Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fwd: David Lane's Response to Doug Marman's newest book

Expand Messages
  • mishmisha9
    A cross post from X-Eckankar_The Chains-of-Eck--(thanks, ... tygerpurr wrote: http://elearn.mtsac.edu/dlane/wholetruthresponse3.htm In Search of
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 21 6:24 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      A cross post from X-Eckankar_The Chains-of-Eck--(thanks,
      Tygerpurr for posting this):

      --- In X-Eckankar_The-Chains-of-Eck@yahoogroups.com,
      tygerpurr <no_reply@...> wrote:

      http://elearn.mtsac.edu/dlane/wholetruthresponse3.htm

      In Search of Paul Twitchell:

      David Lane's Response to Doug Marman's newest book

      Part 2b of 14 parts

      [to read part one of this series go to
      http://elearn.mtsac.edu/dlane/wholetruthresponse1.htm%5d

      [to read part two (a) of this series got to
      http://elearn.mtsac.edu/dlane/wholetruthresponse2.htm





      THE PREFACE, part two (pages 29-32)

      The Whole Truth, Page 29 and page 30:

      In these two pages, Doug, you raise the issue over why Eckankar sued
      Professor Ed Gruss, L.A. Baptist College, and James Peebles. You
      write: "Weren't all these things [the lawsuits, newspaper ads, etc]
      aimed at trying to counter the potential spread of false information
      by the SCP?" You further write a few lines down from this, "Darwin
      hoped his actions would avoid the spreading of false information."

      Of course, the simplest thing would have been the most obvious: talk
      with Peebles and talk with Gruss directly about the matter. But this
      didn't happen.

      Instead Eckankar proceeds to take out a large ad in several major
      newspapers claiming, among other things, that "Eckankar has requested
      these groups to delete Eckankar from their material and asked for a
      letter of apology. MEETINGS TO CORRECT THIS HAVE BEEN IGNORED [my
      emphasis]. AS A RESULT [my emphasis again], in order to protect the
      rights of Eckankar and its members to uphold the important rights of
      all religious minorities, Eckankar has filed one lawsuit in Los
      Angeles and another in Minneapolis."

      http://vclass.mtsac.edu:930/phil/ad1.htm

      http://vclass.mtsac.edu:930/phil/ad2.htm

      This claim, as boldly printed in various newspaper advertisements
      taken at significant expense by Eckankar, is factually untrue and
      wholly inaccurate.

      1). Eckankar NEVER tried to set up a meeting with Jim Peebles. They
      sued him without ANY warning whatsoever.

      2) Eckankar NEVER tried to set up a meeting with Professor Ed Gruss or
      the college he worked at. They sued him and his college without ANY
      warning whatsoever. In point of fact, Ed Gruss had NEVER even read
      Peebles' paper UNTIL AFTER HE WAS SUED.

      As Professor Gruss stated in his deposition (page 34, dated May 17,
      1979), "I took the material from the file [Gruss had a file on many
      new religions, including Eckankar], and I told her 'I haven't had a
      chance to read this stuff. And I only have ONE copy. So when you're
      finished with it, return it." What did Gruss give to Debbie Quin who
      came to his office for information about Eckankar? Gruss states (page
      34, May 17, 1979): "I gave her THE TIGER'S FANG paperback, which is by
      Twitchell. I gave her the Peebles paper. And I gave her a Spiritual
      Counterfeits page and a half treatment that I think was entitled
      Return from the Void."

      Thus, in his own deposition with Eckankar's attorney, Professor Gruss
      clearly stated that he hadn't read the material and in his telephone
      conversation with me (January 26, 2001) stated that he hadn't read
      Peebles paper until he and his college were served legal papers from
      Eckankar.

      You allege Doug that SCP's forthcoming journal is what triggered these
      factually inaccurate ads. If Eckankar wanted to "avoid the spreading
      of false information" (as you claim), then why do these very
      advertisements lie about proposed meetings (and requested apologies
      and retractions)? Even SCP prior to its publication (which was months
      away) agreed to meet with Darwin Gross. And Eckankar never set up any
      proposed meetings with Gruss or Peebles before they slapped them with
      a 2 and a 1/2 million dollar lawsuit. The phrase "As a result" in this
      ad is also misleading and inaccurate, since there was no warning shot
      whatsoever (not even a hint of one) given to Gruss or Peebles. As a
      sidebar it should be noted that when Ed Gruss was asked if he had sent
      Peebles paper to anybody at the Spiritual Counterfeits Project, he
      said no.

      It is interesting to note that Eckankar took out ads 13 days AFTER
      learning that Ed Gruss had NOT sent any material to SCP.

      Furthermore, this very advertisement doesn't explain to its readers
      that Eckankar secured a copy of Peebles' report under false pretenses.
      Mike Noe, as Gruss' deposition makes very clear, never represented
      himself as a member of Eckankar but rather said to Gruss that he was
      associated with the Spiritual Counterfeits Project.

