Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old May 8th 06, 07:21 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
 
Posts: n/a
Default Something I Got in Email - Have Fun

Hey, Folks...

Here is something I received a copy of in my email, along with around
50 other people. Have fun with it!!!

Regards,
Mike Petersen
================================================== ===


Jerry Hanken
President of the Chess Journalists of America

From a local club treasury report to writing for a club newsletter or

Chess Life, This should concern us all.

Sir,

Your behavior of blocking any attempt to look at questionable
disbursements of CJA checks paid on your behalf, needs to stop.

You need to stop opposing financial statements being made. They need
to be available at our annual CJA business meeting.

Where is the money going?

Why are you working so hard to hide where the money goes?

Our group of current CJA members are concerned, and unless you wake up
and make an effort to start cleaning up these clear violations of
published CJA By-laws, http://www.chessjournalism.org/bylaws.htm We
will present our petition at the annual business meeting at the 2006 US
Open to have you removed from office.

Statement of Charges

1 No financial statement, or any accountability for almost $10,000
of CJA funds.

2 No budget - line by line - announced for this current year. In
Violation of the By-laws. See Article 3, under Treasurer.

3 Various Ethics violations:
A. Refusing to allow the appointment of an Ethics Committee
Chairman. This is
a violation of By-law requirements.

We note that this is but a pattern of unethical
behavior over the years. Your lack of ethics and tantrums to
personally attack people who disagree with you is legendary and
verified by many people. Part of your prior unethical behavior is
detailed at http://www.chessnetwork.com/ncn/pantsgate.htm More on
your threats & abusive tantrums to GM Larry Evans is detailed below.

B. Refusing to allow the appointment of our By-laws
Committee Chairman.

It is my personal judgment that you are a person of knowledge and
ability to do good things for chess. But you create so much strife and
reflect so much embarrassment on our quiet little group. We only want
to write and promote the noble qualities of chess. Not the dishonesty
and personal attacks you are so noted for.

Perhaps a credible effort to make amends and correct these cover-ups,
would help defuse this removal process. Perhaps not, for you have
shown your colors once too often.

C. Refusing to allow a vote of the CJA Executive Committee
on important expenditures, even those directly required of our By-laws.
Mr. Hanken you are accused of treating the CJA treasury and the vanity
awards made each year, as your little kingdom. With no respect for
written By-laws, other officer's inquiries or members' concerns.

The major expense of the CJA, is our annual awards.
You directly appointed the Chief Judge, in violation of the By-laws.
The full Executive committee is required to select a Chairman of the
Awards committee, and that person is the one person authorized to
select the Chief Judge and in concert, handle all details and guide
lines for the CJA awards.

This tenacity to run over others and the rules, is
further demonstrated by you playing favors with the Award rules this
year, by banning many articles written by non-CJA members, from over 30
categories, to only go to the one set of awards in category 39. This
banning articles from any category they would be qualified for, is
against the published rules.
http://www.chessjournalism.org/pr060413.htm

This violation of the written By-laws and other rules,
are important on its own merit, but more important, this is
representational of the behind-the-back methods you exercise to
conceal your control.

Where does the money go from the awards? Why do you conceal it?

PS To see Jerry Hanken's own words on how he handles discussions of
the issues, with Larry Evans and others. Click on the link

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.g...b922cda9cda53f

The Larry Evans interview portion is copied below, where Hanken
threatens Evans "You know, maybe we should just settle this like men --
go out into the parking lot." and ends up screaming personal attacks.
Typical, is that Hanken starts out calm before his true inner self
comes out.

This is an embarrassment. Threats and personal hostility, combined
with unethical efforts to not go by required By-laws, especially when
spending thousands of dollars; This needs to stop!

As posted at the above site, Here is the transcript:
(He starts out calm, but then see how he explodes)


LARRY EVANS' INTERVIEW OF JEROME HANKEN ON JULY 22, 1992.


Evans: Ray Orwig [USCF delegate from Northern California] says he has
some
letters from you, and you made some crank phone ca...


Hanken: He has some letters from me telling him essentially that I
think he
did an almost criminal thing.


Evans: Well, he also said you've been pestering him. He had to see a
lawyer,
and he also said that in one of the letters you accused President Dlugy
of
stealing from the USCF.


Hanken: I certainly do. Dlugy has stolen from the USCF, and I'll go on
record
on that.


Evans: But if he's -- if he's reimbursed by the Delegates [at Dearborn]
then
your charge that he's stealing remains just another libel.


Hanken: Well, I beg your pardon. It's no more a libel than your
accusing me
of having written the letters that you wrote [the two hit letters
during the
Eddis-Schultz election].


Evans: What about the Policy Board setting up an independent
investigation?


Hanken: Larry, we don't have to share anything with you. You're a
suspect.
You're the chief suspect.


Evans: But you're a suspect too.


Hanken: You know, maybe we should just settle this like men -- go out
into
the parking lot.


Evans: [laughing]: Jerry, this is not personal. You personalize
everything.


Hanken: It's not personal? You sound like the Mafia. Evans, I can tell
you
that there's going to be some consequences because your behavior is so
outrageous that your mucky, disgusting yellow journalism is so
hideous...I
just want to let you know that you are the worst, lowest kind of person
that
I ever, ever heard of.


