|
|
|
|
|
|
Letter from America!
Fredrick Töben - in Sacramento, California
23 April 2004
For the Record: Rechthaberei - 'I was right!'?
For those who accepted the European American Culture Council's and Adelaide
Institute's invitation to a Revisionist Conference in Sacramento on 24-25
April 2004, the following items will possibly help to clarify matters.
1. Fredrick Töben's reflections on the cancelled conference.
2. Judy's thoughts on the wisdom or otherwise of staging a demonstration before
the German Turn Verein.
3. Edgar Steele's thought - giving false credit to Mark Weber instead of Harvey
Taylor.
4. Mark Weber's thoughts - with comment from Fredrick Töben.
5. Walter Mueller's 'I was right' justification in unilaterally cancelling the
conference after the German Turn Verein refused to honour its commitment.6. Letter from America! Fredrick Töben - in Sacramento, California, 22 April 2004.
1. Fredrick Toben's Reflections
The wonders of technology continues to imbue me with a sense of wonderment. Each
time a plane takes off from some airport, loaded full of individuals going
somewhere, I marvel at the human feat that makes all this possible. The doors
of this huge machine close, and soon it moves along the runway, then suddenly
the somewhat irritating vibrations begin to hum as the plane lifts off
skywards.
Control freaks hate flying because once up there in the air it is not a matter
of controlling anything absolutely. If things go wrong the pilot has to work
together with other individuals and with a multitude of instruments that advise
on what is happening at a particular moment.
Harvey Taylor, Jim Beardsley and I - and all pilots for that matter - know what
it is like when things go wrong in the air. It does not help to scapegoat at
that moment and blame anyone for the predicament. It also does not help to pray
and do nothing and only hope things will be alright and the problem will go
away. A recent example of such matter occurred on my British Air flight from
Moscow to Heathrow, London. Half way through this flight the toilets had become
full - and a technician attempted to solve that problem. The pilot advised
afterwards that he had thought about diverting and landing the plane, but then
decided to continue and get priority landing for Heathrow.
There are other countless examples of human progress in the macro-world that are
now mirrored in the micro-world, such as near instant communications as is
offered via the Internet world. In all such processes nothing is perfect, and
there will always be problems to solve, especially unforeseen ones. For example
I had made contingency plans to have a video screened at the conference thatdetails my persecution in Australia as reported by our television news
services. It would have filled my one-hour talk spot as a good introduction to
the topic of Revisionist persecution. There are still individuals who do not
think this persecution si a physical fact, and that it is a result of our
personal behaviour.
Contingency plans are thus an essential element of any human endeavour -
especially in politics, as we saw with 9:11 where all the legal constraints of
the Patriots Act were already nutted out.
And despite all the planning, life is not to be ensnared by rules and
regulations - as we saw in the communist system where every detail of the
economy was thought-through. That's the essence of dialectic thinking, and I
use the Bertrand Russell example of what dialectics is all about. Two
individuals are resting for the night. When it is time to get up, one just
jumps out of bed, gets dressed, and is off to work. The other will begin to
think: left foot first out of bed, right foot first out of bed. Thus is born
the control freak who still has his bottom bare while the other person is
already hard at work producing the goods.
Individuals who have a low stress threshold level feel more pain when confronted
with real life situations, and thus seek to scapegoat if they have not matured
and have not accepted the fact that living is often painful.
This kind of self-reflection made me toy with the title of my talk, and I
settled on a basic theme - dialogue rather than them-us hatred. That would fit
into the scheme of what Revisionists are doing - not hating, as is alleged by
those that themselves are the haters - but rather to welcome a dialogue. In
this way we clarify the historical problems that require our attention.
When the State of California Governor proclaims a Holocaust Week from 18-25
April 2004, then it is legitimate for individuals to ask what was this
'Holocaust' about. Further, it is legitimate to evaluate anything offered
during such a week and subject such information to a rigorous truth-test.
Simply put, are we being treated like mushrooms, kept in the dark (closed
archives and denied access to information) and fed on bull dust? According to
what I have seen on free-to-air television in the world this is the case. But
then I have the freedom to switch off, and I am not being force-fed material
that does not uplift, that does not inspire, that does not develop my mind.
The ultimate example of the them-us hatred mindset for me is when someone says
to me: Either you are with me or you are against me. Such dialectic thought
pattern does not accord an individual a personal space, nor does it offer an
individual the opportunity to respond freely. The prime example is the US
President proclaiming the war on terrorism: those who question his 'the fight
for freedom and democracy, and against terrorism' sloganeering, are in grave
danger of finding themselves before the courts.
Just recently a respected Texan bio chemist academic felt the full force of the
law when he was taken to court because he had broken some new law that
prohibits him from doing certain things. The court decision has had a chilling
effect on all research in the USA. I wonder if this research will now - as is
the case with much other research - go to Israel. Legal constraints are imposed
in many countries with a vengeance while Israel gets away with it. The
perception is that this is not an accident but rather one of design.
The them-us dialectic thought pattern has emerged again since Walter Mueller
cancelled the conference without informing me about it first. This was
disturbing for me because Adelaide Institute provided a sizeable number of new
speakers to the Revisionist scene, and thus an alternate venue should have been
organised. That is the only criticism I shall make of Walter Mueller's handling
of the planning of this conference.
Upon my arrival in Sacramento it was Harvey Taylor, our MC, who began to do the
groundwork and looked for an alternate venue. Mueller's unilateral decision to
cancell did not mean that our sizeable speaker contingent could not
re-constitute itself into another conference. Paul Fromm, for example, that
veteran fighter from Canada was on his way to the conference, as was Marc
Lemire, that technical Wunderkind who had to date put TBR's and IHR's
conferences on the Internet.
Interestingly, at the last 2002 IHR conference he even had to pay for his own
hotel room, that's how dedicated he is to the cause. He is a professional - and
he now feels that something is not going right because he is receiving
instructions that seem to change again and again. It concerns the title of the
conference that is emerging out of the ashes of the EACC-Adelaide Institute
Revisionist Conference.
Mark Weber - IHR - has taken it upon himself - so according to Harvey Taylor -
to be 'in charge' of the 'new' conference. My point is that although Mueller
jumped off the ship we were still there, and MC Harvey Taylor was the bridging
link, the captain of the re-constituted conference. Weber's actions remind me
of cannibalism and parasitism where out of a disaster someone comes along and
picks up things, then claims they are his and they are new.