      As for me, even my name shows up in Eckankar's deposition of Professor
      Gruss. On the last two pages of the document, Eckankar's attorney asks
      Professor Gruss (page 38):

      Q. Eckankar's attorney: "Do you know David Lane?"

      A. Professor Ed Gruss: "The name is familiar. I think he was mentioned
      by Peebles as a friend or something."

      Q. Eckankar's attorney: "Did you ever send a copy of the ----

      A. Professor Ed Gruss: "No. You already asked."

      Q. Eckankar's attorney: "-- of the Peebles memo to Mr. Lane?"

      At this stage, Professor Gruss' own attorney comments to his client,
      "Okay. Make sure he [Eckankar's attorney] finishes his question before
      you answer."

      [the following is on page 39]:

      A. Professor Gruss (identified on this page as the "Witness"): "My
      answer is no."

      The Whole Truth, Pages 30 and 31:

      Doug writes on the bottom of page 30, "To say that David's term paper
      caused a "tremendous rift among the ECK disciples" is clearly untrue."

      The reason I even mentioned a rift was not because it was merely my
      impression, but rather because Sri Darwin Gross, the Living Eck Master
      at the time, talked about the term paper in several different
      contexts. For instance, the head of Eckankar wrote:

      "My biography is coming out sometime this year and will put a lot of
      things straight. Don't get involved with people who gossip or have
      things to say about Eckankar that are defamatory. This is true also
      about the David Lane MANUSCRIPT that has been CIRCULATED amongst MANY
      of the CHELAS. His untruths will eventually catch up to him."

      Prior to this in October of 1978 (just a few months after I finished
      my independent studies term paper, The Making of a Spiritual Movement,
      for CSUN), Darwin Gross wrote about it in the official Eckankar
      publication, The Mystic World, which is sent exclusively to paid
      members of the organization. Darwin said this:

      "Those who have withstood the attacks have not been affected by the
      material written by people who have not done their research or
      homework, and gotten the facts straight. These attackers are on a very
      low scale of spiritual [sic] according to the survival scale. There
      have been some manuscripts being passed around that are trying to
      degrade ECKANKAR, its teaching as well as its present spiritual leader
      and past spiritual leader

      Furthermore, I was informed by Steve Gazda, a highly placed
      administrator at Eckankar's international headquarters then located in
      Menlo Park, California, that my paper was generating tremendous
      conflict and discussion amongst "many" Eckists (his words, not mine).
      Steve Gazda and Bill Popham were the two officials who interviewed me
      at Eckankar's headquarters after my paper had come out. Years later
      Steve Gazda left Eckankar and contacted me out of the blue and
      reiterated (but with much more detail) how much controversy my paper
      had generated even before the SCP journal was published.

      Dr. Bluth, former President of Eckankar, Ed Pecen (who described
      himself as Paul Twitchell's sometime bodyguard and confidante), and
      other former (and current) Eckists almost immediately made numerous
      copies of my term paper when I first released it in the late Spring of
      1978. Paul Gayeski, in particular, made numerous copies and sent them
      throughout the United States. After I came back from India that summer
      (working as Professor Juergensmeyer's research assistant), I was
      flooded with inquires from Eckists from all over North America.

      I say all of this to simply underline my point that the term paper
      generated lots of controversy BEFORE the SCP Journal came out a year
      and a half later. Yes, the SCP journal certainly caused more
      controversy, but even Darwin Gross claimed that the SCP journal itself
      was taken from my own work. Indeed, he sent out a worldwide memo which
      stated: "The SCP material taken from a college thesis submitted by
      David Lane was not completely researched and is untrue." He went on to
      say in that same memo, "All these people are under the Kal [negative]
      forces..."

      Here is a photocopy of that world-wide letter:
      http://elearn.mtsac.edu/dlane/doc15.htm

      The Whole Truth, Pages 31:

      On this page, Doug, you talk about my claim that a business
      consultant, Bill Popham, was hired by Eckankar to review the impact of
      my paper on Eckankar. You write, "David's claim that Eckankar was
      trying to prevent some kind of rift in its membership over his term
      paper is clearly inaccurate and doesn't even match the timeline."

      Again, it wasn't my claim. This is precisely what Steve Gazda and Bill
      Popham told me. I didn't even know who Bill Popham was until he called
      me completely out of the blue one afternoon when I was living in El
      Cerrito near Berkeley.

      Bill Popham (not me) said he was hired as a business consultant by
      Eckankar to study the impact of my paper on Eckankar's membership.
      Those were his words. He also did NOT say he was member of Eckankar
      when he introduced himself to me. Furthermore, when I was invited to
      meet with him and Steve Gazda at Eckankar's international headquarters
      he had copious notes that he had written down about my term paper. We
      spent a couple of hours going over line by line of my term paper. This
      meeting was also taped by them at the time.

      Both of them said that they were trying to prevent a further rift in
      their membership and thus they were eager to discuss many aspects of
      my research. Later on during this meeting we discussed the impact of
      the SCP journal, but almost the entire meeting was centered on
      reviewing my term paper.