Evans: Did you tell the board of the Southern California people about
Alex
Dunne's analysis [showing that on the basis of a standard adverbial
analysis
Hanken could not be ruled out as a suspect in writing the hit letters]?



Hanken: I certainly did. Alex is part of your conspiracy.


Evans: You asked Alex Dunne to investigate.


Hanken: Yes, I did. And I made the mistake of not realizing that Alex
Dunne
was one of the conspirators.


Evans: Well, at any rate, I am asking you for comments.


Hanken: My comments are that you are a mucking, yellow journalist.
Anything
you write has no merit; anything you say is probably a lie; and if you
want
to quote me, you can quote me. But of course you won't quote me on
that.


Evans: Well, in other words, Orwig is also lying?


Hanken: Everything that you say is suspect because you are a mucking,
yellow
journalist. That's my comment.


Evans: You asked me to call you before I went to press. I am just
calling you
as a courtesy, Jerry.


Hanken: You are a lowdown liar.


Evans: Fine, but I'm merely...


Hanken: A lowdown, complete liar and a slanderer and a vicious lowlife
person. And you have no reason to be in the chess world. You should be
driven
from the chess world.


Evans: Jerry, listen, this is really pointless. If you have no
comments...


Hanken: There is a perfectly good point because I wanted to say these
things
to you for some time, Larry, and I'm glad to be able to say 'em on your

****in' nickel...By the way, when's the last time you played chess,
Larry?


Evans: If I've retired from the game, what does it have to do with
this?


Hanken: [screaming]: Well, if you've retired from the game, get the
hell out
and stop bothering people who like to play! Get out, Larry!! Get out!!


Evans: I should stop writing about it, too?


Hanken: Stop writing about it, stop harassing people, stop slandering
people,
stop with your garbage.


Evans: Jerry, you asked me to call you to get your comments. I have
some
statements from Orwig that are very, very damaging...


Hanken: You've got my comments, you've got them all. You're a yellow,
mucking
journalist. Anything you print is obviously twisted, distorted and a
lie.


Evans: Jerry, you're repeating yourself. I'm asking you: Do you have
any
comments on the Orwig story?


Hanken: Yes, my comments are anything that you print is twisted and
distorted. You're a mucking yellow journalist, and I dare you to print
what I
really said.


Evans: Okay. Goodbye, Jerry.


Hanken: I dare you to print what I said. Goodbye, Lar-re-eee.



The End

  #3   Report Post  
Old May 9th 06, 02:42 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
Chess One
 
Posts: n/a
Default Something I Got in Email - Have Fun


wrote in message
oups.com...
AN EXTRAVAGANCE

I don't think Jerry Hanken should be hounded
from office for taking $600 in CJA money for a trip to
the chess retreat. On the other hand, six hundred
bucks is not small potatoes for an organization such
as the CJA. It is an undoubted extravagance.


What proportion of the annual budget - look like from the CJA web-site there
are 120 members, at 10 bucks a piece thats $1,200 annual revenue by dues,
and the trip = 50%

There is no doubt in my mind that Jerry should
not receive this money. It is wrong. It is wrong
also for the CJA to be sending a representative to
this conclave.


Don Shultz sent me a picture this morning - following our 'interview' which
he was suprised and pleased to find - I asked him to identify who was in the
picture and also a synopsis of the event - or an agenda.

I see the CJA site says that Jerry Hanken will be writing an article on the
event for the June CL - so possibly some of the $600 will be recovered by
fees-received.

I am not saying that the decision is mistaken.
I am saying that it is not the kind of bennie that an
officer of the Chess Journalists of America should get.


I recently wrote CJA on several matters - one was about its stance on
international copyright observation, citing a non-abstract instance that
occurred here - and the other was for questions in preparation for
interviewing Mr. Kok. I didn't receive answers on either, except one
question which arrived too late, and to the effect 'what about Africa?'

Otherwise my e-mail has been loaded with comments by people who strongly
resented spending the money, and others who want to shut up the conversation
and who additionally resented being on the distribution list in the first
place.

Phil Innes



  #4   Report Post  
Old May 9th 06, 05:55 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
Duncan Oxley
 
Posts: n/a
Default Something I Got in Email - Have Fun

Heh, http://www.chessnetwork.com/ncn/pantsgate.htm is funny
stuff. Along with the "Fists Up Pants Down" piece.

I hope you will not mind my reproducing it below for everyone's amusement
again.


------


A Dysfunctional Board


A reader asked me to repost details of an hilarious episode during a
previous
meeting reported in the USCF Delegates Newsletter, an independent
publication
of the Friends of the USCF, Volume 3, Number 1, June 1994. Chairman: GM
Larry
Evans. Newsletter Editors: Larry Parr, Nigel Eddis.


Back copies have become something of a collector's item but some are still
available. Send inquiries to treasurer Nigel Eddis, 825 West End Avenue, New
York City 10025. Small donations are also welcome.


*********


Text of USCF Policy Board motion on Jerry Hanken:


"Due to behavior totally unacceptable as a Policy Board
member, Jerry Hanken is hereby reprimanded for such
behavior." Passed 6-0-1.


FISTS UP, PANTS DOWN!


