Features
Both sides
Introduction: We were sent this short story by John Ginsburg, who is a Winnipeg writer. Given the constant stream of stories about students and professors being intimidated by forces championing political correctness, especially when it comes to anything having to do with Israel, we thought it timely to publish the story here.
June 2021 Mackenzie King College Walking east, past the Theatre building, the view was genuinely inspiring, especially in the bright morning sunshine.
To the right, the contemplative, Ivy-covered Arts Building and the century-old chapel. Straight ahead, the gleaming river and the lush green landscape beyond. To the south, the arching Unity Bridge. But the route to the classroom for Media Studies 32.455, Professor Latchman’s course, was somewhat less scenic. One had to walk around to the opposite side of the Theatre building, in through the small service entrance, and then down concrete stairs to the basement, arriving at a low-ceilinged, damp and windowless room. Such were the current circumstances of the Department of Media Studies, pursuing the noble heights of academic inquiry from the gloomy depths of a former workshop. Its old haunts, on the opposite side of the university, were being renovated from top to bottom.
The condensed, two-and-a-half-month course was entering its final few weeks. With the resumption of in-person lectures, the bright, doubly-vaccinated students had initially been swept in by a wave of camaraderie and intellectual enthusiasm. Reality, however, had soon intervened, an unrelenting schedule of jam-packed three-hour lectures, demanding term papers and nerve-wracking oral presentations. The dim subterranean venue only added to the hard-pressed feeling among the students.
Latchman’s course was entitled Political Correctness and Cancel Culture in the Media and the Arts. It was a senior-level honours course, requiring three term papers and two in-class presentations of each of its twenty-five earnest young scholars. They were a diverse lot, of all kinds of ethnicities and backgrounds. There they sat, in their sculpted, multi-coloured hair, with their necks, arms and legs artistically muralled with tattoos; their noses, lips, eyebrows, ears and navels sporting gaudy piercings; their epigrammed apparel and trendy jewellery on full display. At the front of the class, standing at the lectern, their middle-aged, conservatively-dressed professor was unfazed. The individual expressions of diversity and identity neither made him feel old nor out of place. It was simply the times. One moment might call for ethnic, racial and sexual identities to be completely ignored, while the next moment called for them to be pushed loudly to the front, singled out and magnified. However, for Professor Howard Latchman, it wasn’t a particularly difficult academic world to navigate.
Latchman was a full professor at Mackenzie King College, accomplished in his field, enjoying his twenty-sixth year as a faculty member. He was of medium height and build, with thin, greying hair. He had a warm and friendly manner and had always been well-regarded by his students. His annual student evaluations highlighted his high academic standards, as well as his accessibility and fairness. On the negative side, students found him rather boring at times, and his methods somewhat plodding. His non-academic interests were completely unknown to his students and would have come as an amusing surprise. From his teenage years right up to the present, Latchman had been a drummer in a number of rock and roll bands, most recently with The Heads, playing sixties and seventies songs in nearby towns and bars. Not to mention his tennis playing; he was good enough to compete in senior-level tournaments, once reaching the provincial quarter-finals.
Latchman was Jewish, but entirely secular. This was a constant sore point with his two older siblings, alienating him from them more and more over the years. Brought up in the same conventional Jewish home, he’d been expected to tow the line. Fortunately they lived halfway across the country, so their meetings were infrequent.
He was divorced, with two children in their late twenties. His area of specialty was Journalism. From a doctoral thesis on corporate bias in the western news media, his work had naturally evolved. With social media now dominating the flow of information, his methods of study had radically changed. But the same issues remained at the core: misinformation and the control of information; by large corporations and by special interest groups.
For the June 14 class, student presentations were scheduled for the entire lecture time. Each student had twenty minutes to speak, on a recent case of cancel culture, followed by ten to fifteen minutes of questions and comments from the rest of the class.
With only a few weeks remaining in the spring-session course, Latchman knew most of the twenty-five students by name and by appearance. The first speaker of the day was a Black woman named Letanya Wynn. She was a prominent figure in the class, very bright and always highly engaged, taking every opportunity to aggressively speak out, offering her own point of view on whatever was being discussed. She was very slight in stature, with closely-cropped orange and yellow hair, wearing massive hoop earrings and bright red lipstick. Latchman took a quick glance at the text message she had sent him, containing the title and summary of her talk. ‘Good morning everyone’ he said. ‘Our first speaker is Letanya Wynn. She is going to be telling us about a cartoon that was recently published, in a Seattle online magazine. A textbook case of cancel culture. We will follow the same format as previous presentations. At the conclusion of the presentation, we will entertain comments and questions. Ms. Wynn!’
Letanya Wynn made her way, a little awkwardly, from the back of the class up to the sixty-inch monitor at the front, where she inserted the small USB drive she’d been carrying. She selected the only file on the drive, a jpg file. It was a copy of a cartoon, recently published in The North West Record, a Seattle-based publication. The cartoon shows two men having sex, one Black and the other white, with their naughty parts concealed behind a chair in the centre foreground. The Black man is positioned behind the white man, who is bent over. A shirt is draped over the chair, displaying a large BLM logo. In the background, a grim-faced, white uniformed cop has entered the room, standing in a doorway. He is pointing a gun at the two men, with a talking bubble that says ”You’re supposed to be two metres apart, not two feet.” The caption underneath the cartoon says ”Basic Length Measurements”. This satirical take on the coronavirus pandemic and the BlackLivesMatter movement had been greeted with an immediate social outcry online. Its creator, a Black male cartoonist, was fired as a result, by his publisher, who was also a Black male.
