X-Message-Number: 1585 Date: 11 Jan 93 17:43:18 EST From: Saul Kent <> Subject: CRYONICS: Reply To Dave Pizer As I said in my reply to Scott Herman, I will not answer accusatory questions on Cryonet regarding my past involvement in cryonics unless someone makes direct accusations against me. Since Dave Pizer made no such accusations regarding my involvement in the Cryonics Society Of New York and Cryospan, I have nothing to say at this time about the matter. As I have stated before, I will be happy to discuss openly my involvement in any aspect of cryonics history with anyone who is sincerely interested in learning about it. Dave's attempt to place the blame on me for his failure to raise enough money to purchase the building in Scottsdale, Arizona is inappropriate since I initially supported the purchase of the building and never opposed it. His characterization of my opposition to Carlos Mondragon's presidency as my "war on Carlos" is also inappropriate. My decision to help Paul Wakfer document in writing the opposition to Carlos was as a direct result of Dave's request that such documentation be submitted to the Alcor Board. His suggestion that he would have been able to raise the money for the building if I had postponed my "war on Carlos" is thus nothing more than an evasion of his responsibility in the matter. Dave says that: "I do not think that winning your (FDA) case is going to be as easy as you have suggested in some of your writings and your Life Extension Newsletter. It appears to me you may be making the same kind of miscalculations that you made in the Dick Jones legal battle." I've never said or even suggested that winning the war that the FDA has been waging against Bill Faloon and me would be "easy". On the contrary, our efforts to stop the FDA from putting us out of business have been extraordinarily difficult and challenging. Dave's characterization of our legal fight against Dick Jones' relatives as a "miscalculation" is inappropriate. The decision to fight that battle was not a calculated one, but was a matter of moral outrage. At the time, every Alcor Board member (and every other Alcor member who knew what was going on) experienced that sense of moral outrage. The decision to sue Dick Jones' relatives was strongly supported by every Alcor Board member (with the exception of Mike Darwin). My actions in working with our attorneys to prosecute the case were reported directly to The Board without any complaints. The first time I ever heard of Dave Pizer's criticism of my efforts in the Dick Jones case was in his written response to the written criticism against Carlos that I helped to compile. Now I hear it again in his answer to my questions to Keith Henson about other Alcor members who think that my active involvement with Alcor is a "threat" to Alcor. Dave's criticism is not only *very* late in coming, but is also vague and accusatory. Dave says I should admit my "major mistakes" in dealing with the case as if his contention that I made "major mistakes" is a foregone conclusion. What "major mistakes" did I make in the Dick Jones case, Dave? Now that you've accused me of making such mistakes, I think it is only fair that you tell the readers of Cryonet just what those "major mistakes" were. Dave suggests that my "ideas" are a threat to Alcor. What ideas, Dave? Saul Kent Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=1585