[I refrain from elaborating on this issue in any more detail because such
thought-pattern raises fundamental moral and intellectual problems, some of
which go back a decade concerning some Revisionists.]
Weber did not know the nature of the speakers' relationship to either EACC or
Adelaide Institute.
Unfortunately the money factor also comes into it. Weber was not prepared to pay
for my costs, etc.
I could not answer Mark Weber if I was prepared to speak at the IHR conference.
How can I speak at our conference because although Mueller had cancelled we had
not cancelled. Taylor then wished to know if I was prepared to speak at a
combined IHR-Adelaide Institute conference . Again my point was that we drop
the designations IHR or Adelaide Institute and accept the Taylor proposal that
this be a conference for Ernst Zundel.
Soon afterwards, through a third party, I was advised that Ernst Zundel had
called Mark Weber collect from his prison in Toronto and specifically requested
that the conference be called an IHR conference. My reading out the long letter
I had received from Ernst only a little while ago is thus not necessary any
more.
This matter now has me worried because Walter Mueller's outburst against Mark
Weber and Weber's new alliance with alleged white supremacists would be ideal
for the Canadian authorities who have stated that Ernst Zundel is a kind of
godfather of the white supremacist movement. And as these immoral legal
proceedings against Zundel in Canada are an absolute farce - but they are
continuing - then we must not do anything that could be construed to be harmful
to Ernst.
I do not want any part in setting up Ernst Zundel for the firing line - if that
can be construed to flow from the Saturday conference.
And as it is Ernst Zundel's specific request to have our conference - I still
call it our conference - under the Schirmherrschaft of the IHR and its allies,
then so be it. I shall not fight Ernst Zundel's wishes.
Accordingly Adelaide Institute withdraws from the proceedings with an apology to
its invited speakers, advising them to send me their costs claims that arose
out of Walter Mueller unilaterally cancelling the conference and without him
having endeavoured to find another venue.
I also apologize to all those many individuals who trusted us in getting this
conference off the ground. It will not now help to start the blaming game and
play the victim of Mueller's 'hot-headedness' or Toben's trusting nature. Any
such triumphalism, something I have detected in Mark Weber's talk and actions
about whose conference it now is, is futile in-fighting. I go along with Germar
Rudolf and judge individuals by what they produce because in the Revisionist
world, and elsewhere, talk is cheap. Germar Rudolf is the power house of
Revisionism and his track record is excellent.
2. Judy's thoughts on the wisdom or otherwise of staging a demonstration before
the German Turn Verein
Jim Beardsley has asked me to comment on the planned boycott of the Turnverein. I
neglected to get his e-mail address from Fredrick Toben before he went to bed
so I am sending this to him so that he can forward it to Jim as Jim will be
gone before I get up tomorrow to send it myself.
The Sacramento Turnverein is celebrating its 150th anniversary on June 5 of this
year. They have just refurbished the building. They have a choir, I believe is
also 150 years, they have songfest, where all the choirs from the Bayarea come
and contend. On the 2nd of May they have a Children's Maifest. They have German
Language Schools for children through adult. They have a lovely library. They
have all the traditional fests. At Christmas Time they have a Kriskindle Markt.
Thy collect coats for kids
at that time. It grows each year and more and more young children are attending.
These people have put in untold hours building a wonderful organization and
excellent community relations.
It would be an absolute shame if anyone would do anything to mar their excellent
reputation. When families have squabbles, they do not hang their wash out in
public. After the conference it is time to have a meeting and discuss what has
happened.
Sacramento is a town that has about 90,000 Russian immigrants. I have no idea
how many Kmong, Mexican, Latin American and African, but it is a lot. We have
wonderful write ups for all of these groups. We hope they will do the same for
the 150th celebration. If there would be a boycott by any group that is tainted
by the media it would be a tragedy.
It is not too many years ago that we had 3 Synagogues fire bombed in one night.
Two brothers, admitted white supremacists, were arrested and admitted that they
had done it. They had also killed a homosexual couple in Redding.
The community came together to support the Jewish community in unprecedented
fashion. Candle light parades, gathered $500,000 for repairs. Cuomo, the son of
the NY Governor was head of Human Resources, HUD or some such department in the
Clinton Administration. He arranged for a $6,000,000 loan guarantee for the
Synagogues.
Anything dealing with any group that has any taint, real or imagined will
reflect very badly on the Revisionist movement in general and I fear could hurt
the very person you hope to help.
From the bottom of my heart I plead with you do not protest openly. Some of
these people have worked 50 to 60 years to build a wonderful vibrant
organization and it could be destroyed by out of towners, that have no
investment in this club at all.
And who would be laughing? having spent not a penny. We would destroy ourselves.
I pray that cooler heads will prevail. This is one German organization that has
done everything right...we can educate them later as ladies and gentlemen.
It is true, you win more bees with honey than with vinegar.
Thank you for letting me put my 2 cents worth in.
I pray the conference will be a success. Look at this as an opportunity to
build, not tear down a vibrant organization.
Judy
3. Ed Steele and his thoughts RE: The Saturday Conference
Quoting "Edgar J. Steele" <steele@plainlawtalk.com>:
Having been mentioned here, I cannot help but dip my oar in the water.
Yes, I absolutely agree with Frederick that compromise is important. We
must keep the truly important people here uppermost in our minds: the
conference attendees. Then we should also keep in mind the image and
importance of Ernst, to whom the conference is dedicated. Then we must keep
in mind that we are in the public eye and have a responsibility to act both
accountably and responsibly. Then the sensibilities and needs of the
speakers should be attended to. Finally, and only after all those people
are accommodated, come the organizers.
Mr. Mueller clearly lost sight of all this and put himself first and
foremost. He blew it badly. His cosponsors should have provided better in
the event of his failure, frankly, but did not.
[Rather difficult from Australia, Ed! This was a first Revisionist cofnerence
organized in absolute openness via the Internet, and the enemy of free speech
merely waited for self-destruction to occur. Easy! Fredrick Toben]
The advance naming of the
venue was a clear tipoff to many of us, despite his assurances that it could
not go sideways. We simply didn't realize how naive and incompetent he
really is. Unfortunately, he seems to have exclusive control over the
attendee email list, which is about to become unimportant except as an item
of evidence in a lawsuit. Now is not the time to recriminate over him,
however. We will have plenty of time to pick over his rotting carcass
later.
