On opposing a club's policies

The Virtual Stamp Club, in a poll, is asking its members about the
course of action they would take if a club they belonged to was heading
in the wrong direction. My answer was "Resign and tell them why."

This actually happened to me and to Lt. Col. H. L. Halle, the president
of the Germany Philatelic Society in 1959.

A German study group we belonged to said in its new handbook (partly
subsidized by the Fédération Internationale de Philatelie, and by
extrapolation by the American Philatelic Society) called us war criminals.

It did this by stating that West Germany's 1948 Building Series had been
issued because American officers were illegally running the Bizonia
(American and British Zones of Germany) postal service. The handbook
cited the Geneva and Hague conventions, without specifying a part
dealing with postal governance. Forty years later, I still do not know
what they were talking about.

Well, if we were being accused of being war criminals under one or both
conventions, Harry and I did not want to belong. So we asked APS to
protest against this. It did not. It would not. So we quit APS.

At IBRA, a 1973 international stamp show in Munich, the Germans finally
issued some sort of apology to Bernard Hennig and Dr. Werner Bohne, by
then president of GPS.

I realize that APS was not the culprit in this case, but it should have
battled furiously to correct the injustice, because all Americans were
being tarred by this accusation -- and, need I point it out -- by people
who had participated in far greater war crimes just a few years earlier,
far greater than issuing a bunch of ugly stamps.
--
Stephen G. Esrati
PO Box 20130
Shaker Heights, OH 44120
(216) 561-9393

From: "Stephen G. Esrati"
Subject: On opposing a club's policies

The Virtual Stamp Club, in a poll, is asking its members about the
course of action they would take if a club they belonged to was heading
in the wrong direction. My answer was "Resign and tell them why."

This actually happened to me and to Lt. Col. H. L. Halle, the president
of the Germany Philatelic Society in 1959.
snip
Stephen G. Esrati

An interesting coincidence, Stephen. Just yesterday I read an editorial by
you in an old issue of The German Postal Specialist; I don't recall which
issue it was. You were appealing for a change in the editorial policy of the
journal to allow articles of more general interest that people would
actually read, as opposed to philatelic arcania that would bore the average
non-specialist and many specialists to death. I think you must have
succeeded, for I have found many interesting articles about WWII philately
in issues dating from the early 1980s through 2000.

I have certainly seen enough very dry philatelic journals. I wonder if
membership in specialist societies would increase if they worked hard to
relate stamp collecting to the "real world," as the Germany Philatelic
Society seems to have done.

Bob Ingraham

On Sat, 12 Jul 2003 17:34:02 GMT, "Stephen G. Esrati"
wrote:

They said: Americans had illegally taken over the Deutsche Post in
contravention of the Geneva and Hague conventions.

Is someone smoking too much crack over there or what?

I guess I would be guilty before a German Volksgericht (people's court).
I am very proud to be an American.

Me too.

Tracy Barber

On Sun, 13 Jul 2003 08:35:43 +0200, "Victor Manta"
wrote:

Victor Manta wrote:
"Stephen G. Esrati" wrote in message
...

The Virtual Stamp Club, in a poll, is asking its members about the
course of action they would take if a club they belonged to was heading
in the wrong direction. My answer was "Resign and tell them why."

This actually happened to me and to Lt. Col. H. L. Halle, the president
of the Germany Philatelic Society in 1959.

A German study group we belonged to said in its new handbook (partly
subsidized by the Fédération Internationale de Philatelie, and by
extrapolation by the American Philatelic Society) called us war
criminals.

snip
--
Stephen G. Esrati


Why have they called you a war criminal?

Victor Manta

"Stephen G. Esrati" wrote in message
...
They said: Americans had illegally taken over the Deutsche Post in
contravention of the Geneva and Hague conventions.

snip

And what had you personally to do with this alleged crime? Or was it a
felony of having a dissenting opinion?

Victor, you must stop asking yourself questions... It doesn't look
good... :^P

Tracy Barber

A little off-topic bit I left the NRA for a similar reason. I am (was) a
competition shooter and have many medals and trophies. Because the NRA
is the sponsor of many tournaments, I had to belong to the organization.

I constantly read NRA ads stating something like "2 million American
shooters demand the right of all to bear arms," etc. Well, I for one do
believe that a sane honest citizen has the right to own a rifle, but had
no problem with the government checking a gun buyer for felonies,
insanity, etc. I felt that the organization was misrepresenting my
attitude on a regular basis and therefore left it.

"Herb F." wrote:

A little off-topic bit I left the NRA for a similar reason. I am (was) a
competition shooter and have many medals and trophies. Because the NRA
is the sponsor of many tournaments, I had to belong to the organization.