YOUR USCF DUES $$'s AT WORK


New Windsor, NY., May 21 -- "Now I finally know what the Policy Board does
during closed sessions," said one visitor today just as the door to the
meeting room flung open at about 10:20 a.m.


The visitor saw Member at Large Jerry Hanken with his left fist raised and
right hand cocked. "I'm going to kill him! I'm going to kill him!" Mr.
Hanken
screamed while appearing to move toward USCF President Denis Barry.
Meanwhile
Vice President Fred Gruenberg, like a referee in a boxing match, struggled
to
restrain Mr. Hanken -- WHOSE PANTS THEREUPON FELL DOWN!


Executive Director Al Lawrence quickly drew the blinds of the office window
and closed the door. The PB briefly continued its "meeting."


The Delegates Newsletter has learned that Mr. Hanken's outburst came after a
PB decision to deny Randall Hough, ex-USCF secretary and close Hanken ally,
a
Distinguished Service Award.


States one PB member, "Jerry and Fred began to argue about Randy, while
Jerry
accused Fred of disliking his buddy. Denis decided to call the meeting to
order by first using his gavel and then his voice."


"You think that you can yell louder than I can?" Mr. Hanken roared in
response. "Well, I'll show you who can yell loudest!"


Later, while Mr. Hanken remained in the now-darkened office to regain his
composure, American Chess Foundation President Fanueil Adams told President
Barry, "Congratulations, stand up to that guy!" Mr. Adams told Mr.
Gruenberg,
"You should have let him [Hanken] hit him [Barry], and then he'd go to
jail."


Responded Mr. Gruenberg, "Yeah, you're right. But I took one look at Jerry's
size and Denis' and had to step in."


Mr. Adams said, "You're right. He's a big one."


An excited Mr. Gruenberg continued, "He was going to hurt him. You know
that.
He's big and strong. I had to stop it." And then Mr. Gruenberg said to Mr.
Hanken, who had finally reappeared, "You were going to attack him."


Replied Mr. Hanken, "No, I was going to hit YOU."


Mad Dog Or Old Yeller!


As the PB reassembled for open session, Member at Large Bill Snead spoke
first. "Jerry," he said, "we're not yet in session. As a courtesy to us, I
wish you would resign from this Board. Just as a courtesy, you understand."


Mr. Snead, who along with Mr. Gruenberg had earlier threatened to resign,
said, "The issue is whether we will enforce minimal acceptable standards of
civil conduct. What we saw here today meets no standard, let alone a minimal
one."


USCF Secretary Rachel Lieberman said, "In my opinion, Denis was only trying
to
call the meeting to order and was simply doing his job as chairman."


Mr. Gruenberg reiterated his earlier statements. "There is no question in my
mind," he said, "that he would have hit Denis."


Treasurer Frank Camaratta, who in no sense defended Mr. Hanken's conduct,
argued that Mr. Gruenberg overreacted and mistook Old Yeller for a mad dog.
"I've seen him yell like this before," Mr. Camaratta said, "and I'm sure he
never intended to hit Denis."


"I was never out of control," said Mr. Hanken. "I felt physically attacked
by
you [Gruenberg]. It changed from a yelling contest that I started to a
physical thing between you and me. I don't know how it happened. I love you,
Fred. You know that."


Mr. Gruenberg stated, "Jerry, I pushed you back because I had to."


In a tear-choked voice, Mr. Hanken replied, "And that's when my pants fell
down."


"At last," said the out of town visitor at the PB meeting, "I got to see our
USCF dues dollars at work. But I'm confused. Did the Board reprimand Mr.
Hanken for threatening to kill President Barry, or for losing his pants?"


*************


EDITORIAL: FUNNY PANTS?


By Larry Parr


"The democrats of IL MONDO want to know our program," said Benito Mussolini.
"It is to break the bones of the democrats of IL MONDO. And the sooner the
better."


There were no bones broken during the Policy Board meeting from May 20 to 22


[1994] though there might easily have been. President Barry, who broke his
back four years ago, could have been crippled for life if he had suffered a
second accident; Fred Gruenberg, who later complained of a bad headache, was
in the pre-stroke stage of a cold sweat; and Jerry Hanken, whose trousers
were
at half-mast, could have toppled forward in a fall that might have been
fatal
for someone of his age and size.


So while the national chess community is laughing over Mr. Hanken's
embarrassment, and while one prominent East Coast organizer is saying that
Mr.
Hanken's next political slogan should be "Fists up, Pants down!" we at the
Friends of the USCF do not regard it all as good dirty fun.


Bill Snead wondered what will now be considered acceptable and unacceptable.
We have a simple answer: What is acceptable is that which is accepted.


The Delegates have accepted two FIDE title matches in which the family of
one
of the participants was held hostage in the Soviet Union; the Delegates have
accepted Don Schultz's support for FIDE declaring a journalist persona non
grata; the Delegates have accepted Florencio Campomanes placing his mistress
on FIDE's payroll and publicly humiliating his wife; the Delegates have
accepted President Campomanes' threats to kill several journalists; the
Delegates have accepted President Campomanes placing FIDE funds (including
cash from the USCF) in a private account in his personal name; the Delegates
have accepted the beating of one anti-Campomanes campaigner in Latin
America;
the Delegates have accepted the utter corruption of FIDE's rating list and
title award system; the Delegates have accepted the decision of a previous
Policy Board to hire the Pinkerton Detective Agency to investigate GM Larry
Evans; and we are sure that the Delegates will accept Mr. Hanken's behavior
in
New Windsor.