I can reach a lot of people, and have already done so. I will again,
tonight or tomorrow. Unfortunately, Stormfront's forum seems to be off air
just now, which is a rich source for communicating. Having someone at the
Turn Verien to redirect people is a must.
Mark deserves some special recognition, because without his intervention
there would be NO conference taking place. [sic - it is Harvey Taylor who is
doing the groundwork - FT] He seems to control the web site
and venue, therefore it seems unlikely anybody will prevail upon him to
generalize the name to something like the "Zundel Revisionist Conference,"
though that would be my personal preference. I can't honestly say that he
doesn't deserve to put the IHR imprimatur upon it, however, because he IS
the guy making it happen. None of the rest of us, though we play a part,
can say that. And Harvey is working his butt off, obviously, and deserves
our thanks.
Some of us have differences. We must put them aside and think of others.
The show must go on. I particularly look forward to Frederick's
participation and speech.
I wanted to see Mr. Chamish provided some time, since he could be expected
to be put out about the original cancellation. I intended to make him into
a Holocaust Denier with the irrefutable logic of my presentation and my
ability to cloud men's minds, by the way. However, since it has come to
light that "he said the JDL contacted him, and he gladly gave them full
copies of his speech AND! invited them to the conference," I am not so sure
it is such a good idea to have him there (see my earlier missive today about
being threatened by Mr. Maniacal). Fortunately, it is not my call to make,
since it's a tough one. I'll support whichever way you fellows decide to go
with this one. After all, I'm just a speaker - you guys are doing all the
heavy lifting.
Get an accounting, fellows, of all the direct expenses of this new
conference and we will make a pitch at some point for contributions. If
nobody else wishes to do so, then I will step up and do it, since I'm not
the one coming out of pocket. Whatever Walter has expended, as far as I'm
concerned, he can eat, unless he cooperates and provides the email list and
some of the food and drink he is whining about.
A final word, then I'll butt out: let's have some fun Saturday. I'm
looking forward to seeing and hearing all of you and everybody else that
ends up speaking. If the best revenge is living well, then we truly can do
no better than to enjoy ourselves!
-ed
> -----Original Message-----
> From: info@adelaideinstitute.org [mailto:info@adelaideinstitute.org]
> Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 2:58 PM
> To: James Beardsley
> Cc: marc@lemire.com; weber@ihr.org; hataylor@syix.com;
> steele@plainlawtalk.com; info@adelaideinstitute.org
> Subject: The Saturday Conference
> Marc, please note that Mark Weber (IHR) is not in charge of the
> re-constituted
> conference, but that Harvey Taylor is - he is in charge because he is the
> transition MC from one to the other events.
> This was agreed to by Harvey and I because this would unite the
> supporters of
> Ernst Zundel. Calling the conference an IHR conference would
> alienate those
> supporters who dislike Mark, but like Ernst.
>
> Ernst may have a wish but he must also realize - which he does - that the
> factions cannot be united under the IHR banner.
>
> The aim of this conference is to unite not to point-score and behave in a
> triumphal way - that win-lose thinking that Mark is carrying with
> him when he
> insists that he is in charge.
>
> Harvey is aware of the importance of compromise - and even Ed
> Steele agrees with
> me on this.
>
> For example, Barry Chamish will possibly be a speaker and he is
> one of ours, etc.
>
> Please contact Harvey Taylor who is in charge of the conference
> for Saturday.
>
> Sorry about you being dragged into this -
>
> Fredrick
> Quoting James Beardsley <jamesbeardsley@earthlink.net>:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Marc Lemire [mailto:marc@lemire.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 2:26 PM
> > To: James Beardsley
> > Subject: RE: Our talk / The Saturday Conference
> > http://www.internationalrevisionistconference.com
> >
> > Homepage now says:
> >
> > "Free Zundel Revisionist Conference sponsored by his friends and
> > supporters."
> > -Marc
4. Mark Weber's thoughts - Re: False information / [With comment from Fredrick
Toben]
Quoting Mark Weber <weber@ihr.org>:
22 April 2004
Dear Fredrick,
In spite of our talk the other day, you continue to put out false
information about the Saturday conference.
The Saturday IHR conference is not simply the defunct two-day conference
under another name. It is true, as you have indicated, that several of the
speakers at the Saturday event will be in northern California this
coming weekend anyway because they had planned to address the two-day
conference that was cancelled by the organizer, Walter Mueller.
But not all of those who were to address the defunct conference were
invited (by the IHR) to attend the Saturday event. Furthermore, the
venue for the Saturday conference was paid for by the IHR. And even
Walter Mueller has asked that the Saturday conference be called an IHR
event.
It's not so important who gets credit for the Saturday event, which we
organized to rescue something from the wreckage of the defunct two-day
conference. What's important is that this event is taking place at all.
If the IHR had not taken the initiative to organize the Saturday event,
there would be no conference.
[sic - IHR is Mark Weber who has difficulty organising anything of substance,
and it was Harvey Taylor who paid the $5.000 on behalf of the IHR to our
conference. It is Harvey's wish to see the IHR start to function again,
something that has not happened under Weber. Taylor is watching Germar Rudolf's
The Revisionist magazine, and in time Taylor may announce the demise of the
IHR's JHR.
Some time ago I suggested that on account of my having a reasonable track record
for meeting deadlines in productions, I could take over the IHR and run it
efficiently, while Mark Weber becomes the resident research professor, and
continues writing his excellent articles. Mark admitted that he cannot meet
deadlines - and so his new role as Zundel publicist is perhaps more
appropriate, I sincerely hope so. It is a pity that Mark's IHR staff are always
hired by Mark, but then always fired again. There is clearly something wrong
somewhere.
Some Revisionists think that Mark Weber is there to close down organisations -
something he effectively has done with the once flourishing IHR. Nothing of
significance has come out of the IHR - except court cases. I did state to Weber
that it was time to stop litigation processes against Carto - in the hope of
getting money on the quick, and without any personal effort.
His new venture into the white supremacist groups is a worry. After all, one
reason why he and Greg Raven at gun-point wrested the IHR building from
Elizabeth and Willis Carto was because he perceived them to be racists. And now
Weber consorts with known racists? Something is not quite clear to me here. I
now wish Mark Weber well in his endeavour - he has been calling himself the IHR
for a decade now and by his fruits he shall be remembered.
By the way, my use of the term 'racists' is not of the kind indulged in by those
who use it as a shut-up word. Most mature individuals are racists because they
love to be with their own kind, culture and community - as is my preference.
