A number of former Alliance members have received an unsolicited newsletter in their mailboxes in recent weeks and days.
Most people who had been receiving the newsletter from Erich Gliebe had ceased their pledge payments long ago but yet were still getting it nonetheless. Gliebe’s successors have inherited this list of names and it would seem most are still not interested.
It appears what few were still paying dues were mostly elderly people without access to the internet. Some of them whom we know had contacted us to inquire as to what was happening and we filled them in.
We have received a number of copies of this newsletter from various supporters who have alerted us to it. As they have no use for it, they’ve forwarded it to us. Many others still are alerting us to receiving the unsolicited mail and are asking if we want them to forward. We thank you all for giving us a heads up but no, we already have more copies of this than we need.
In reviewing this newsletter we find a number of misstatements and things untrue that need correcting. We provide comment on that here for those who received the unsolicited mailing.
1. The Library
The library, both Dr. Pierce’s books and the organizational library are corporate property. Nonetheless they were sold by Gliebe and purchased by Williams as private property and removed from the national office.
Williams says that the library will once again become corporate property upon his death. If we take him at his word, the library from his viewpoint is his own property until his death.
As it stands now, the books are considered as Williams’ private property. They now reside in a building that is Williams’ private property that is located also on Williams’ private real estate. No matter how much he refers to the new Alliance office in Tennessee, it is simply not a fact until that property and that building are transferred in ownership from Williams to the National Alliance. Otherwise, it is just playing with words.
Even though there has been an unethical sale the library is still a corporate asset and belongs to the National Alliance. We will work to restore the corporate ownership and its return to the national office. Williams is of course welcome to keep his land and his building as they are owned by him solely.
2. The McCorkill Bequest
The newsletter mentions that the National Alliance has an attorney representing it on the appeal of the case.
This is not true. Mr. Hughes is the attorney representing the estate. He does not represent the National Alliance and made statement of that fact to the Canadian court when Gliebe was chairman. Mr. Hughes’ fees are paid from the estate, not the National Alliance.
Gliebe had no attorney to speak for the National Alliance in that case and nor does Williams.
Since the Canadian court in New Brunswick struck down the McCorkill bequest, the case has already set precedent with another case there. Another estate has been interfered with by the government because the bequest was challenged as being racist which is against the laws of public policy there. In this case it was a Jamaican immigrant who denied a portion of his $400,000 estate because one of his two daughters had a child by a White man.
There are other similar cases now in cue in Canada and thus these rulings on the basis of the McCorkill decision further complicate the issue of a reversal unfortunately.
3. The Lawsuit
A. The newsletter states that NARRG’s only demand was that Erich Gliebe step down as chairman and appoint someone else.
This is incomplete and misleading. NARGG’s demand included the stipulation that the person appointed must meet the approval of the NARRG team. Will Williams does not meet our approval and nor does Kevin Strom for that matter.
Williams ridiculously infers that we simply wanted Gliebe gone and anyone Gliebe appointed would be alright with us. This is very simpleminded.
Also it would be well to reiterate again that the lawsuit also includes Gliebe board members Ryan Maziarka, whose personal residence continues to be used as the corporations VA business address under Williams and more significantly, Jayne Cartwright who is still on the Williams Board of Directors and has been reassigned to the role of Secretary of the NA. Under Erich Gliebe, she held the position of Treasurer. It is very significant we think that this person who is a very close confidant of Erich Gliebe continues to serve as an official with the Williams team. Another Gliebe associate, John Mclaughlin has been added to the board. Erich Gliebe had sold Mr. McLaughlin artifacts of Commander George Lincoln Rockwell that were owned by the National Alliance several years ago.
B. It is further said that the NARRG team wishes to install a certain member of the team as chairman. This also is not true.
The NARRG team cannot select a chairman. The selection must come from an installed Board of Directors. Some of those board members will likely come from the team. Keep in mind that the team includes others who are not plaintiffs. Thus there is a wider selection for board positions and chairman.
