From freevoice@igc.apc.org Tue Dec 27 15:35:36 1994 Received: from fnord.tlg.org (root@fnord.tlg.org [140.174.153.100]) by fido.wps.com (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id PAA03226; Tue, 27 Dec 1994 15:35:36 -0800 Received: from mail.igc.apc.org (root@mail.igc.apc.org [192.82.108.38]) by fnord.tlg.org (8.6.9/8.6.9) with ESMTP id PAA16790; Tue, 27 Dec 1994 15:35:32 -0800 Received: from igc2.igc.apc.org (igc2.igc.apc.org [192.82.108.39]) by mail.igc.apc.org (8.6.9/Revision: 1.54 ) with SMTP id PAA05080; Tue, 27 Dec 1994 15:34:14 -0800 Received: (from freevoice) by igc2.igc.apc.org (8.6.9/Revision: 1.5 ) id PAA18603; Tue, 27 Dec 1994 15:34:14 -0800 Date: Tue, 27 Dec 1994 15:34:14 -0800 From: Freevoice Message-Id: <199412272334.PAA18603@igc2.igc.apc.org> To: deke@fido.wps.com, maile@fido.wps.com Subject: For Tai (but also, Deke, Maile, Mike) Status: OR Dear Tai, It seems that I'm being drawn in for a tit for tat agrument with Jon Bekken (and by association the GEB/GST) which I was avoiding, for what I thought was the longterm good of the union. I sent you my response to Jon, and I'll include his letter at the b ottom so that you can draw your own conclutions (BTW, can you send me a copy of my own letter to Jon, I did it online, and forgot to send myself a copy). I take Jon to be threatening "expulsions, embezzlement proceedings, and the like", if we don't answe r his questions the way he has posed them (which by the way seems to be how FC has framed the questions, though my impresions are all second hand). I want to make a statement of principle, which is not just about Philly's particular situation but should be a standard of activity within the Union on all levels, and which is why I won't comply with the process as its currently presented to me. Before any entity in the union is going to place blame, make charges, or compel testimony it should be incumbent on them to actually read the documents that relate to the topics, and further to interview concerned parties about what there understandings and rec ollections are, and then produce the documentation for its case. Further, whoever is being investigated should recieve a clear and unambiguious statement as to what is being investigated, and how they might have transgressed accepted protocals. Lastly, if it is deemed that sufficient cause exists to pursue the investigation, that there should be a public and accountable inquiry into the matter. As I read Jon's letter, the argument is not whether we misused the funds, but who misused the funds and whether it was intentional "It may be that what appears on the surface to be deliberate misappropriation of IWW funds was in fact inadvertant careless ness..." This strikes me as a way of asigning guilt or wrong doing without the benefit of a hearing or investigation. For us to even consider responding "WHO" and "WHEN" questions is give credibility to our "deliberate or careless misapporiation of IWW funds". Frankly, I think that FC knows that he doesn't have a case and is trying to get us to either give him more information to help attack us, get us to violate something in the process which will then be cause to expell us, or to basically slander us in general. The IWW should do better than the Spanish Inquisition or McCarthy hearings. We will gladly respond to, and engage an open, public process, wherein which we have clearly stated rights, but this has the credibility of a witch trial, and deserves the respect that such proceedings deserve. We have always complied with all requireme nts of the IWW that we were aware of and seemed to apply to us. In Solidarity, Josie, x341890 BTW The criticism of the GEB/GST is not meant to refer to you, Deke, Mike, Dave, Zimya or anyone else personally. Jon Bekken's letter FW Josie, It is my understanding that funds -- explicitly requested to support IWW organizing activities at Temple University -- were transferred in the form of copiers to the nonexistent Patterson Group and to FW Ervin, who also received IWW funds. FWs Rush and Chase have informed me that until FW Rush telephoned an inquiry there were no reports, and that thus far they have been unable to ascertain when the funds were transferred out or on whose authority. The matter is extremely serious, and I and some others are searching for a resolution that will not tear the organization apart. It makes a very real difference WHEN these transfers occurred. So far no one has been able to get a clear statement on that. It makes a very real difference WHO authorized and carried out these transfers. It may be that what appears on the surface to be deliberate misappropriation of IWW funds was in fact inadvertant carelessness, and that we can thereby avoid the need for expulsions, embezzlement proceedings, and the like. I earnestly hope that this is the case. But responses such as the one you just sent me, which respond to none of the issues I raised, leave me little hope that this is the case. I hope the Branch will be more forthcoming, so that we can find a resolution to this crisis that everyone can live with. Jon Bekken