That does not mean I am a supremacist and refuse to interact with the whole
spectrum of human nature. I oppose the multicultural society because it is a
fraud, and is only comfortable to those who have the cushion of protection from
social strife that money provides, viz. the left-liberals. Throughout my recent
travels I met Asian, European and African racists who, however, are not
supremacists. That is the difference one ought to make. I sense this
triumphalism-supremacism of the Jewish kind, the dialectic of win-lose in Mark
Weber's email - Fredrick Toben]
We intend to make sure that proper credit is given to you, Walter and
Hannes for your important work.
Please let me know if you accept our invitation to address the Saturday
conference. If I do not hear back from you by the end of today, I will
assume that you do not accept our invitation, and accordingly you will
not be one of the speakers.
Regards,
Mark
weber@ihr.org
Institute for Historical Review
Tel. 949 - 631 1490
-----------------------------------------------------------
Subject:
Re: ** Internet Broadcast - 2004 IHR Revisionist Conference
Date:
Thu, 22 Apr 2004 19:13:06 +0930
From:
"" <infoadelaideinstitute@adam.com.au>
To:
"" <marc@lemire.com>
CC:
"" <htaylor@syix.com>, "" <weber@ihr.org>, "" <toben@adelaideinstitute.org>,
"" <thetruthisback@yahoo.com>, "" <paul@paulfromm.com>,
"" <hm@deutsches-kolleg.org>
Marc
I have been talking with Harvey Taylor and he claims this is not an IHR
conference. Marc did not know the extent to which we had organised
speakers for the conference because that was an agreement between Walter
and myself.
Marc wanted to invite me to the conference, and I said to him that this cannot
be because I am attending our conference, albeit in truncated from, as
is Ed
Steele and Michele Renouf, both of whom I had invited originally, and
whom Mark
re-invited because they are already on their way, etc.
I explained this to Harvey and Mark and so think it is not quite right
to call
this an IHR conference, etc.
Harvey Taylor is doing the legwork-organisation here in Sacramento, but this
truncated conference must still give full credit to Walter and Hannes because
they did all of the work to get it to this stage. This is what Harvey
Taylor wishes to do when he as MC launches the conference at noon on
Saturday, 24 April 2004.
It is a pity that Walter pulled the plug on this meeting without
consulting me first - an email would have reached me because while
flying in I did read my daily emails - in airport lounges.
The aim is now to make use of the material that has been prepared for
the conference so that it doesn't go to waste.
Walter Mueller has distanced himself from the current re-constituted
conference, and that is his right. However, we have a duty to those who
entrusted us with their good will of putting on a conference to do just that.
Walter also sent out an email wherein he makes his position clear - and
that is
fulfilling his part of the duty to inform individuals of his viewpoint - his
reasons why he pulled the plug.
Adelaide Institute is still there with some of our speakers, and this
means that Harvey's suggestion of calling it an Ernst Zundel Conference
is acceptable.
Walter Mueller unilaterally cancelled the conference and so we are
rescuing what we can.
Harvey Taylor is the one who is managing matters from here.
What say you to this?
When are you arriving in Sacramento?
Please advise.
Fredrick
5. Walter Mueller's 'I was right' justification in unilaterally cancelling the
conference after the German Turn Verein refused to honour its commitment.
22 April 2004
Dear Fellow Patriot!
Today, I start out with a letter from a College
History Professor, who is an expert in revisionism and
has done this for years. His letter is exactly the
essence of what I am trying to say. Read and weep:
[START]
I have been a college history professor and something
of "revisionist" since the 1970s. I have watched (and
on a few occasions participated in) the evolving
history of Revisionism. I remember the initial
breakthrough that came with the publication of Dr.
Butz's study, and the significance of such peripheral
(non-Holocaust centered) critiques as Alfred
Lilienthal's THE ZIONIST CONNECTION. All through the
1980s and '90s Robert Faurisson did much to confirm
that many revisionists were indeed serious scholars,
deserving of attention. Indeed, in the late 1980s Dr.
Ernst Nolte acknowledged as much, and progress was
made with the publication of his EUROPAISCHE
BUERGERKRIEG. It was with some hope that I recall
reading the bombshell Leuchter study and Germar
Rudolf's pioneering work on the camps. Bradley Smith
and others have labored with some success in the
academy. Despite financial difficulties at the IHR, it
has continued its work. And Dr. Robert Countess and
Germar Rudolf have done wonders with THE REVISIONIST.
And among the general public a framework for
discussing "revisionist" ideas has perculated into the
mainstream in the columns of Joseph Sobran and Pat
Buchanan, in the works of Paul Findley and others.
Perhaps more importantly, Norman Finkelstein's THE
HOLOCAUST INDUSTRY and volumes by Novick and others
have raised serious questions in "main public square
of public opinion" that we had been asking for years.
Thus, the signs at the beginning of this millennium
were hopeful that, finally, at last, despite the best
efforts of the "traditional enemies of free speech" to
squelch any opposing views [e.g., as in the Irving
trial], an open discussion of the issues surrounding
the "Holocaust," World War II, and the role of the
Jews might actually occur.
So, I read with disbelief about all the ridiculous
name-calling, character assassination, and political
jockeying surrounding the abortive International
Revisionist Conference. So many rumors, so many egos,
so little common sense--enough idiocy and overweening
personal pride and self-aggrandizement to go around a
thousand times.
No wonder, then, despite the best efforts of those few
tireless souls who continue their work, and the many
advances that we have made, that we continue to lose
and deserve the opprobrium heaped upon our heads. No
wonder the other historians---some well known---that I
have talked with and who are familiar with our cause,
are loath to publicly associate with us.
I have no idea as to personalities---thank God I do
not know some of the individuals involved. Those with
their own little political agendas just need to go
away and "do their own thing." And while I consider
myself to be something of a "racial nationalist," I
think it important to maintain a distance between the
strictly scholarly objectives of "historical
revisionism" and the eventual conclusions that might
be utilized by various groups and movements.
I regret that the conference could not be held. The
chaos and examples of destructive individualism are
not good augurs. Until we get our priorities (and
egos) straight, it will ever be back to the catacombs.
(A former history prof)
[END]
Dr. Fredrick Toben flew into town, after two weeks of
silence, and the "Selbstzerfleischung" began. Dr.
Toben feels that their new revisionist conference
should be renamed to the "Ernst Zundel Conference."