Mr. Snead: At every time and every place in the long history of man, what's
acceptable is what's accepted.
--
Larry Parr



  #5   Report Post  
Old May 9th 06, 06:51 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
Rob
 
Posts: n/a
Default Something I Got in Email - Have Fun


Chess One wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...
AN EXTRAVAGANCE

I don't think Jerry Hanken should be hounded
from office for taking $600 in CJA money for a trip to
the chess retreat. On the other hand, six hundred
bucks is not small potatoes for an organization such
as the CJA. It is an undoubted extravagance.


I would have to ask in what official capacity was Mr Hanken travelling
for the CJA?
If he were travelling on CJA business and the board voted to approve
the expenditure( presuming it was not out of line with the CJA's
operating guidelines) I don't see a problem.

What proportion of the annual budget - look like from the CJA web-site there
are 120 members, at 10 bucks a piece thats $1,200 annual revenue by dues,
and the trip = 50%



There is no doubt in my mind that Jerry should
not receive this money. It is wrong. It is wrong
also for the CJA to be sending a representative to
this conclave.


As Larry states, if he is not travelling in any official capacity, then
it is wrong.

Don Shultz sent me a picture this morning - following our 'interview' which
he was suprised and pleased to find - I asked him to identify who was in the
picture and also a synopsis of the event - or an agenda.



I see the CJA site says that Jerry Hanken will be writing an article on the
event for the June CL - so possibly some of the $600 will be recovered by
fees-received.


As a private journalist, his expenses should be paid from his own
pocket. Perhaps he should be required to repay those funds by the CJA?


Rob

I am not saying that the decision is mistaken.
I am saying that it is not the kind of bennie that an
officer of the Chess Journalists of America should get.


I recently wrote CJA on several matters - one was about its stance on
international copyright observation, citing a non-abstract instance that
occurred here - and the other was for questions in preparation for
interviewing Mr. Kok. I didn't receive answers on either, except one
question which arrived too late, and to the effect 'what about Africa?'

Otherwise my e-mail has been loaded with comments by people who strongly
resented spending the money, and others who want to shut up the conversation
and who additionally resented being on the distribution list in the first
place.

Phil Innes




  #6   Report Post  
Old May 9th 06, 11:08 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
Chess Freak
 
Posts: n/a
Default Something I Got in Email - Have Fun

Clowns are in control of US Chess. This saga sounds like
a scene from Dr. Strangelove.




"Duncan Oxley" [email protected] wrote in message ...
| Heh, http://www.chessnetwork.com/ncn/pantsgate.htm is funny
| stuff. Along with the "Fists Up Pants Down" piece.
|


  #7   Report Post  
Old May 10th 06, 09:44 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
[email protected]
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pantsgate

JERRY HANKEN ON PANTSGATE

Clowns are in control of US Chess. This saga sounds like
a scene from Dr. Strangelove. -- Chess Freak

HANKEN REPLIES

It might be nice if someone found my own account of this nonsense but
that
would be too evenhanded! I guarantee its funnier and a LOT truer. It's
out there
in cyber space somewhere if someone wants to look. It was I who dubbed
the
whole thing "Pantsgate". I am not good at finding stuff so could
someone help me
on this? Next I guess will be the many campaign letters which attacked
me in
USCF elections. Well I did win 4 out of 5 of those! Still standing,
Jerry.

By the way, I just got back from the USCF Retreat in Boca. Look for a
report on
this on the CJA website and the June CHESS JOURNALIST. There were 21
people
there and I signed up 14 for new CJA memberships, including the
Facilitator who
does not play chess. (8 were already members).

-- Jerry Hanken.

  #8   Report Post  
Old May 10th 06, 03:58 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
LiamToo
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pantsgate

It was I who dubbed the whole thing "Pantsgate". I am not good at finding stuff so could someone help me on this? -- Jerry Hanken.

Here's it:

The Pantsgate saga
From: Jerry Hanken Subject: Pantsgate Date: Wednesday, 16 February 2000
5:31

Tom Dorsch wrote:

What a joke from the worst Policy Board member in USCF history, the only Board member who was ever censured for his conduct at PB meetings.


This is the guy who pulled his pants down and mooned the Board at a
meeting, with women present! This is the guy who jumped up and made a
run at the president, shouting, "I'll kill you!"

Hanken represents the lowest point reached in the Federation's long and
shabby history of poor leadership. For this living disgrace to
criticize anyone else is remarkable--and it is no coincidence that he
has absolutely no facts to offer.

Regards, Tom Dorsch

As usual from Tom, this is quite a distorted account. But it has become
increasingly obvious that if I intend to continue posting on this forum
I will have to deal with "Pantsgate," my personal Chappaquiddick. So
here's the whole story.

