copy of two letters. The first was a letter from H-R SDS to the Director of he CFIA, inviting the CFIA to join in a debate over its "right to exist"; the second was the CFIA Director's rejection of the invitation.

The students who gave me the Xerox copy said that they were not committed for or against the CFIA, but intended to attend the SDS forum, which was to be held in lieu of a debate, in order to become more informed about the issue. They explained that there would be no debate because the CFIA had declared that "they [SDS] could not debate logically."

It occurred to me that people who were not, in fact, committed to the SDS position would not be likely to distribute its handbills. It also occurred to me, as I read the Director's letter, that the student had misrepresented the CFIA's position. The Director says: "In view of past experience, there is no reason to expect that an SDS forum would be conducted in a manner conducive to serious and rational discussion." This appears to mean, not that the SDS people are incapable of logical debate, but that they probably would not conduct the meeting in a calm and rational manner. Would an objective person, one not committed for or against the CFIA, misrepresent the CFIA's position so casually?

Indications were that these two students were SDS supporters, predetermined against the CFIA, who had assumed the role of uncommitted observers, in order to get other uncommitted students to attend the meeting. A deception, however, must be consistent if it is to deceive; this shabby attempt at deception, betrayed by every second statement the students made, was transparent.

On the heels of such a disingenuous invitation, I could only expect that the forum would be equally disingenuous. The declared object of the forum, to decide whether the CFIA should be abolished, can certainly never be achieved without the presence of the CFIA to present its defense. Given the CFIA's refusal to attend, and the consequent lack of evidence from their side, no objective assessment is possible. If the SDS declares, as a result of the forum, that the CFIA should be abolished, we will have had, not an objective inquiry, but a kangaroo court in the absence of the defendant.