However, the white nationalist groups and Mark Weber
disagree. They want the credit to go to the IHR.
This would have never happened with me in charge. We
had these animals tamed and following the rules.
Speaking of Ernst Zundel, brain midget Bill White and
Dr. Fredrick Toben were asking whether or not I was
critical of Ernst Zundel. I find it real bothersome
that this creep, Bill White, even mentions Ernst
Zundel's name. I have been a supporter of Ernst Zundel
for many years. I have met him personally and he is
one of my heroes. I just received his speech for the
original conference in the mail, and I passed it on to
Harvey Taylor.
The whole Zundel thing is a very strange and upsetting
thing. Just because Ernst Zundel suffers doesn't mean
that I can't be critical about the people around him.
Of all the amenities we featured, the Zundel Raffle
generated the least interest. Even Germar Rudolf, who
I learned to now highly respect, withdrew the offer of
300 free books, once we inquired whether or not we
could give them away for a "donation to Ernst Zundel."
Not that I think he doesn't like Zundel, but people
have a serious concern about the money issue. This is
not the first time this came up. For the planned
conference, Ernst Zundel wrote a personal note to me
and Harvey Taylor that any money collected on his
behalf cannot be given to Paul Fromm and was to be
collected by Harvey Taylor and sent to Ernst Zundel's
attorney by certified check.
In addition, the original conference was dedicated to
Ernst Zundel, the Revisionist Resource Guide was named
after Ernst Zundel, and a donation box was to be place
to collect money for Ernst Zundel. Don't forget the
raffle! Strangely, Ms. Ingrid Rimland distanced
herself from the conference, after a small malheur
with Dr. Toben, and actively started boycotting the
conference.
Today, the organizers of the "new conference" are
fighting whether or not Ernst Zundel should be
involved in their conference. But here is the height
of stupidity: No one wants the Resource Guides, or any
of the very valuable raffle items.
Here is the e-mail discussion between Dr. Toben and
Mr. Weber, which is quite embarrassing:
[START]
Subj: Re: Our talk / The Saturday Conference
Date: 4/22/2004 3:19:24 AM Pacific Daylight Time
From: info@adelaideinstitute.org
To: weber@ihr.org
CC: htaylor@syix.com, chp@vho.org,
toben@adelaideinstitute.org, thetruthisback@aol.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)
Dear Mark
Contrary to what you are saying below my conversation
with Harvey saw things differently, and that our
speakers list will become known soon - and that the
schedule is not in need of being done quickly.
Since when are you in a hurry, Mark? I have been
waited for the topic of your talk since 1 April!
The schedule will fit in those speakers who have made
it to the conference - and some are in transit.
Hence the scheduling is not a matter for dispute as
you imply - flexibility of time allocated can be
arranged on the day because not all speakers need a
full hour.
This means that until the Saturday things will be in
flux and we have to play it by ear because it would
not be fair to those who manage to slip into the
country as late as Saturday AM to then exclude them
from our lineup of speakers.
As to your invitation for me to be a speaker, Mark.
You don't seem to understand that I need not be
invited to this conference because it is our
conference as well - as well as newcomers who have
replaced Walter Mueller's organisation, such as the
IHR.
As I stated to you on the phone there is no need to
make this a battle of the wills, as you are wishing to
do now - we have to rescue and save that which can
be saved. There is no need for triumphalism to creep
into the proceedings and gloat over a failure by
claiming this conference on Saturday is completely
separate from the original as planned, and that it is
now an IHR conference.
Why are you doing this, Mark?
That you did not know the speakers' arrangement we had
with Walter Mueller is a given - and from that
unawareness, it appears to me, flowed your urgent
desire to now call this conference an IHR conference.
Harvey is still the MC and he is in charge of the
speakers' list. This MC position is what unites us for
the cause that now prevents us to make this a purely
IHR conference. As I said to you, it seems
parasitical-cannibalistic to now call the meeting an
IHR meeting.
He has agreed that I will be the first speaker.
Oh, Mark, I thought that you would be asleep by now
because I am the one jet-lagged. My computer time
indicates you sent this email at 3AM, but I may be
wrong.
Over to you.
Fredrick
========
Quoting Mark Weber <weber@ihr.org>:
Dear Fredrick,
This message is to follow up on our conversation
yesterday (Wednesday) afternoon.
I have given further thought to your proposal, and
have discussed it with others, including Harvey. Upon
further reflection, I think it is important that the
Saturday event remain, in name as well as in fact, an
IHR conference dedicated to Ernst Zundel. There are
several reasons why I think that this is important,
and I'd be glad to explain them to you if you wish.
As you'll recall, yesterday I invited you to address
the meeting as a scheduled speaker. You did not give a
clear response, or perhaps I did not understand it.
Please let me know if you accept our invitation to
address the conference. I'd appreciate a response
quickly, because today (Thursday), we will be working
out the schedule.
Whether you accept or not, Harvey and I agree that the
Adelaide Institute (and you) should be given full and
proper credit for its role in making it possible for
several of the speakers to be in northern
California this weekend.
Regards,
Mark
weber@ihr.org
Institute for Historical Review
[END]
Can you imagine that the original sponsor of the
conference, Dr. Toben needs an invitation to be a
speaker? What an outrage.
And here is a wonderful example of what would happen
to you if I would have turned over the mailing list to
the organizer of the "new conference", Jamie Kelso,
frontman for the Stormfront.
Also, it is proof that only I tell the truth. Here,
Jamie Kelso is speaking on behalf of Mark Weber,
Harvey Taylor and you, my friends who were the guests.
For laughing, please get the tissues ready:
[START]
Mr. Walter Mueller and Mr. Hans Huber,
This e-mail is sent to you to put in writing the
telephonic and Internet statements communicated to you
that you are incurring full financial liability for
all damages caused to people who are being
deliberately and maliciously misled and defrauded by
you into believing that no revisionist conference will
be held this Saturday, April 24th in Sacramento.
This e-mail also repeats to you the information that
these damages are likely to be very substantial,
perhaps as high as $100,000. This can only be guessed
at this point because you have sole control of the
e-mail list of ticket buyers who have bought expensive
airline tickets, car rentals, hotel reservations, and
costly changes in their plans. You have been asked
by your co-organizers Harvey Taylor and Mark Weber to
send an e-mail to the 350 or so ticket buyers
informing them that your 3 e-mails declaring that
no event will be held in Sacramento are incorrect and
misleading. You have known for 3 days now that the
revisionist conference has been relocated and is going
forward so that these 350 or so people could have
preserved the value and expense incurred by all of
their travel and schedule plans by coming as scheduled
on Saturday morning to Sacramento. Yet you have given
zero cooperation in either sending out such a
communication yourself or allowing your own two
co-organizers Harvey Taylor and Mark Weber to send out
such a desperately needed and urgently time-critical
communication.