Letanya Wynn’s presentation was focused and articulate, extremely well done. Latchman wasn’t surprised that she strongly supported the cartoonist’s firing, arguing that the themes represented in the cartoon were demeaning to Black people and personally offensive to her. But he was surprised by the subdued class response. Maybe it was because it was so early in the morning, he thought. Maybe non-Black students felt they didn’t belong in the conversation. Whatever the reason, only two students commented on the presentation, both Black men. They both disagreed with Letanya Wynn, instead finding the cartoon to be a clever work of satire, and seeing the cartoonist’s firing as an extreme overreaction.
Thinking further about the minimal class reaction, Latchman wondered if, compared to other recent topics, the class didn’t find the cartoon to be especially shocking or controversial. In any case, he was very impressed by the presentation. Twenty out of twenty, he thought. A great presentation.
Latchman glanced at his phone and quickly re-read the details for the second talk of the morning. It would probably be less engaging than the first talk, he thought. Less contentious.
‘Class, I would next like to introduce Mark Mazur. He is going to talk about the recent Facebook controversy. I’m sure we’ve all heard about it. Certain posts were not published at first, but then appeared later, after a reaction against the company. Mr. Mazur!’
The second speaker was evidently Jewish, and religious, wearing a kipa. He was tall and very thin, with a neatly trimmed beard and a friendly face. After being introduced, he stood up from his chair near the front of the room and walked over to the lectern, where he placed his notes. He was soft-spoken, with an easy and confident manner. ‘Good morning’ he said to the class, with a smile. ‘When I read about this recent Facebook controversy, I naturally read some of the posts that had not appeared for so-called ”technical reasons”. They were published a few days later, after people had complained that Facebook had shown an anti-Palestinian bias, by deliberately blocking the posts. Of course, this is not the first time that Facebook has faced these kinds of accusations, sometimes because they do allow certain posts. For example, when they published all the lies and distortions from Trump’s supporters, during the election campaign and after.’
‘There are three main questions here. First of all, is it just a coincidence that many of those posts – I didn’t try to read more than ten or so – promoted a completely one-sided picture of the recent war between Israel and Hamas? Secondly, does Facebook have the legal right, and perhaps the moral responsibility, to not publish whatever it deems to be inappropriate? Are Palestinian-run websites held to the same moral standards? Do we insist they publish pro-Israeli posts, balancing these with opposite points of view? Or do we think they should be free to decide which posts to publish and in what numbers? Thirdly, and what is most relevant to this course, is why did Facebook backtrack? Why did the policy change, with the posts being published after all? Was it political correctness, catering to an offended group, rather than just sticking to an otherwise reasonable and clearly defensible editorial stance?’
‘I’m Jewish, so some people might try to diminish what I have to say because of a perceived bias. Of course, such an ad hominem assumption of bias could be made against detractors as well. In any event, let me first summarize what I consider to be a truthful, balanced view of the war. To begin, the loss of life and the destruction of property, the traumatization of people, especially children, on both sides, is absolutely horrible. These are the terrible costs and results of war. However we measure the consequences, it is obvious there cannot only be a picture from one side. Hamas sent literally thousands of missiles into Israel, killing people and destroying property. The effects were greatly reduced because the Israelis were able to shoot down most of those bombs before they landed. Hamas fired those missiles with the intention of killing whomever they happened to kill, destroying whatever property they happened to strike. They were aimed more or less randomly. Consequences in return, to the population of Gaza, were horrendous. There were – ‘
At that moment, one of the other students interrupted, a woman wearing a hijab, sitting near the front of the class. She stood up, looking directly at the speaker. Speaking with an Arabic accent, her tone was fierce and accusatory. She was essentially shouting. ‘You are killing children’ she said to the speaker. ‘You are destroying hospitals. You are killing innocent people.’
Professor Latchman was somewhat caught off guard, but he quickly moved to stop the woman’s outburst. Having spoken to the woman on a few previous occasions, he knew her name was Jamila Fayad, and that she was an immigrant from Syria, having settled in the area a few years before, with her parents and siblings. She was one of four religious Muslims in the class, three female and one male. The others were seated side-by-side in the row behind her. In a class that consisted mostly of people of color, they hadn’t particularly stood out during the previous weeks of the course. As occurred to Latchman in this moment, this was likely because the course topics had centred almost completely around anti-Black racism and issues involving sexual identity.
Latchman, seated at the front of the room right beside the speaker, stood up and made a restraining gesture to the woman with his right hand. It was abundantly clear to him that the situation could easily escalate if he didn’t quickly take control. ‘Please. I must ask you to stop, Ms. Fayad. Please sit down’ he said, in a firm, resolute tone, addressing the woman as he did all of his students, using her last name. ‘You will have an opportunity to comment once the speaker has finished. Please allow the speaker to make his presentation. We have all agreed that there will be no comments until these presentations have been completed. And please, remember not to attack people personally. We can strongly disagree with what someone says, but let us challenge what has been said. No personal attacks or insinuations. That is very important. Okay. Mr. Mazur, please continue.’
‘Thank you, Professor Latchman’ said the young speaker, apparently unrattled by the outburst. ‘Justifying war and conflict and killing might be called a fool’s job’ he continued. ‘Yet, if people are not provided with an accurate historical picture of conflict, it can make the situation worse and lead to further violence and injustice. Hamas is a terrorist organization. Our country and other western countries have declared this to be the case. Their only goal in relation to Israel is quote, to drive the Jews into the sea. The idea of a peace treaty or peaceful co-existence is not even a possibility. The claims made about land can – ‘
Again Jamila Fayad stood up, confronting the speaker in the same defiant, angry way. ‘You must end the occupation’ she said. ‘You must give back our land. You are killing our people. We have the right to fight for the liberation.