First I would like to point out that when this unfortunate incident
took place in 1994 I was completing my 10th year of service on the USCF
Policy Board, a record. By any HONEST account (not yours, Tom &
Larry!), I was a good Board member. I did my homework, never missed a
session, and chaired an important subcommittee, Tournament Standards. I
was an acknowledged champion of excellence and integrity in chess
(actually wrote the section of the rule book on fixing games).

My last year on the Board (93-94) was a difficult one. I was constantly
at war with Denis Barry over- irony of ironies- Al Lawrence, who I
defended strongly! On the fateful day in question the Board had just
completed a closed session in the conference room of the USCF office.
The curtains were drawn over the window area- it had been very closed.
There were a number of observers out in the office waiting including my
old friend Larry Parr.

Most people moved out of the conference room and there were only four
left- Denis Barry, Fred Gruenberg, Frank Camaratta and myself. Fred and
I were in an intense discussion sitting down and Frank was at the other
end of the table. Now remember, these were the ONLY persons in the
room, and NO meeting was in session.

Denis interrupted my argument with Freddie, which was in a modulated
tone, by raising his voice. I directed my attention to him and tried to
answer him but he literally tried to outshout me! At that point I was
angry but hardly in a "murderous rage" (myth #1)! I remember exactly
what I said- "You think you can win an argument by out shouting me- no
way!"

Those of you who know both Denis and I would not be surprised to know
we are both stubborn and sometimes loud. The shouting went on for about
a minute. I had gotten up from my chair and stood to face Denis (I did
not "make a run at" him, or "advance on" him with menacingly raised
fists- myth #2). I simply stood my ground. Both of us said some nasty
things (Denis swears I threatened to kill him but I have no
recollection of that- I DO know that there was never any possibility of
physical force being used, and no fists were raised.)

At some point during our attempts to shout each other down, Fred
Gruenberg became alarmed and decided to intercede. He may well have
mistaken a shouting match for a dangerous situation, and meaning well
he grabbed me around the waist and started to pull me toward the door.
Now Fred is a little guy and I am quite big. Remember, no one outside
could see into the room.

Myth #3 is the claim that I was advancing on Denis and Fred got in
between. Rather, I simply resisted being pulled toward the door. Then
it got funny. Fred, in his zeal, accidentally pulled my pants down.
(Myth #4- Hanken's pants were around his ankles and all the spectators
including the delicate ladies saw the behind. Totally false. Myth #5-
Hanken dropped his pants and "mooned" the Board. Totally false.)

In fact, my pants went only to my knees and for only a second- I
immediately pulled them up, turned to Fred with a clenched fist, and
exclaimed, "Fred, you moron, you pulled my pants down!" I uttered that
fatal phrase loud enough for all to hear. The truth is that it was that
utterance which sealed my fate. Only the other three persons in the
room could have seen that one second pants drop. Both Fred and Denis
are vague as to what they saw, and Frank says he saw nothing (no one
can even say if I wear briefs or boxers!) Frank says he was working on
his PB notes and paid no attention- he had heard these shouting matches
before, was not interested, and obviously didn't think there was
anything dangerous going on.

As soon as I realized what had happened I unclenched my fist and
assured Fred I was in control. I was not then or at any time prior to
that in front of the door. Unfortunately for me the premier myth maker
in USCF history, the great word stylist Larry Parr, had HEARD (mind
you, not SEEN)- my immortal humiliation! It was in his interest to be
able to portray USCF officials as thieves and buffoons (he never
accused me of the former) to show the terrible results of government
without OMOV. This is another piece of irony, as I now fully support
OMOV.

So I became the poster boy of PB bad behavior and all of the good I had
accomplished was forgotten. Parr and The Evil One (Dorsch) got lots of
mileage out of that incident, and I literally could never run for
office again (thus Chappaquiddick, except no one was hurt.) To show how
thoroughly successful Larry was in his mythmaking, my friend Don
Schultz put it in his book "Chessdon" with many of the myths intact and
without even asking me about it!

The aftermath was that Board member Bill Snead, one of the finest and
most effective of 25 Board members I did service with (ask Snead and he
will probably say the same about me), became so incensed at me he
introduced a motion, which he later acknowledged was illegal, to kick
me off the Board. The motion was changed to "censure" and I even voted
for it. Unlike some people, I am not afraid to admit my mistakes.

I am not proud of any of this, of course, but it did not happen during
a Board meeting and I did not pull my pants down. It kind of saddens me
that no one thought to mention that Denis was not entirely innocent in
this, but he and I are friends now and I only write this to put the
truth on record.

Of course, the really bad Board member, Tom Dorsch, can continue to
take his pot shots and certainly will. But the truth is that he
disrupted his meetings with insults, sarcasm, and wild charges, and was
totally nonproductive. Tom can't point to a single accomplishment in
his three years, was the only Board member ever reprimanded by the USCF
Ethics Committee, and was soundly defeated by the voters last year.
(Hey Tom, let's compare election results! I was elected four out of
five times, with one second place finish in a field of three. You were
one out of two, and after the voters saw your performance on the Board,
you placed 14th out of 16 candidates!)

A few examples of Dorsch behavior as a Board member:

1) During a 1999 Board meeting, Dorsch accused Rachel Lieberman of
manipulating the 1997 election results, sending the ballots out too
early, in June, to insure her election. But Rachel never sent ballots
in June at any time, did not run in 1997, and never tried to manipulate
anything.