We now face the certain prospect that many people,
perhaps hundreds, who have been intentionally misled
and deceived by you will have lost a lot of money,
easily $1,000 or more in individual cases, by failing
to use non-refundable tickets, or canceling tickets
with a high penalty, or other such costs that you have
known for three days now were totally avoidable. You
have known that only you had the access to the only
e-mail list by which these totally unnecessary damages
to hundreds of people to whom you owe a good-faith
legal responsibility could be avoided.
This e-mail also memorializes our conversations by
phone and by Internet wherein you have been informed
that you, Walter Mueller and Hans Huber, are solely
responsible for causing the damages that have already
been caused and any further damages that will arise in
the next few days as more ticket holders and other
e-mail list recipients intentionally misled by you
incur
further utterly unnecessary monetary and other losses
and damages.
Also, this e-mail memorializes the communications to
you that you can expect to be held liable in court for
all such damages as described above and beyond.
This e-mail is being transmitted at 1:45pm Pacific
time, April 22nd, 2004. The exact text of this e-mail
will be read to you on the phone or to your answering
machine immediately following transmission.
Sincerely, Jamie Kelso
Stormfront
[END]
If you still have any doubt that the white supremacist
movement hasn't hijacked the new conference, you need
to read this again. Imagine, these are the same people
who claim to be superior over everyone else.
And now a word from Germar Rudolf that is probably the
most sensible one. He also points out that he does not
want to be involved with the new conference and its
fighting over the name:
[START]
Dear friends and supporters!
Valued customers and subscribers!
Many of you might have followed the ups and downs of
the revisionist conference that was planned in
Sacramento, CA, for the coming weekend, its planning,
its cancellation, and various attempts of its
resurrection.
Since 1993, I have been invited to almost all
revisionist conferences. Each time I had to carefully
weigh the pros and cons, and ever since I came to live
in the US, I accepted almost all invitations, no
matter who organized the conference. As one of the
major publishers in this field, I think it is a must
to be present at such conferences. It was not
different with the originally planned conference in
Sacramento.
I have, however, decided not to attend any substitute
conference that is planned to take place this coming
weekend. The reason for this are multifold:
a) Most important is my business, which needs every
minute of time I can spare. Since its establishing in
1996 until March of this year, Castle Hill Publishers
was a home-operated business. The growth of my company
- doubling the turnover and number of employees last
year - made it necessary to move it to a proper
business location, an operation that occupied more
time than I thought. All projects are thus delayed,
and I need every day to catch up.
b) From email and phone messages to me I learned that
there is much disagreement over what the allegedly
planned substitute conference should be all about, and
I am not interested in getting involved in such
arguments.
c) I will not risk losing more money and time by
flying out to Sacramento as long as there is a risk
that this substitute conference gets cancelled as
well.
d) I had many books shipped to Sacramento in order to
offer them for sale to the audience, but when I
learned of the conference's cancellation, I had all
books returned. I will therefore not be able to offer
any books.
e) I will try to organize an authentic revisionist
conference in Chicago either later this year or
beginning of next year. I hope that this way
revisionist conferences can finally get into calmer
waters in the future.
I asked Walter Mueller, the organizer of the original
conference, if he would include my company's new
program in a mailout he might make to all original
participants, so that everybody could at least be
informed what is going on in terms of revisionist
publishing activities at my end. However, based on
emails I received from Mr. Mueller I assume that this
might not happen.
Our website's store will soon be updated, with many
more books included in our program, so if you are keen
on learning about our new projects, please feel free
to go to www.vho.org/store.
Sincerely
Germar Rudolf
Castle Hill Publishers
PO Box 257768
Chicago, IL 60625
ph: (773) 769 1121
fax: (413) 778 5749
chp@vho.org
[END]
Let me make a few comments about this hard-working
man. I have been highly critical of Germar Rudolf. One
of the reasons was, because I forgot that he is a
German, and we Germans like everything by the book.
However, in all this he's been forthright honest and
by the numbers. If everyone we had to deal with would
have acted like him, we would have been just fine. I
will ask each and everyone on my mailing list if we
can forward them to Germar Rudolf's bookstore, so he
gets a chance to do business. And this my friends is
how you deal with a situation.
Edgar J. Steele, writer and attorney, just informed me
that the JDL already knows about the "new conference."
And, interestingly, they did not contact the IHR, who
claims to be the organizer, but Edgar J. Steele, to
tell the JDL where it is located:
[START]
Below is an email I sent this morning in reply to the
JDL's latest threat against me. The JDL threat is
contained in Bill Maniaci's email, reproduced
following my response. I'm taking it very seriously.
A good turnout for the Sacramento conference is
crucial. I can't afford to hire bodyguards, but I'll
bet I might be able to count on some burly friends to
be nearby to serve as deterrents to violence by this
madman...at least, I hope so.
-ed
-----Original Message-----
From: Edgar J. Steele [mailto:steele@plainlawtalk.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 9:01 AM
To: Maccabee@charter.net; JDL@jdl.org.il
Subject: RE: [Fwd: Your resurrected hate conference.]
Mr. Maniaci -
You claim to be peaceful, then promise to have your
"good friend" Mark Wiles with you in Sacramento this
weekend to "renew (our) relationship?" The same Mark
Wiles from Nevada, the JDL free-range goon squad
enforcer and former lead henchman for the late Irv
Rubin?
Lessee now, that would be the relationship that
entailed Wiles' threatening my family and me with
physical harm, of course.
That would also be the relationship which saw him
physically assault me in front of the courthouse in
Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, during the Aryan Nations trial.
The relationship which saw your organization issue a
death threat to my little 8-year-old girl, as well as
every other member of my family.
Would that include Mr. Wiles' episode of gun waving in
front of the home of my client at the time of that
trial, too?
Simply because I dared to provide legal representation
to the defendants in that trial. At that time, of
course, I had yet to start writing or speaking out
against terrorists and criminals such as yourself. In
a very real sense, your organization created me, you
know. Just as you create all anti-Semites.