Anticipating this second outburst, Latchman had already decided on his response, and he acted swiftly. He stood up and again addressed the woman. ‘That is enough’ he said, speaking somewhat forcefully while trying to retain his composure. ‘This presentation is over for now. Thank you, Mr. Mazur. I am sorry for the interruption. Class, we are going to take a fifteen minute break now, before the next talk. Would everyone please leave the room, except for Ms. Fayad. If you wouldn’t mind, Ms. Fayad, I would like to have a word with you before we continue.’
In his head, Latchman was rapidly composing a short speech he would deliver to Jamila Fayad, some careful form of admonishment. How she had attacked the speaker personally. How she hadn’t let him speak. How she had been rude and disrespectful. How she had denied him the same basic freedom of speech she would want for herself. But he never had the opportunity, as Jamila Fayad filed out of the room along with everyone else. For fifteen minutes, Latchman stood waiting for her to return, but she never did. When the students returned fifteen minutes later, she was not among them.
This was certainly not the first time a student had filed a formal complaint about some aspect of Media Studies 32.455. One of Latchman’s colleagues had faced a similar situation a few years before, when a Black student had objected to a class discussion on rap music. The professor had played a selection of songs in class, all laced with profanity and the N-word, which the student had found humiliating and demeaning. The professor had to appear before the Academic Standards Committee to answer for the material. He volunteered to meet with the student-complainant, and successfully diffused the matter. Most student-complaints never reached that stage. Though they were always taken seriously, such complaints were usually answered by no more than a polite note from the Dean’s office, thanking the student for the submission and emphasizing that it had been taken very seriously. The university was always striving to improve in its awareness of and sensitivity to student concerns, et cetera. It was virtually unheard of for any remedial or punitive action to result from such a complaint. So, when Howard Latchman was asked to meet with the Dean of Arts the following week, after a formal complaint had been filed by Jamila Fayad, he wasn’t particularly troubled by the matter.
On the day of his meeting with the Dean of Arts, Latchman came prepared, bearing a printed copy of the course outline for 32.455, as well as a detailed summary of the incident surrounding Mark Mazur’s presentation the previous week.
Like many faculty members at Mackenzie King College, Howard Latchman was mostly oblivious to administrative matters. He tried to have as little to do with meetings and committees and procedures as he could possibly get away with. For most of his years on the faculty, he would not even have been able to name the President of the university, or any of its senior administration. His focus was his teaching and his other academic work. As a full professor in his late fifties, he’d paid his dues, and he now purposefully managed his time with a minimum of aggravation and a minimum of futility. When he was escorted into his meeting with the Dean of Arts, by the administrative assistant, he was meeting the Dean for the first time.
Walking into the Dean’s inner office, carrying his documents, he was greeted by an exuberant, friendly-looking woman. ‘Hello, Professor Latchman’ she said. ‘I’m Amira Zuhar.’
Latchman only vaguely remembered the Dean’s recent hiring. People who had paid more attention would have remembered that she’d been highly touted at the time. She was a devout Muslim and well-known social activist. She’d been hired directly from the faculty ranks at the University of Toronto, with an impressive publication record in Political Studies, and with absolutely no prior administrative experience. Forty years of age, she was a shining example of Mackenzie King College’s commitment to diversity and inclusiveness at every level.
Dean Zuhar was wearing a beige hijab. She had a dazzling smile, immediately disarming Latchman. She motioned for him to sit down on one of the black leather chairs beside her oak desk, offering him water or coffee or tea, all of which he politely refused.
All of a sudden, Latchman’s situation seemed much more perilous. A hijab-wearing Dean was to pronounce on the complaint; on the confrontation between a hijab-wearing student and a male, Jewish student; a confrontation in which he, Latchman, himself Jewish, was deemed by the female student to be at fault. This might not go so well, Latchman thought to himself, nervously glancing around the spacious, well-appointed office. He decided he would wait for a moment before offering his documents to the Dean.
‘Professor Latchman’ the Dean began, flashing a quick smile, a smile Latchman was suddenly rather wary of. ‘Thank you for dropping by today. Jamila Fayad’s complaint… I’ve sent you a copy of what she’s written. I have spoken at some length with her.’ The Dean spoke evenly and quietly, maintaining direct eye-contact with Latchman. ‘Jamila says you silenced her. You stopped her from talking, from countering the pro-Israeli statements. She says you took the side of the Jewish student. Because you are Jewish. She says she can’t return to your class anymore, because you don’t give the same freedoms to all of your students.’
Latchman shuffled in his seat uneasily before offering a response. ‘Ms. Fayad stood up and interrupted the class presentation’ he said to the Dean. ‘She accused the speaker of killing children, of destroying homes. Accused him. He was not involved in the war. He’s not an Israeli; he’s a Canadian. She kept accusing him. It was horrible. She said things like ”You are killing children”; targeting her accusations directly at him. I politely asked her to stop, but she wouldn’t. She continued her personal attack. I had to stop the presentation entirely. It was embarrassing to expose my entire class to that kind of thing. I’ve prepared a detailed summary of the – ‘
The Dean cut Latchman off in mid-sentence. ‘As to the interruption and as to her point of view, she is obviously a passionate defender of the Palestinian cause. And she felt it was necessary to counter a one-sided justification of the actions of the Israelis. Her use of the personal pronoun ”you” probably has as much to do with second-language issues as anything else.’