2) During a 1999 Board meeting, Dorsch charged that Mike Cavallo had
negotiated poorly with the Yugoslavs in 1997 regarding reimbursement of
about $60,000 in legal fees we had spent in connection with Informant
purchases during the embargo. Dorsch claimed that Cavallo took the
first offer by the Yugoslavs and could have done better. The truth is
that USCF was not legally entitled to any of this money, and our
auditors had estimated only 50% recovery! The Board was delighted when
Cavallo recovered 100%- I still don't understand how he did it,
Fillippone had tried without success- but two years later, Dorsch tried
to rewrite history to label this incredible achievement as a failure,
claiming we should have recovered more than 100% of what we spent! The
truth is that Cavallo did not take the Yugoslavs' first offer, but
rather persuaded them to accept USCF's first offer!

3) At a 1997 Board meeting, acting on advice of legal counsel, the
Board voted to disassociate itself from inappropriate attacks by Dorsch
against George Filippone, in violation of the latter's settlement
agreement. Here is that Board motion:

"PB97-116 (Board): The Policy Board disassociates itself from the
inappropriate remarks by Tom Dorsch about George Filippone in a posting
on rec.games.chess.politics on July 17, 1997, disavows itself from
those remarks, and directs Tom Dorsch to comply with the terms of the
Employment Severance Agreement with George Filippone of June 3, 1997.
PASSED 6-1 (Adams, Eade, Ferguson, Goichberg, Lieberman, Schultz in
favor; Dorsch opposed)"

Please note: Dorsch opposed?!! Incredible! But in his three
dysfunctional years on the Board, when did Dorsch EVER admit a mistake?


I am hardly a perfect person, and I know that I have lost it from time
to time (especially before my insulin diabetes was diagnosed), but no
one ever questioned my love of chess and my dedication to the USCF.

It is clear that my giving an honest account of "Pantsgate" will not
end the lies and myths, as well as fresh attacks which will result from
my decision to speak out against the mob who dominate this newsgroup. I
am not saying I won't answer further questions, but I intend to
continue with more substantial matters.

Oh yes- one more thing for TEO (the evil one Dorsch): One of the most
delicious moments of my life in chess was when you greeted me at Reno
with a string of vile epithets spilling out of your cesspool of a
mouth. The only words I said to you that evening were "Tom, you will
finish 14th!" And he did!

Jerry Hanken

More on this link: http://www.chessnetwork.com/ncn/pantsgate.htm

  #9   Report Post  
Old May 10th 06, 04:23 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics,rec.games.chess.misc
[email protected]
 
Posts: n/a
Default Pantsgate

HANKEN ANSWERS PARR

Whoever found that, thanks. If it was Larry Parr
I suspect he would not be as harsh today. If I am
wrong Larry, let me know. This was actually the first
time I saw your counterpoint. Good, but you know
I cant spin with your skill! Anyway, it was good to see
my truth in print, even if it was 9 years ago.

YE SHALL BE JUDGED BY YOUR WORKS.

-- Jerry Hanken

-----------------------------------------------------------------
*From: Larry Parr Subject: Pantsgate
Date: Wednesday, 16 February 2000 7:58 *

* AN RGCP WELCOME TO JERRY HANKEN*

*Dear Jerry,*

* Permit me to extend to you a good old-fashioned r.g.c.p. welcome in
the form of this open letter. To be sure, I think that you would better

spend your time writing those chess memoirs that we all wish to read or

doing some community playhouse Shakespeare. But to paraphrase your
beloved Bard in a way to avoid the ire of feminazis, "Do you not know I

am a man? When I think, I must speak." And you obviously wish to speak
to the "mob," as you describe us so felicitously, on r.g.c.p.*

* So, here you are. With us. On r.g.c.p.*

* But with whom are we really speaking, old chap? We all know, my good
fellow, that you are not writing the postings on Federation finances
that appear in your name. So why not fess up and take the first few
steps of your r.g.c.p. career in a straight rather than crooked line?*

* You have nothing to lose and, perhaps, a reputation to regain.*

* A fashionable piece of advice among pop-psychologists these days is
that we "get in touch" with our "inner child." Robert de Niro even
starred in a comedy about a Mafia don trying to do the same. My view,
which your close friend Randy Hough shares, is that you have been in
unremitting contact with your "inner child" since the cradle. So, in
this open letter, I will try to touch your inner adult.*

* Fair enough? *

* THE HANKEN DEFENSE*

* I enjoyed reading your posting of February 15, in which you wrote
about the famous "Fists Up, Pants Down" (my headline) episode involving

your threat to murder former USCF President Denis Barry. If we examine
your claims in extenso, we will find that with the exception of a
couple
of details, you backed up the specifics of my account while offering a
totally different spin.*

* Still reading? I hope so.*

* You will correct me if I am wrong, but the point of your defense was
to spin the episode so that you were actually an in-control muchacho
who
got stung by the force of circumstance. You were the aggrieved party
who, admittedly, overreacted a smidgin to President Barry's alleged
shouting. You were the earnest Policy Board member who unluckily got
pantsed by former USCF Veep Fred Gruenberg, who falsely imagined you
meant to murder the Prez. And "unfortunately," you were being
frolicsome
precisely when this writer was on hand to capture your "immortal
humiliation!" Finally, you were the victim of this writer's account
that
appeared in the "Delegates Newsletter."*