I constantly read NRA ads stating something like "2 million American
shooters demand the right of all to bear arms," etc. Well, I for one do
believe that a sane honest citizen has the right to own a rifle, but had
no problem with the government checking a gun buyer for felonies,
insanity, etc. I felt that the organization was misrepresenting my
attitude on a regular basis and therefore left it.

I have a similar history. Many, many years ago, as a teenager, I belonged
to the Junior Division of the NRA so I could participate in competitive
matches and qualify for medals. (I made it to some bar of Sharpshooter, but
I forget which. Fourth or fifth maybe.) But when I came to understand the
political agenda that the NRA claimed was on behalf of me, I let my
membership lapse. Years later, as an adult, I joined again, thinking it was
better to have some counterveiling opinions within the organization. I
quickly realized that was a really useless course of action, so I let my
membership lapse again.

--- Steve

"Shoot targets, not people."

"Herb F." wrote in message
...
snip

I constantly read NRA ads stating something like "2 million American
shooters demand the right of all to bear arms," etc. Well, I for one do
believe that a sane honest citizen has the right to own a rifle, but had
no problem with the government checking a gun buyer for felonies,
insanity, etc.
snip

How about government checking (at best permanently) everyone for felonies,
insanity, and especially for etc.? Because who known, maybe some are
thinking about buying guns, knives, ropes, planes, for unknown purposes...

Victor Manta

Some interesting comments to my post.

The bottom line (and the story really has nothing to do about guns
although some people with a hidden agenda will try to make it into an
anti or pro-gun debate) is that no organization has the right to
publicly state that all of it's members believe in anything unless they
take a vote.

If the NRA says that 2 million of it's members believe that everyone has
the right to bear arms (or wear silly hats or whatever), then they need
to poll those members. Nobody ever asked me my opinion. They assumed it.

I did not much care for having someone say to me, "NRA? Oh you are one
of those crazy *******s that thinks that a convicted wife-beater fresh
out of prison and on meds to control his bi-polar problems needs to have
an AK47." Why should I look like an idiot because a PR man at NRA HQs
feels it is his responsibility to see that everyone in the world can
pack a semiautomatic weapon?

Now I repeat, I am a shooter. I have five pistols and 3 rifles. This is
not about the weapons. It is about a national organization making
comments in your name.

What are your options? Very few. Leaving that group is about the only
one that is of any significance.

On Mon, 14 Jul 2003 07:32:34 -0400 (EDT), (Herb F.)
wrote:

Some interesting comments to my post.

The bottom line (and the story really has nothing to do about guns
although some people with a hidden agenda will try to make it into an
anti or pro-gun debate) is that no organization has the right to
publicly state that all of it's members believe in anything unless they
take a vote.

If the NRA says that 2 million of it's members believe that everyone has
the right to bear arms (or wear silly hats or whatever), then they need
to poll those members. Nobody ever asked me my opinion. They assumed it.

I did not much care for having someone say to me, "NRA? Oh you are one
of those crazy *******s that thinks that a convicted wife-beater fresh
out of prison and on meds to control his bi-polar problems needs to have
an AK47." Why should I look like an idiot because a PR man at NRA HQs
feels it is his responsibility to see that everyone in the world can
pack a semiautomatic weapon?

Now I repeat, I am a shooter. I have five pistols and 3 rifles. This is
not about the weapons. It is about a national organization making
comments in your name.

What are your options? Very few. Leaving that group is about the only
one that is of any significance.

When a group I am involved with takes me for granted in this fashion I
usually opt out of it altogether. Unless I give the group my vote of
confidence it is still mine to give. No group can take my vote from
me. That is foul...


Tracy Barber

"Herb F." wrote in message
...
Some interesting comments to my post.

The bottom line (and the story really has nothing to do about guns
although some people with a hidden agenda will try to make it into an
anti or pro-gun debate) is that no organization has the right to
publicly state that all of it's members believe in anything unless they
take a vote.

Even if a vote is taken, this doesn't mean that all have agreed on
something. Just some thousands more votes in a country of millions of voters
can make a big difference, like recent history has shown.

If the NRA says that 2 million of it's members believe that everyone has
the right to bear arms (or wear silly hats or whatever), then they need
to poll those members. Nobody ever asked me my opinion. They assumed it.

Maybe NRA has in its statutes that its members believe that everyone has the
right to bear arms. No idea if it is true, but have you by chance checked
its statutes? If it is true, then they can assume it indeed.

snip

Victor Manta