Latchman was incensed at the Dean’s complete misreading of the incident. He struggled to remain composed. ‘No’ he said, his voice rising. ‘Her usage of ”you” cannot in any way be attributed to second-language issues. She very deliberately pointed to him, and targeted the accusations at him. There was no doubt about it at all. She is a bright student. She obviously knows the difference between ”you” and ”the Israeli army”. There were twenty-four witnesses to the incident, other than me. How many of them have you bothered to interview?’ His tone had quickly progressed to one of anger and impatience. ‘I’m guessing very few, if any. I guess I should have expected you to take her side, but what you are saying is patently ridiculous and simply wrong. All of those statements about the way things proceeded, and the accusations made about my reaction, they are all false. In fact, they’re libelous. She should examine her own behaviour. The ”Jewish student”, as she calls him, did everything he could to be even-handed, respectful and non-accusatory. The whole point was to address the political correctness involved in the matter. In Facebook’s reversing its decision to not allow certain posts that were clearly pro-Palestinian. Was it political correctness that pressured the company to reverse its position? The presenting student was admirably respectful and sensitive to the Gaza side of the conflict. He didn’t even get to fully express his thoughts on the matter. She jumped on him and fired off some very hostile, personal accusations at him.’
Dean Zuhar responded in a much sterner tone than before. ‘Professor Latchman’ she said, ‘I am very much disturbed by your implying my taking sides here. That is certainly not the case. I understand and I very much appreciate the sensitive nature of this classroom topic. Especially for both Jewish and Muslim students. But Professor Latchman, we can’t have students accusing our faculty of silencing their views. We can’t have our students saying it is impossible for them to continue their attendance in class; impossible because of their humiliation and their perceived mistreatment at the hands of their professors. This goes well beyond reasonable classroom behaviour and course management. I’m afraid I’m going to have to suspend you from any further involvement in this course. Your department chair, Professor Guilfoyle, will appoint a replacement to finish the remaining few weeks of lectures. I have spoken to him this morning. For the present, there are no further consequences to you with respect to this incident. However, there will be a full internal inquiry into the matter. I have asked Professor Nkosa, the chair of the Academic Standards Committee, to conduct a thorough review of the matter, including your role. Thank you for coming in this morning.’ Saying this, Dean Zuhar stood up to see Latchman out.
Latchman was stunned. It took him a moment to begin breathing evenly again. Getting to his feet, he was fuming mad. ‘Are you serious?’ he said to the Dean. ‘This is a travesty. There were twenty-four witnesses to the event. Did you talk to them? Does the truth matter? Do you -‘
Dean Zuhar cut him short. ‘Professor Latchman’ she said, firmly. ‘I’m very sorry. I have to interrupt you. I know you must find this very upsetting. I’m going to wish you a good day. This is a most unfortunate incident. Again, thanks for coming in.’
It was all Latchman could do, to simply walk out of the room, without lashing out at the Dean of Arts. He stormed out of the office, out of the building and onto the nearly empty quad outside, shaking his head in disbelief.
THE END
Features
Part 9 of the delusional Winnipeg con man: His phoney promises to fund a charitable foundation in Africa lead one trusting individual to contemplate suicide
By BERNIE BELLAN This is the ninth part of a story about a delusional Winnipegger who believes he is someone of great wealth and has spent the better part of 30 years contacting people all over the world telling them that he wants to invest in their businesses or projects. The first eight parts of this story are all available to read under the FEATURES category on this website.
Here is part 9 of my story:
Of all the deceptions in which Fred Devlin engaged over the years, arguably the one that inflicted the most damage was on the man I’ve been calling Charlie, who lives in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.
As I’ve explained, that initial email which I received on January 16, 2026 was supposedly sent by Charlie (whose real name sounded much more African than that). While I was impressed by the quality of writing that went into that email and responded to it immediately it came as a surprise to me that the follow-up email which I received did not come from Charlie. Instead it came from the man I’ve been calling Rick.
Why was Charlie’s name being used as the author of an email whose contents were so explosive if, in fact, it was someone else entirely who had written that email?
I’m still not sure of the answer to that question. Clearly Rick had his own reasons for not attaching his name to that January 16 email, but when I finally did hear from Charlie it wasn’t until March 7 – and what he wrote was so plaintive that I was prompted to send him some money.
Here is the line of communication that began between Charlie and me – and which is still ongoing as I write this:
emails between Charlie and me sent on March 7, 2026
Hi Bernie, I’d like to kill myself and leave a note, because I’ve got a bad reputation now because of Fred. Next week I have to pay $1200. Fred told me to borrow it and start a charity he was going to fund on January 25th, but so far he hasn’t done anything; it seems like he forgot. I need to find this money and I don’t know how. I’m considering suicide because I have no other options.
Thank you.
Hi Charlie,
To whom do you owe the money?
Bernie
He’s the owner of a cooperative and savings association, and luckily he knows Fred too, because he gave me that money in two installments. Fred also emailed him asking about the banking procedures for transferring the money from Luxembourg. He also knows Fred. He owns this association. He gave me that money because he saw Fred on the video call and it was Fred speaking. But at some point, Fred denied it; we have all the evidence.
Fred said he was going to put down $450,000 or $300,000 in January to start the projects. Everyone in my town knows this story, and everyone is a witness.
Charlie
Did the fellow who gave you the money make you sign something?
Bernie
Yes, he did
He gave us 1000 dollars, and we have give him 1200$.
Charlie
I don’t understand. This fellow gave you $1,000 but you’ve given him $1200. Do you mean that you owe him $1200?
Bernie
Yes, the $200 is for his benefit. If you borrow $500, you have to repay $600. If you take out a loan of $1000, you’ll repay $1200. I owe him $1200. And besides, we wanted to take out a loan of $3000, but I had my doubts. I’d like to kill myself because I’ve lost my reputation. Fred even sent me to the leaders of my town, telling them he was going to improve living conditions here and create many jobs, telling them he was going to implement “Congo Improvement Projects.”
Charlie
Maybe I can negotiate a deal with this guy that you owe money to. What if I offer to pay him $500? Will he let you off the hook? $1200 is a lot of money.
Bernie
If you could help me by just paying him $600, that would be great because he can give me another three months. And I can also arrange to pay in installments. But it will depend on your availability. I really thank you so much.
Charlie
Before I agree to send any money I want to see something in writing from the guy you borrowed from promising that he will give you another 3 months to repay the other $600.