* Really, Jerry, the Hanken Defense will need some brushing up if you
ever intend to enter another USCF political "tournament."*

* WHERE WE AGREE*

* Still, we agree on many of the saucier details. I wrote that Veep
Gruenberg pantsed you. You write that you "exclaimed" to former Veep
Gruenberg, "Fred, you moron, you pulled my pants down." I wrote that
you
were shouting in the meeting room. You write that you "exclaimed" and
uttered "loudly enough" so that all could hear. I wrote that, most
likely, you did not pull down your pants. You write, "I did not pull my

pants down." I wrote that your pants were sub-knee but ueber-ankle. You

write that your pants were at about knee level. (We are within a few
inches of agreement.) I wrote that you had clenched fists. You write
that you "unclenched" your fist "as soon as [you] realized what had
happened."*

* Interesting, don't you think, that last bit about how you unclenched
your fist "as soon as" you finally "realized" what was happening?
Inadvertently revealing. More anon on this subject.*

* Let us return to the areas in which we agree. I wrote that the
episode
had the office staff giggling and turning their faces away. You write,
"Then it got funny." I wrote that your supporters often excused your
manic-depressive episodes because you were on medication. You write
that
your diabetes rather than the medication affected your behavior. (We
are
close here.) I wrote that preceding the threat to murder Prez. Barry,
you were screaming at Veep G. You write that you were having an
"intense" discussion with the Veep. I wrote that the Veep stated on
tape
that you intended to kill Prez. Barry. You write that Veep G. "may well

have mistaken a shouting match for a dangerous situation." (Indeed, he
"may well have.") I wrote that you stood up to face Prez. Barry. You
write, "I had gotten up from my chair and stood to face Denis." *

* Our accounts have a lot in common.*

* WHERE WE DISAGREE*

* Alas, we do have some disagreements. Let us look at them and permit
readers to decide whose account is more likely. Fair enough?*

* I wrote that the curtains to the meeting room were not completely
closed and that I could see through at an angle near the desk of the
ED's secretary. You write, "Remember, no one outside could see into the

room." (The drapes were only later closed completely during your long
convalescence before reappearing in the meeting area for your censure
in
open session.) I wrote that Veep Gruenberg stated on tape that he
pulled
down your pants to prevent a catastrophe. You write, "Fred, in his
zeal,
accidentally pulled my pants down." (Veep G. also told the same story
to
others at the time. Your pantsing was no accident unless the Veep was
lying for some unaccountable reason.) I wrote at the time that your
pants were at slightly below half-mast for about a quarter of a minute
or more and that you teetered forward to pull them up. You write that
the pantsing was "for only a second." (Readers are invited to gain
about
200 pounds, have themselves pantsed in a moment of great emotional
turbulence, then bend over to what Mr. Hanken calls his "knee"*

*and pull them up. This action cannot be performed in "a second" even
by
a physically fit man primed to pull up his knickers. Mr Hanken remained

pantsed and palsied for many seconds as his trousers languished
sub-knee
though ueber-ankle.)*

* So we are disagreeing. But to disagree is human. Fair enough?*

* I wrote that you screamed you would kill Prez. Barry. You write that
"Denis swears" that you so threatened but that you have "no
recollection
of that" -- perhaps because, as you noted elsewhere, you had not yet
"realized what had happened." Strange this business about not realizing

what had happened even though you claim to have been in control! (I
would add that Veep Gruenberg also testified hearing your death
threat.)
I wrote that the S.S. Hanken took a step toward Prez Barry. You write
that you were veering doorwards under the guidance of that human
tugboat, Veep G. (Prez Barry will, perhaps, back up my reporting that
he
assumed a defensive crouch within a foot or two of the monumentally
inattentive Frank Camaratta to meet what he obviously believed to be an

imminent rush or senescent amble in his direction.) Others wrote that a

meeting was in session when you threatened to murder Prez Barry. You
write by way of what you believe to be extenuation that no meeting was
in session. (Sorry, the meeting was still in session though PB members
had left the room. This issue was later discussed in open session when
you finally reappeared following the brouhaha. Still, I award you
rather
than Tom Dorsch this particular point. He was right but on a
technicality, and we do not wish to permit such technicalities to
obstruct our search for what really happened that day in New Windsor so

many moons ago.)*

* Fair enough?*

* IN SEARCH OF HISTORY I think that as we try to determine whether your

death-threat episode was a freak occurrence like a hailstorm in the
tropics, we ought to examine whether other similar events occurred in
your USCF biography.*

* Fair enough?*

* We might mention the famous tape-recorded threat to attack GM Larry
Evans physically during an interview that he was conducting with you.
You wanted to take him out in the "parking lot" by way of answering one

of his queries.*

* Care to deny the threat?*

* Or there was the chair-throwing episode that others have described
better than I. Or there was the Tears Down, Chin Down embarrassment
when
you left the Policy Board table to blubber near where the trophies used

to be kept in New Windsor. If memory serves, that was back in 1985. I
was brand new to the Federation, and at first I thought you had
something in your eye. Really, I did! Then, when two of your fellow
Board members left the table to console you out by the trophies, I
understood what was happening. The employees were giggling.*