      So, Doug, you were not at that meeting. You didn't get an unsolicited
      phone call from Bill Popham who introduced himself as a business
      consultant. You didn't attend that meeting at Eckankar's international
      headquarters. You also didn't get another unsolicited phone call from
      Steve Gazda, who later defected from Eckanka, explaining once again
      how much controversy my paper generated.

      Again, I say all of this because your discussion of this event (one in
      which you were NOT a participant) only reflects what YOU think
      transpired. It does not reflect what Bill Popham and Steve Gazda
      personally told me. Of course, if you step back for a moment, and
      actually look at the timeline, you would have soon realized that the
      SCP journal had NOT even been published when Bill Popham contacted me.

      I lived in El Cerrito, Doug, from January 1979 to June of 1979. The
      SCP journal didn't come out until the Fall of 1979, at which time I
      had relocated to Hayward, California, in order to teach at Moreau High
      School. I realize you want to downplay my claims, but you neglect to
      realize that these were not merely "my" claims, but those of Popham,
      Gazda, and a host of other Eckists. Even the former Editor of the ECK
      World News, David Stewart told me of the controversy that my paper was
      generating. Even my first appearance at Eckankar's international
      headquarters to meet with David met with much discussion.

      The Whole Truth, Page 31, par 3:

      When you, Doug write, "However, David's suggestion that it was only
      because his manuscript was so thoroughly researched that Eckankar did
      not pursue legal actions..." it reveals a particularly troublesome
      trait in your entire treatise on my book. Your repeated inaccuracies
      when directly paraphrasing me. I never said "thoroughly researched", Doug.

      I said instead, "thoroughly documented." This is key because if what I
      wrote was NOT thoroughly documented, then Eckankar most certainly
      would have sued me. They also didn't sue SCP because they too had
      thoroughly documented their case. Now this doesn't mean that I was
      right and SCP was right and that our research was flawless. What it
      does mean, however, was that the allegations we made about Eckankar
      and Paul Twitchell were referenced and cited.

      Now you may think that this is merely a quibble on my part, but it is
      not. Your tendency (and we will see it again as we go through your
      book, page by page, line by line) to inaccurately paraphrase me allows
      you to create misleading and inaccurate arguments concerning what I
      actually said in the text versus what you "think" I said in the text.

      The Whole Truth, Page 32 :

      On this page you raise the issue of whether or not Eckankar threatened
      to sue me over my term paper. The facts speak for themselves.

      1. Eckankar's first letter to me ended with this request, "And we
      would very much like have a copy of your completed report for our
      files if this is possible. You may send it to my attention and I will
      pass it along to Sri Darwin Gross." I was 20 years old when I received
      this reply back from them. Naively (now in retrospect, very naively),
      I thought that Darwin Gross would respond to my paper after I kindly
      sent a copy to his Secretary as requested. No such luck.

      2). On July 5, 1977, Alan H. Nichols, attorney at law representing
      Eckankar, sent a certified letter to my mother's home. In that letter
      Eckankar threatened me with legal action if I published my term paper.
      Eckankar's lawyer claimed my paper was defamatory. I eventually
      contacted my sister, Kim, who was a practicing attorney, and she wrote
      back to Eckankar's lawyer stating that it was entirely inappropriate
      for him to have threatened such a thing in the first place.

      3) Eckankar never did sue me over the content of my paper and they
      toned down their rhetoric after my sister wrote them a series of very
      terse legal letters on the matter.

      4) Later, of course, Eckankar did sue me over the cover of my 1983
      edition of the Making of a Spiritual Movement. But that is another
      subject we will tackle under a different heading.

      In light of Eckankar's habit of legally threatening individuals who
      write critically about them or who unknowingly "publish" one photocopy
      of an unread term paper, I was distinctly convinced that, yes,
      Eckankar does indeed want to "undermine any open and objective
      investigation." Ironically, it was precisely because Eckankar
      threatened to sue J. Gordon Melton of ISAR over his encyclopedia entry
      on Eckankar that he eventually contacted me personally.

      Let's review for effect here: Eckankar threatened to sue me (a 20/21
      year old undergraduate student), Jim Peebles (another 20 year old
      undergraduate student), Professor Ed Gruss (who had the temerity to
      xerox one copy of Peebles' paper), L.A. Baptist College (for employing
      such a devious miscreant), Woodrow Nichols (who also wrote a small
      paper on Eckankar for a Christian journal), and Dr. J. Gordon Melton
      for an encyclopedia entry on Eckankar.

      And all of these threatened lawsuits took place within what time fram?
      1977 to 1979.

      So, yes, Doug I most sincerely did think that Eckankar was increasing
      its efforts to undermine any "open and objective investigation into
      its founder's past." Dr. Melton certainly had that impression as well,
      and even stated as such in his first unsolicited letter to me.

      NEXT, Preface, part three (pages 33-46)

      --- End forwarded message ---
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.