Bernie
That’s a good idea, we can thank you because you just saved my life. I’ll do it, but on Monday. Because tomorrow I can just tell him this and complete the document. Once we receive the money, that’s how we can sign. But also, here our official language is French. The document will be written in French.
Charlie
By the way – I’m Canadian. Our dollar is worth far less than an American dollar. I will only give $600 Cdn.
But you’re going to have to tell me more about how you got involved with Fred.
Bernie
Fred had contacted me alone since 2020. He told me he was a businessman with an organization called Xanadu Charitable Foundation which he wanted to establish in Africa, and that I would be the future project manager, but first and foremost, I had to be a volunteer, and I agreed to that. My story is very long; I’ll gather all the evidence tomorrow and send it to you.
I have several documents that Fred sent me, letters of recommendation to show to the leaders of my city. I have everything, and Fred himself knows this. Try asking for it; he can’t refuse because he knows I have all the evidence.
Charlie
emails sent March 8
Hi Bernie, I was talking to Rick. He told me to send more emails about Fred’s situation. I told him I’m waiting until we can finalize things with you, or until he tells you first. I’ve already promised the landlord I owe him half this week, and we’re going to complete the paperwork with him tomorrow. But right now I’m completely overwhelmed; I don’t know what’s going on anymore. You said you don’t really know my story? But I wrote it to you a long time ago. (Charlie is referring here to the January 16 email. For some reason he was still maintaining the pretense that he wrote that email.) Double-check your emails. And if you have any questions, you can ask me.
Charlie
Yes, I read your story, but it doesn’t tell me how Fred found you. I want to know exactly what you did when Fred contacted you.
I also want to see something in writing that shows what Fred promised you.
Finally, I want to know the same thing I’ve asked everyone else: Did you ever do anything to check out whether what Fred was telling you bore any relation to reality?
All that I’ve heard from everyone I’ve talked to is how convincing Fred was. Am I the only person who’s met Fred who realized early on he was full of shit?
Bernie
At my age, it wasn’t easy not to believe an older person like Fred. The evidence and documents I have are, firstly, the confidential agreement he had me sign, and secondly, a letter of reference he gave me to show to the leaders of my city so they could investigate, telling them he was going to build here. I even managed to print t-shirts for his organization with my own money, and one day, I even managed to feed 250 orphaned children in Fred’s name. The promises are in our conversations, and sometimes we had video conferences with him. I’m not here to smear him because I respect him greatly; I’m here to tell the truth. I have screenshots, images, and documents to prove all of this.
Charlie
Charlie, I’ve got to know who wrote that original email I received from you on January 16. Was it Rick? If so, why didn’t he send it himself? Why did it come from you?
Bernie
For the first time, Fred sent me a Messenger invitation. After I accepted, he told me I was lucky and that God loved me very much because I had just met a great person and the owner of a large organization called Xanadu, A few days later, he told me I would be Xanadu’s future representative in Congo. I was surprised too, and I immediately checked his profile. I found he was real, even though I still had some doubts until we started video calls for conferences. We continued our discussions for a year. Afterward, he told me I had to work hard to get the representative position. He suggested I volunteer to gain experience. I was easily convinced because during our video calls, he was always sitting in a luxurious office with computers. I couldn’t have any more doubts. And that’s where it all began.
Charlie
email received from Charlie March 9
Hello Bernie, I acknowledge my mistake in not realizing Fred was mentally ill. It was difficult for us not to believe him because during video conferences he seemed serious. I was right because he always made promises he never kept. He also told me he had meetings with Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. I also wonder how someone who talks to these adults can have the time to talk to me.
Regarding the names of the people I know that Fred told me he spoke to about his businesses, I suspect he defrauded and lied to.
Charlie
On March 11 I sent Charlie $600 Cdn. It wasn’t easy completing that transaction. In fact, I attempted to send the money several times through different methods. I finally settled on using something called Remitly, but I had to have a phone number for Charlie. It turned out that he gave me the phone number for a friend who is registered with Remitly. When I entered Charlie’s name as the recipient, however, the transaction didn’t go through – and it took me some time to get the money back into my bank account. I was quite upset with Charlie over his not telling me that the phone number he gave me wasn’t his – but in the end I was able to send the money to him successfully – after I changed the name of the recipient to his friend’s name.
emails sent March 12
Hi Bernie, I’m writing to you to thank you for everything you’ve done for me. I only recently met you, but you helped me with problems that weren’t yours. I’ve never met someone as kind-hearted as you. You’ve sacrificed so much for me; you’re so kind and understanding, like a parent to me. I handed over the money today, and I’ve been granted another three months. I’m looking for a job, and if I find one, I hope I can finish the rest on my own.
I have a report I’m going to send you. It’s a report from the field trip I did across the entire country. Fred told me he was going to implement a project here called the “Congo Improvement Project.” He told me to identify the problems facing Congo and propose solutions. It was work I did with all my heart, but in the end, Fred was always there to betray me. The report is 33 pages long. It’s work I myself greatly appreciated. Right now, it’s become a real obstacle for me because I used Fred as a reference on all my CVs, and no one can trust me anymore because I defended him so much here. I said he was a good and genuine person. I deeply regret my life. Fred has just destroyed it.
Charlie
Hey Charlie,
I was glad to help. Your story was one of the worst I heard of all the people Fred sucked into his orbit. I’m still wrestling with how I should write this story. Your part of the story is especially poignant because you actually put out money that you didn’t have – all in pursuit of a worthy project that was intended only to help people.