* Salzburg had its "Sound of Music." New Windsor has its "Sound of
Giggling."*

* Or there was the memorable PB meeting in Seattle, when I became the
object of your ire for reading to the Board a message from GM Evans.
You
began to pound the table with your fist and to chant that I, as the
messenger, was a piece of sh-t. You stood up, advanced in my direction
and threw the torn pieces of GM Evans' message at me. The chair then
offered an apology for your behavior and language. The meeting was
adjourned. Poor Bill Goichberg literally ran to the bathroom and
upchucked. You went with John Donaldson, who calmed you down.*

* More or less fair enough?*

* To tell the whole story, your friend Gary Sperling was present, and
he
neither saw nor heard anything that he could remember. And true enough:

The angle of this cagey attorney's head never moved from the table top
just as Mr. Camaratta noticed nothing even as Prez Barry, within a foot

or so of Mr. Camaratta squared away to meet you charge. Further, your
friend Mr. Goichberg later contended that his upchucking was merely a
coincidence unrelated to events.*

* So many coincidences, so much forgetfulness, don't you think?*

* YOUR CAREER AS A PB MEMBER*

* Jerry: I do not toe a party line. Tom Dorsch is wrong to say that you

were the worst Policy Board member in USCF history. The most
obstreperous, yes. The loudest, yes. The crudest, absolutely. The least

productive, arguably. But the worst, no.*

* Let's discuss criteria.*

* My criteria or, more accurately, criterion for sheer awfulness is to
have formulated damaging policies. By this standard, Harold Winston
makes you look like Lev Alburt fruitlessly proposing for years an 800
sales number. Jerry: you are not the worst PB member in USCF history
because to win that coveted Old Guard honor, you had to develop,
formulate and initiate major policy initiatives which proved to be
disastrous.*

* You did virtually nothing for 10 years. In 1992 you spearheaded a
drive to allocate up to $1,000 for the Pinkertons to investigate GM
Evans for an anti-Semitic campaign letter that was mailed along a route

from Los Angeles to San Francisco by your fellow PB member Randall
Hough
on the very day it was postmarked along that route. After GM Evans was
cleared by the Pinkertons, you were suspected of penning that anonymous

letter but the investigation ceased even though people heard you utter
phrases used in that letter.*

* You once told me that your ambition was to be seen to be at the
center
of events. You achieved this ambition. For over 10 years, you were on
and off the Board. You came to peronsify a certain kind of governance.
You came to symbolize the Old Guard for many. But you were never what
Newt Gingrich has called a "policy wonk." You were a policy follower
rather than a policy initiator.*

* For all of your virile posturing and chair-throwing, you were a
policy
neuter. Fair enough?*

* THE QUESTION OF FRIENDSHIP*

* Someone should write a book about shifting friendships and hatreds
within the USCF. They shift in the political wind like the desert sand
in a storm.*

* You, Jerry, now refer to the recent past USCF president as "my friend

Don Schultz." But I recollect in the days before the 1992 Eddis-Schultz

race that your opinion of Mr. Schultz was far different. Too, Bill
Goichberg once came in to my office during office hours at Chess Life
offering to show me documents proving that Gary Sperling was a liar and

crook. Later, both you and Mr. Goichberg worked on behalf of Mr.
Schultz
and Mr. Sperling. Mr. Goichberg told me that Gary Sperling had
"changed," and I responded that adults in their 40s do not suddenly
become new people.*

* Readers may judge for themselves.*

* Certain hatreds however, stand the test of political time. Jerry, you

are now calling Mr. Dorsch "The Evil One Dorsch," which you rather
sloppily rendered as an acronym, "TEO" rather than "TEOD." Frankly, I
have never known you to be a religious man, and if your reference to
"The Evil One Dorsch" is a harbinger of your conversion to my religion
of Catholicism, then I rejoice for the salvation of your soul.*

* Welcome, Jerry, to the communion of the Holy Roman Catholic Church
and
its unbroken apostolic succession.*

* Welcome, Jerry, to the communion of the r.g.c.p. You may rest assured

that your threat to murder Denis Barry will continue to be discussed as

we go together on this forum, intellectual hand in hand, in search of
history.*

* Welcome, Jerry.*

*Larry Parr*

Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rec.games.chess.play-by-email Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Paul_Morphy rec.games.chess.play-by-email (Chess - Play by Email) 0 March 12th 06 03:15 AM
Rec.games.chess.play-by-email Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Paul_Morphy rec.games.chess.play-by-email (Chess - Play by Email) 0 January 8th 06 05:15 AM
Rec.games.chess.play-by-email Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Paul_Morphy rec.games.chess.play-by-email (Chess - Play by Email) 0 November 26th 05 08:38 PM
Rec.games.chess.play-by-email Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Paul_Morphy rec.games.chess.play-by-email (Chess - Play by Email) 0 November 19th 05 10:00 PM
Rec.games.chess.play-by-email Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) Paul_Morphy rec.games.chess.play-by-email (Chess - Play by Email) 0 October 15th 05 07:31 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:29 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017