Keep in mind also, that the chairman’s position under our new management will be nothing like it has been under the Gliebe years and now continues with Williams. We simply cannot afford to set the organization up for another round of failure putting sweeping powers and faith in just a single individual. Doing such is only for the rare exceptional personalities recognized by almost everyone. Currently even among the best of us, such a personality is not at this time available. Read our Pledge of Intent for further explanation.
C. The newsletter says that the NARRG team as former members have no standing with the court. This is not true.
It is because the court has recognized the rightful standing of the team that we have carried the lawsuit this far. If we did not have standing the case would have ended on April 16th of 2014. In our 2nd hearing last October our standing was once again affirmed by a different judge.
In our opinion neither Williams nor Strom would have any standing with the court as they haven’t been members in over a decade and also have personal issues that would be disqualifiers for them both from membership.
D. As an observation we are continually noting the multiple times our adversaries make much ado about the amount of money we’ve spent executing this legal action. It is once again repeated in this newsletter. Erich Gliebe has commented on it in another recent session with the SPLC.
We see this as a demonstration of our resolve and commitment to save the National Alliance. The amount of money we raise from our many supporters also shows the resolve and commitment of these dedicated people as well. As we’ve mentioned elsewhere, our supporters include members who go all the way back to the 1970’s, they include people who have worked for Dr. Pierce at the office as well a newer people who have joined around the time of or since Dr. Pierce’s passing. Our NARRG team includes some of these decades long members.
However, being able to execute this lawsuit clearly shows that we have some considerable support for the reforming and restoration of the National Alliance. We think both Gliebe and Williams are simply envious of the support given us.
Certainly it would have been most optimal to have this money available for promoting the National Alliance but unfortunately we must first regain the organization to apply money to. Without our success, there is no hope for the National Alliance.
And in the grander scope of things, the money we’ve spent so far really isn’t that much considering what is at stake. Yes, this is so important that we will gladly commit more to save Our Cause.
E. The newsletter states that the NARRG attorney was quoted as saying that he found the views of the National Alliance as being “repulsive”. This is not true.
The attorney never said anything of the kind. This was reported to Williams by Erich Gliebe right after the first hearing on April 16, 2014 and Williams repeated it on the internet. Williams and Gliebe have been working closely together for a long time now carrying out their individual interests of which they work mutually together to accomplish. We know for certain that they continue to keep in close touch with one another.
What the attorney did say was simply that he did not agree with the National Alliance. Gliebe embellished the matter to suit his spin last year as does Williams now. That has no bearing with the corporate matters that the attorney is working on for us.
Remember, this is a corporate case, a business case. And as such the National Alliance is very much the principal part.
At that same first hearing Erich Gliebe did accuse the NARRG team as being of the same type as admitted multiple murderer Frazier Glenn Miller, which is a ridiculous statement if there ever was one.
The truth of the matter is that this murderer and documented government informer is a decades long close personal friend of Williams. And they are still in touch with one another even now as Miller awaits trial.
F. In a case like this where there are hefty punitive damages being sought against defendants without means of immediate satisfaction and payment of the award, of course no attorney is going to take such a case on contingency. That goes without saying. This is no basis to judge the merit of the case. A better basis is the fact that our case has standing with the courts by two different judges and as such we may continue to proceed with our case. And we shall.
G. Williams mentions he thanked NARRG for forcing Gliebe to step down and his efforts for “healing” the NA were “spurned”. His “thanking” was more of an act of trying to be “cute”. You can read in his SPLC interview what he considered as “thanking”. It’s pretty bizarre. Read it for yourself.
4. Comment on Membership
Williams has done an about face; some backtracking on his previous pronouncements. A member is no longer required to be a Cosmotheist; at least not with a capital “C” anyway the newsletter says.
As their intent is to make the 2005 edition of the membership handbook invalid, the door is now open for people with mental disorder as well as those with sex crime admissions and convictions to be admitted; in fact even attain the highest positions of leadership.
In closing, there will be a healing process as mentioned in the newsletter but that can only come once the legal process is concluded successfully.
If anyone who has received this unsolicited mail has any questions, please feel free to e-mail us (firstname.lastname@example.org). Again, thanks for so many of you offering to send us a copy. As we mentioned at the beginning, we’ve received plenty of them already, so you are welcome to put them into your recycle.