I consider myself very lucky in that I was born and grew up in a great country like Canada. I’ve done okay financially but my no means am I rich. Still, I contribute a lot to charity. Helping out someone like you is all part and parcel of the same thing as far as I’m concerned. And just because it was difficult getting you the money – and I got upset with you a couple of times – doesn’t mean I won’t help you again. If you find it a real struggle paying off the rest of what you owe let me know. I’m prepared to help more if necessary.
-Bernie
email from Charlie March 14
I understand, Bernie. Luckily, you understood everything. What Fred did to me will hurt me for the rest of my life. Here, several people keep asking me, “When are you going to implement the project with Fred?” I always feel ashamed everywhere.
Charlie
email from Charlie March 17
Hi Bernie, I hope you’re doing well. I received some annoying messages from Rick. He told me he doesn’t believe in anyone anymore, and that we’re all corrupt. I didn’t reply because I didn’t understand. I can’t threaten anyone; I can only respect what’s in order. Personally, I wanted to write a long letter and then kill myself. I didn’t need to bother anyone or say too much. I was really surprised to see his messages saying we’re corrupt.
Charlie
emails sent March 18
Just ignore him Charlie. I don’t really know him but from what he’s written to me lately he’s clearly not well.
Bernie
Thank you so much for your advice. This time Fred isn’t calling me anymore. He did call me once, offering me money for a small project to calm me down, but I knew it was just a scam. In the next two weeks, I’m going to explain Fred’s story to the people in my town, because many people are waiting for funding from him and they don’t know what happened. In the meantime, I’m waiting for a job here. If it works out, everything will be fine, but if it doesn’t, I’ll still be in a bad situation.
Charlie
The fact Fred has stopped calling you could mean one of two things: Either he is at times aware of his behaviour and can control it for periods of time or more likely, there are people closely monitoring him now and trying to keep him from continuing his delusional behaviour online. I’d be curious to see whether he continues to leave you alone. Keep me posted and of course I hope things work out for you.
Bernie
Maybe.
Do you know why I wanted to kill myself? It’s because I sang (?) Fred a lot here in my town. We were promised great leaders that we would create jobs here, but now everyone sees me as a liar, nobody believes me anymore, everyone says I’m a scammer too. It’s difficult for me, that’s why I’m desperate.
Charlie
Well, if you need to show people something that will prove you never intended to mislead anyone I’ve been writing a story about what Fred Devlin has done – and is continuing to do. I’ve finished the first 4 chapters and you’re welcome to read it if you like – and share with anyone who is angry at you. Of course, it’s in English but I can try to translate it using AI.
Bernie
emails from Charlie March 19
The big problem is that Africans think that a crazy white person, a scammer white person, and a poor white person don’t exist; it’s difficult to convince them. Africans think that white people are perfect.
Charlie
Hi Bernie, I tried to sit down with my father and some of the elders in my town who know Freds story well. Because I’m the son of a reverend pastor, and Fred had promised my father he would build him a church. Now I’ve made them understand that Fred is a con artist; he also has a mental problem. I apologized to them. They told me it wasn’t possible, but in the end they understood, though they were very surprised to hear it. My father cried. The elders in my town told me I must be in cahoots with Fred and that maybe I’m the con artist. They asked me about the money I borrowed, and I told them I’m paying it back myself. They asked me how I met him and advised me not to trust people anymore.
Charlie
emails sent March 20
Well, you can tell them that there’s at least one white guy out there who’s nice, who believes in you, has helped you and is doing everything he can to stop Fred Devlin from making your life and other people’s lives miserable.
Bernie
Thank you so much, Bernie. They also have some questions, asking me how I had the courage to sacrifice myself like that for someone like Fred. Bernie, maybe you only know the debt I owe because of Fred, but you don’t know the story behind me, and that’s why I wanted to kill myself. For my part, I can only thank you for giving me hope for life again. But here at home, no one can believe in me anymore. I can’t leave my city, I can’t work here except start a business because everyone knows I’m waiting for funding from Fred. I’d also like to ask you a question out of curiosity: do you have any people here in Africa? Do you know Africa? Have you ever been to Africa?
Charlie
emails sent March 21
Sorry Charlie – I don’t know anyone in Africa except some people in South Africa – and I don’t really know them. I just have a good friend who’s from South Africa who still has lots of friends and relatives there and he’s introduced me to some of them online.
I don’t understand how the people in your home town still believe that Fred is going to provide you with funding. How much proof do they need to understand he’s a very sick person and nothing he has ever said is real?
Do you want me to send you what I’ve written for my story so far? I supposed you could translate it into French if necessary. Maybe then people would understand how crazy Fred is.
Bernie
Hi Bernie, I was with another team today, some of the people Fred had promised to start with me. I tried to explain things to them, and they understood, even though it wasn’t easy for them. Tomorrow I have a general meeting with them and some of the leaders here. I can even send you the photos tomorrow. Despite everything, it’s very embarrassing for me; no one believes me anymore. Some even tell me they’ll never trust me again.
I’m hated in my community now. How can I continue living this life with a bad reputation? Bernie, if you ever stop seeing my messages, know that I’m no longer in this world. It’s not easy being hated by your community; you can’t buy a reputation, it’s earned through your actions. Goodbye.
Charlie
Charlie – don’t lose hope and please don’t think of killing yourself. Of course I understand what a difficult situation you are in. Is there anyone in your town that I could speak to to try to tell them that you were just an innocent victim of a very sick person – who also victimized many other people? What would it take for your reputation to be reburnished?
Bernie
Bernie, I’m African, but somewhat civilized. I know Africans well, which is why I don’t want to put you in contact, because he’ll only ask for money. The only solution is to change my environment. When I pay off this debt, I’m just going to move far away from here. Otherwise, I risk getting stressed. I’m waiting for tomorrow’s meeting, and then I’ll tell you what happens next.