I recognize that this is just your cute way of
threatening me, Mr. Maniaci. Are you also behind the
anonymous death threats I have been receiving this
week?
For all the good it will do, I will turn your threat
over to the FBI and the Sacramento Police Department
and demand physical protection from you and your
Nazi-esque thugs.
Your word means nothing, Mr. Maniaci. It is the word
of a craven coward who threatens little girls. The
word of a man terrified the world might learn the
truth about himself and the terrorist organization of
which he is a member. In short, the word of a bully,
a liar and a thief; just one of so many Jewish thieves
who have stolen our America and robbed us of our
rights, our heritage and our culture.
Interestingly, Israeli Barry Chamish originally had
been on the agenda to provide the very dialogue you
disingenuously mention, from the point of view of
Jewish Supremacists like yourself, but your tactics
have prevented his attendance now. His stated
intention was to convince all attendees of the
incorrectness of our position. Even he is outraged at
your bullyboy methods, so reminiscent of the way that
Israel deals with the Palestinians.
You seek no dialogue. You seek only to shout down and
shut out. When you can't do that, then you and your
followers resort to death threats to little girls and
brazen physical violence. When that doesn't work,
your fellow travelers always have found that a bullet
to the base of the skulls of your enemies is most
effective, as so often demonstrated by you Jews
following the Bolshevik takeover in Russia last
century.
Come on down, Mr. Maniaci. You and your fellow
travelers may kill our children as you have
threatened. You may even kill many of us, as you have
done so many times past and in lands distant. But you
will never break our spirit. You will never silence
us. You will never take our freedom.
Edgar J. Steele
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Maniaci - Jewish Defense League, Chairman
[mailto:Maccabee@charter.net]
Sent: Thursday, April 22, 2004 1:11 AM
To: Edgar Steele
Subject: [Fwd: Your resurrected hate conference.]
Importance: High
Mr. Edgar Steele,
Dear Ed,
I realize that you are one of the preeminent defenders
of the First Amendment, and insist that your rights
therein not be infringed upon. You are going to enjoy
your rights on Saturday. However, by keeping that
location a secret, you are essentially denying our
free speech rights.
If we don't know where you are, then you have trampled
upon the rights that you so vehemently insist that you
protect. Is it not then your moral obligation to tell
us the location so that we may peacefully counter
demonstrate?
You have my word that we will be non-violent. After
all, haven't you said repeatedly that the Jews have no
guts? Be a good sport, besides, my good friend, Mr.
Wiles will be with me and he is anxious to renew your
relationship.
Who are you afraid of, a few old and feeble Jews? Give
me a break!
Shalom,
Bill Maniaci
Jewish Defense League, Chairman
" We sleep safe in our beds because rough men stand
ready in the night
to visit violence on those who would do us harm. "
- George Orwell
NEVER FORGET THE MURDERS OF IRV RUBIN, ZT"L,HY"D,
RABBI MEIR KAHANE, ZT"L,HY"D, AND RABBI BINYAMIN
KAHANE, ZT"L,HY"D
"Al ta'amod 'al dam re'ekha" (Do not stand idle by
your brother's blood!)
ISRAEL OUT OF THE U.N. - THE U.N. OUT OF ISRAEL!!!
KOL YISROEL AREIVIM ZEH LAZEH
ki yad al kes Kah, MILCHAMA HASHEM b'AMALEK, m'dor dor
ha-Mossad le-Modiin ule-Tafkidim Meyuhadim Mossad
Vlamalshinim al thi Tikvah !!!!!
Erets Yisrael Le'Am Yisrael - The Land of Israel
belongs to the People of Israel
The JDL was founded in 1968 by the late Rabbi Meir
Kahane,ZT"L,HY"D
[END]
Maniaci is the same guy that worked with the
Turnverein.
And last but not least a letter from one of our guests
that we recommend as special reading for Jamie Kelso:
[START]
W offer you a hearty thank you for all your efforts on
behalf of the conference that you worked so hard for.
We who know you never doubted
that you did your very best in planning the event.
What is tragic is that the Jewish Defense League
speaks for the entire Jewish community, according to
their letter in which they boasted of trashing your
'freedom of speech' and 'freedom to assemble' by
intimidating the TurnVerein to cancel your conference.
The Hate Laws cover this kind of thing and should be
pursued to the fullest extent.
When historians and scholars seek to discuss any
period in history to find out the facts and to bring
truth to history, they should be applauded. That is
what revisionism is all about and furthermore,
Revisionism is NOT ILLEGAL. It is covered by the
First Amendment, making it perfectly legal to voice,
write, publish all new views that are discovered by
historians. The U.N. Delcaration of Human Rights
makes those 'rights' binding on ALL nations. Freedom
to do research and to speak of the findings is
unlimited. It makes you wonder at the tactics used in
this attack on free speech, and if this is to be
allowed and the perpetrators are not arrested, then
there needs
to be some soul-searching by the citizens of
Sacramento that they are allowing bullies to run the
show. You wonder who will be the next victim of this
subtle terrorism
against the rights of citizens who are supposed to be
protected by our Bill of Rights.
On to bigger and better things, we hope. What is the
truth is eternal. Those who deny it will reap the
whirlwind someday.
Thank you for not divulging the mailing/reservation
list. That was an honorable thing to do.
W/V
[END]
Just picked up Paul Fromm and Diane King from the
airport, going out for dinner with them and the
Odorfers.
As we arrived at the motel, Frank Schmidt and his wife
had already arrived as well. So, the whole bunch of us
got together for a "mini conference." Had wonderful
food, wine and conversation. Paul Fromm, whom I have
never met before, was telling us the newest about
Ernst Zundel, who has become a battle of the wills in
the new conference. Diane King, joined us, a
delightful, attracive woman. Rich Odorfer and his wife
are incredible knowledgable. Odorfer is a writer and
author of a book that should be at the "new
conference," since all the books are with Harvey
Taylor. Odorfer's wife, a German-American, is just as
involved as her husband. And, of course, veteran
revisionist and owner of Heimat Publishers, Frank
Schmidt and his wife. The Odorfer's will leave
tomorrow. I gave Frank Schmidt and his wife as well as
Paul Fromm and Diane King the number for Harvey
Taylor, so they can check out the "new conference."
Letter from America!
Fredrick Toben - in Sacramento, California
22 April 2004
"Life is trouble, only death is not. To be alive is to take off your belt and
look for trouble."
