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