Charlie
emails sent March 24
Hi Bernie, I have a long letter to write to you today because I had a big meeting with everyone who knows Fred because of me. But first of all, I apologize if this is going to bother you. By the way, I wanted to show you the plaque that a village chief made for Fred, because Fred promised he would arrive here in 2023. He also asked me how Fred is doing.
Charlie
I hope your people listen to you & understand how you were completely fooled by Fred.
Bernie
Yes, only the wise ones understood. The others say that if I didn’t take the money, it means I was Fred’s accomplice. The others say they’re going to file a complaint against me. The others understood. Here, where I come from, promising an orphanage and not keeping that promise is a great sin; it’s taboo here. But I don’t see my future in this city. I have a bad reputation right now.
Charlie
On March 26 I wrote to Charlie that the lawyer I had contacted about taking on Jonathan as a client had told me that he had asked the head of civiil litigation at his firm to get in touch with me. I also told the lawyer that there was someone else who had been very badly hurt by having been duped by Fred Devlin – but that this poor fellow lived in Africa. I said that I really hoped a lawsuit could proceed so that Fred Devlin’s parents might finally take steps to harness their delusional son and keep him from contacting anyone ever again with a promise to invest in a project with that person.
I sent Charlie a copy of what I had written for this story to that point.
He responded: Thank you so much, Bernie. I just translated and read part of it. Congratulations on what you’re doing; you’re a true writer. Fred called me 10 minutes ago saying he wants to work with me, but fortunately, I ignored him.
Charlie
Can you keep a record of every time he calls you and I hope you keep all messages he sent you.
Bernie
Yes, I keep just messages and mails
Charlie
ok that’s good. Do you think you could send some to me – not all of them, just ones where he promises he’s going to fund the charitable foundation he wanted you to set up. I want to use them in my story – with the names changed of course.
Bernie
But he did a lot of things via video calls and other things in writing.
Charlie
emails sent March 27
I don’t know that anything I would do would make any difference, but I’d like to have as much written material as possible for what I’m writing.
Obviously, you can’t send me videos or memories of conversations.
Bernie
I have a lot of evidence and documents because I have a Xanadu folder on my computer with everything. Unfortunately, I gave my computer as collateral to the person I owe, so I can only use some of the evidence on my phone. Fred is asking me how much money I want to give him back his website because it contains all the information about him and who he claimed to be. He’s afraid I might reveal it.
Charlie
Charlie sends me a screenshot of a text message sent from Fred to Charlie:
“Your land, your house, your pharmacy your phone your books, computer and your future revenue. You sided with my enemies and will legally lose everthing.”
March 28 Charlie sends me another screenshot of a text message from Fred to him:
“I have hired lawyers to take all your life’s assets. You have until 12noon Central time to take down internet slander and apologize on facebook.
“You have assisted in publicly attempting to lie and ruin my reputation.
“If you decide to lie about our good relationship my family and I will sue you. If you continue to slander my reputation you will be sued. You better take down the slander sites immediately.”
emails sent March 28
Bernie, as I told you long ago, I’m not here to smear Fred, but to tell the truth. I wanted to commit suicide because I’m worthless in my community because of him. I have all the testimonies, as well as witnesses who know my story with Fred well. There are even documents he sent me to show the leaders of my town, showing him that he was going to implement several projects here. Since I needed a job in the future, I was always obedient to him because I had no choice. I printed t-shirts, I bought food to feed 300 orphans twice a year in Xanadu’s name, and Fred congratulated me, telling me I was the best. He lied to my father, saying he was going to build his church because my father is a reverend pastor. I have a lot of evidence that proves everything. He told me to spend what I have to buy hectares of land he was going to finance in January, but so far he hasn’t done anything except deceive me. He was video conferencing with several people from my village using my phone, telling them he was going to finance it in January. Now everyone in my community is against me. If you talk about Fred or Xanadu, they might kill you. I deleted all my posts about Xanadu and burned the knitting (?) too. Right now, Fred is threatening to destroy me.
Charlie
Can you forward me actual messages showing that they were from Fred? Someone could say that you wrote these messages yourself.
Bernie
Hello Bernie, Fred spent all night threatening to kill me, saying he’s going to take everything I have spiritually, and that anyone I work with will hate me. He said he can’t help me with anything anymore and that I’ll be back to square one. For my part, I’d like to take my time and write at least 5 or 6 pages about my story with Fred, because right now I’m still saddened by what he keeps saying. He writes things and sometimes deletes them; luckily, I’m taking screenshots. Sometimes he calls me and insults me. He told me if I publish his website where all his information is, I’ll die and he’ll kill me spiritually.
Charlie
Also, on March 20, Charlie began sending me messages on WhatAapp in addition to emailing me.
His first message was: Good morning Bernie. I’m Charlie. I asked you for your WhatsApp number because that’s where I can easily send you several pieces of evidence and that’s where I always communicate.
Attached to Charlie’s message were several images, most of which were indecipherable, but two of which showed Charlie – one with a group of kids from his community who, I assume, were to be beneficiaries of the charitable foundation Charlie was going to create – using money from Fred Devlin’s Xanadu Foundation. The other photo was of Charlie meeting with women from his community. From one of his previous emails I surmise that he was trying to explain to them that he had been duped by Devlin.
Also attached to Charlie’s WhatsApp message was a message from “David Simkin,” the supposed CEO of the Xanadu Group of Companies. It’s particularly galling that within Devlin’s enormous delusion he actually would have gone so far as to create a fictitious character who became part of his story – and whose name was used to add a patina of respectability to what was utter nonsense.
Sequel to Charlie’s story: I eventually sent Charlie another $800 so that he could pay off the rest of the debt he had incurred by having t-shirts made with the charitable foundation logo on the front, along with food that he bought for 300 orphans in his community.