That's what Zorba the Greek said in a moment of despair as his friend asked for
the meaning of life. When, together with his friend who had financed a project,
the whole structure fell apart, exclaimed "Let's dance" - and they did the now
famous Zorba dance.
The above comes to mind as I sit here in Sacramento in a friend's home,
reflecting on the full extent of that email news item I received when entering
the USA after spending a pleasant night in Brighton, England.
Walter Mueller, the organiser of our conference from the Sacramento end had
unilaterally pulled the plug on the conference because the venue managers had
cancelled his booking. The details of this will keep a number of individuals
busy for a while - blaming the Jews, etc. But there is no need to blame the
Jews when we have those who bend to their pressure. The cancelled Revisionist
conference in Lebanon comes to mind.
There was also talk of some extremist white nationalists taking over the
conference, and Mark Weber - IHR- is, as far as Walter Mueller is concerned,
heavily involved in this. Walter Mueller distanced himself from such overt
expression of politics and advised his 350-odd individuals who were going to
attend the meeting, that it was definitely off.
There was no attempt at finding an alternate venue because Walter Mueller had
done everything correctly to this point, i.e. advising the venue officials what
he was on about in asking that the conference be held in their hall. He and MC
for the conference, Harvey Taylor, had given many media interviews on the
matter.
Also, something that was a first for any conference, through a daily email
bulletin, Walter Mueller informed in absolute detail on the progress of the
conference. Usually conferences are planned by a committee and outsiders do not
have a look into how things are developing. For example the settling of the
speakers' list is always one of compromise - who accepts and who declines, and
who at the last moment is able to jump in and replace a speaker who cancels at
the last moment.
I was such a replacement at the 2002 IHR conference when Fritz Berg pulled out,
and then Jurgen Graf could not attend owing to his wife's illness. Instead of
Jurgen and I sharing half an hour of Fritz's talk time, Mark Weber advised that
I had a full hour to fill. And so one has to improvise, something that was not
too difficult especially after my just having attended the TBR conference in
Washington. However, as a large number of individuals attending the IHR
conference also attended the TBR conference that weekend before, I had to make
certain that I did not repeat myself - and that goes especially for the jokes.
There is nothing worse than to hear a speaker a second time and he trots out
the same old worn joke.
So, I was prepared for anything to happen at Sacramento, even going so far as to
provide Walter Mueller with a video that would serve to cover my possible
absence as the first speaker of the conference.
Mueller's detailed emails became a classic in that the recipients gained a full
feel of what it takes to mount a conference, especially the ups and downs that
normal human interaction brings with it. Students of literature are fully aware
of this normal behaviour that we call ' the battle of the wills'. Others would
label it the 'ego thing', but I shy away from using Freudian concepts because
they are too base and they do not embrace the human potential that resides in
our ideals, from which most individuals gain their sustenance in time of
demanding stress. Hence the importance in such times to have a balance between
body and mind, not one or the other.
So, through his emails Walter Mueller took us on that roller-coaster ride that
most individuals experience privately when planning anything. He objectified
the matter to the point that some felt it was too much of a gossip shop.
However, I delighted in it because it is better to have a dialogue (with lots of
monologues) than nurture a festering them-us hatred. Walter got it off his chest
in often explicit and basic terminology. For many academics it was a fresh
breeze that was blowing from Sacramento. There were others who visualised a
tempestuous and destructive storm.
But anyone who has been in public, and who has organised things, will know that
the whole range of human endeavour is ever present when things are planned.
Thus we had massive criticism from within the Revisionist camp - and I can hear
them now with their "I told you so!"
Interestingly, when planning things, one does listen to critical voices that
inevitably multiply as the date of a set function nears. However, as the
responsibility rests with the individuals who have come together for the
purpose of staging an event, listening to someone does not necessarily mean
acting on such advice.
On a number of occasions I wrote emails stating " I hear you...". And so
although I am terribly disappointed that Walter unilaterally cancelled the
conference - without consulting me - it is not a devastating blow. The
cancellation has brought with it other phenomena that are also of interest.
Some Jewish group is reported to be crowing of a victory, something I find
perhaps also a normal reaction - but such an attitude does not help in
encouraging dialogue. In fact it brings out and further accentuates the them-us
hatred that such groups propagate.
And now to current developments.
Mark Weber is desirous in picking up the pieces of the conference, something
that is to my liking, as I, too, have not yielded to the situation and claimed
defeat.
However, Mark wishes the conference to be known as a new conference and call it
an IHR Revisionist conference. I disagree with that because, unbeknown to him,
our list of speakers practically remains the same. After I mentioned this he
quickly added Ingrid Zundel-Rimland to the list who will be interviewed per
telephone.
I also stated that it seems parasitical and cannibalistic to call this conference
a new and IHR conference because the matter is not new, but a mere
re-constituting of something that Walter Mueller had been putting together for
many months. it would be too presumptuous of Mark Weber to do that, and I did
say to him it smacks of triumphalism of the basest sort where individuals are
gleefully gloating at the breakdown of Walter Mueller's work.
Such divisiveness I cannot see any value in entertaining. Who profits from such?
The enemy can gloat over it all but surely those who have a love of truth and
beauty cannot be anything but rather sad that we have had this breakdown.
Hence, the positive attitude needs to be retained, and Harvey Taylor expressed
this quite well to me.
The ever diplomatic Harvey Taylor, who remains Master of Ceremonies, suggested
that the conference be re-named the Ernst Zundel Revisionist Conference,
something that I agreed would make it acceptable to me. Harvey Taylor thus
proceeded to make a firm booking at a venue where the conference will now be
held just for one day, on Saturday, 24 April, beginning at 12 noon until 10pm.
I had difficulties accepting that Mark Weber offer me an invitation to our own
conference, albeit now re-structured. Further, the speakers that did not cancel
their flights, and are on their way to Sacramento, will be offered their
opportunity to address the meeting.
I did make a request to Walter Mueller that, owing to the fact that we were the
other half of the organisation that sponsored speakers, he send through his
extensive email list a request from us that individuals should still continue
to come to Sacramento, especially those who have paid up. Also, it would be
good if the number of individuals was sizeable because in this way the motel
bookings would not be that drastically reduced so as to financially hurt the
venue that accepted the block accommodation booking.
When you arrive, please contact Harvey Taylor at Sacramento: hataylor@syix.com;
tel: 1-530-6562-444
Stay tuned - from the battlefront.
Fredrick Toben
Adelaide Institute
©-2004 Adelaide Institute