I’ve remained in touch with Charlie, who tells me how difficult it is for him to find work in Africa, even though he’s highly educated and speaks seven different languages. The immense toll that being strung along by Fred Devlin for years will never be ameliorated.
Coming next: I receive a surprise phone call from the man I’ve been calling Fred Devlin, who asks to meet with me. I end up confronting him over all the cons he’s been pulling.
Features
BOOK REVIEW: “Fighting the Hate: A Handbook for Jews Under Siege”
Reviewed by MURRAY BENDER “Thinking on your feet”—quickly defending a position in a coherent, persuasive manner—is a situation that many people find challenging and stressful. “If only I had said this.” or “Why didn’t I say that?” Hindsight is always 20-20.
Following the Hamas atrocities of October 7, 2023, it has become increasingly necessary for diaspora Jews to “think on their feet” as they unwittingly face a barrage of tough, sometimes hateful, questions about Jews and their Israeli homeland.
Why is Israel committing genocide in Gaza? Why doesn’t Israel return the land it has stolen from Palestinians? Why are Israeli settlers attacking Palestinian farmers? How is Israel different from apartheid South Africa? Why can’t I criticize Israel without being called antisemitic? Is it true that Jews control the world? The list of potential questions is nearly endless.
Engage or hide? This is the difficult choice that confronts Jews as they look to deal with anti-Jewish and anti-Israeli behaviour. Fortunately, author and journalist Melanie Phillips comes to the rescue with her practical and insightful book, Fighting the Hate: A Handbook for Jews Under Siege.
According to Phillips, the dilemma has no single answer. “People need to decide how to behave in accordance not just with the specific circumstances but also with their own attributes and limitations.”
Some regard engagement with their opponents as a sacred duty. “They believe it is a betrayal of the Jewish people not to uphold Israel’s case.” Ohers may be uncomfortable with such a direct approach, but “those who decide to keep their heads down and avoid any altercation may well find that this leaves them with a permanent sense of regret and even failure,” she says.
As a result, it’s probably a good idea to adopt some sort of balance. And that’s where Phillips’ 150-page handbook comes in.
She starts by providing context around the “crisis of legitimacy and acceptance” from which Jews are reeling post-October 7. On the basis of extensive conversations with Jews from across the U.S., Britain and Australia, the author found that many “were near stupefied by the terrifying hatred and irrationality that was unfolding around them.” Again and again, they asked: “What should we do? What can we do?”
In response, Phillips offers a pragmatic approach to help prepare for the inevitable conversations, including a number of key principles:
- Get smart rather than emotional
- Stop playing defence
- Find common ground
- Be positive and confident
- Keep physically safe
Based on these overarching criteria, she provides an extensive list of quick and clever retorts to a range of different situations, emphasizing that “it’s our duty to our children and grandchildren to fight for truth and justice.”
So, the next time it is necessary to “think on their feet,” diaspora Jews will be able to respond quickly and confidently to those difficult questions about themselves and Israel. And they can thank Melanie Phillips for coming to the rescue.
Fighting the Hate: A Handbook for Jews Under Siege by Melanie Phillips is available online from Amazon and Indigo.
Features
ESports Meets Casinos: Overview of Bet Sport Gaming
ESports has become part of the interactive entertainment of online casinos. In fact, many fans already have the opportunity to use Dragonia Casino Bet Sport options while watching the matches of their favorite teams. The hybrid entertainment model opens up many possibilities and increases audience engagement. When video games intersect with betting, it creates a unique collaboration where participants have the opportunity to get a completely new experience right in their own home. At the same time, you can continue to enjoy the usual viewing of familiar tournaments and competitions.
How ESports and Casinos Interconnect
ESports has become a multi-billion-dollar industry that attracts spectators. Traditional casinos are focused on luck. But now they are introducing additional methods of encouraging their customers. Among such options, eSports events deserve special attention. Such bet sport offers combine the usual excitement with an element of competition. The structure of the casino entertainment provides participants with the opportunity to test their skills and reveal their own hidden talents. There are several forms of integration of eSports mechanics into the structure of a classic online casino:
- Competitive betting. Online casinos provide the opportunity to bet on eSports tournaments, which is similar to the usual sports betting. In addition, the possibilities are significantly expanded compared to simple viewing platforms.
- Skill-based casino games. Games inspired by eSports encourage players to actively participate in what is happening on the screen. The games reward the player’s results with certain prizes.
- Interactive arenas. Some casinos broadcast eSports events in real time. This allows players to follow the games directly online, which creates a feeling of real participation in familiar entertainment.
- Cross-platform interaction. Online casinos are introducing eSports-style leaderboards and achievements to attract more participants.
Such innovations appeal to new participants. Cultural changes are part of the development of the infrastructure of the classic casino, and eSports fans find a new environment for entertainment and communication.
Growth of ESports Betting
Global eSports revenue in 2025 exceeded $1.5 billion. Each bet sport option has made a significant contribution to the development. Surveys show that over 60% of players will express interest in betting on eSports, which reflects the demand and the need to develop an updated infrastructure for participation.
ESports events attract 15-20% more new participants compared to conventional casinos. The eSports betting market will exceed $20 billion by 2027, according to analysts’ forecasts, which encourages new participants to more actively watch tournaments and participate in various types of activity.
Why Fans Choose ESports
Bet sport gambling is gaining popularity. This is due to several reasons. For example, large casinos in Las Vegas and Macau now host full-fledged eSports tournaments alongside traditional entertainment. Venues are also experimenting with separate fan zones where sports betting and classic gambling are available.
Some of the most popular eSports disciplines are League of Legends and Counter-Strike: Global Offensive. Some online casinos even introduce eSports mechanics into slots so that players can try something new.
In short, the intersection of eSports and casinos is a natural development of the industry. Competitive play and an optimized betting system create a comfortable environment for true fans who want to diversify their leisure time.