July 26th, 2006 (EB News)

July 21st, 2006 (EB News)

It would appear from the resignation news today that Brash is prepared to protect his Exclusive Brethren financial links with extreme predjudice ... or is it possible that a word was placed in his ear?

July 12th, 2006 (EB news)

Tribunal to hear anti-gay election pamphlet case - June 13th, 2006

Older news, but obviously worth posting on the main News page. We shall be watching for the result of the promised tribunal hearing with interest.

In the lead-up to the March state election, Ms Delaney lodged two complaints - one against the Liberal Party and another against a member of the Exclusive Brethren, Roger Unwin.

Anti-Discrimination Commissioner Sarah Bolt accepted the complaint against Mr Unwin for investigation and a decision is expected in the next few months.

Tribunal to hear election pamphlet case - Web Link

July 12th, 2006 (EB news)

Brethren Schmethren - July 12th, 2006

"We have great influence. We stopped the Greens in Tasmania because of their evil homosexual agenda. We don't vote ourselves, but we know how to spend our money wisely. We are united before God under the Elect Vessel. The Vessel lives nearby!"

Oops, I thought, a loony. "I think you want the Container Terminal," I said gently. "That's where the vessels live."

Brethren Schmethren - Web Link

July 8th, 2006 (EB news)

Labour party celebrates 90 years - July 7th,  2006 

The Labour party in New Zealand are planning to increase their funding to combat the extraordinary impact of the Exclusive Brethren funding that the opposing National Party enjoyed in the recent NZ elections. The label 'National / Exclusive Brethren Party' sums up their close monetary relationship ... "We need to raise more money. We were outspent by the National/Exclusive Brethren party by $2 million."

Labour party celebrates 90 years - Web link

Labour party celebrates 90 years - PDF Version

July 7th, 2006 (EB news)

Elusive Exclusive Brethren - Sunday 30 April  2006 

The following Australian radio show transcript dates back to April 2006. The content and supplementary details were requested by Journalists and we have received permission from ABC Radio National to republish here on Peebs.Net. Some of the correspondence is extraordinary and 'pure EB'.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/bbing/stories/s1624361.htm- Web link

Radio Show Transcript - PDF version

Correspondence File - PDF Version

EB Pamphlets referred to in Show - PDF Version

July 3rd, 2006 (EB news)

The Sydney Morning Herald carries a bitingly accurate summary of the political aspirations and impact of the group known as the Exclusive Brethren:

Hidden Prophets - The Sydney Morning Herald, Australia

You don't know these three Sydney suburban businessmen, but their sect has influenced politics in four countries. David Marr reports. WITH an iron hand, West Ryde businessman Bruce D. Hales rules his world church. To his 40,000 followers in the Exclusive Brethren, this prosperous supplier of office equipment in the Sydney suburbs is known as the Elect Vessel, the Lord's Representative on Earth, the Great Man, the Paul of Our Day, Minister of the Lord in Recovery and Mr Bruce.

Exclusive Brethren heavyweights  from left, Phillip McNaughton, Athol Greene and Daniel Hales.

June, 2006

WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Dear Mr. Chipeur,We are not under any illusions as to the probable impact of writing personally to you. We fully understand that rolling snowballs, once started, begin to form their own dynamics. However, we are of the opinion that perhaps this is an opportune moment to attempt something that has not yet occurred between us - a civilized method of communication and an honest exchange of views.

As you know, we voluntarily represent a small group of people who have an agenda that is as far from the concept of monetary gain as is possible to be positioned. You on the other hand, have a business to run which is dependent upon a public perception of your position in your profession to enable fee rates and to attract new clients. You have developed an interesting niche in your portfolio and we sense that this is what initially persuaded you to represent the Exclusive Brethren. Whether this is now a decision you regret, we do not know. As we are both aware, a rolling snowball can sometimes get out of control.

Where we philosophically meet is in the field of forcing change. You, as representative 'cavalry for hire', are the means by which modern western society often takes on missions under banners that may represent either Right or Wrong. We understand advocacy and appreciate that a client is a client. Conversely, Peebs.Net has a single purpose which, from a directional perspective, has little to do with personal reputation, operational overhead or status in our community. We firmly believe our mission to be Right and this may help explain why Peebs.Net was formed following the legal silencing of two predecessors. It will also explain why a 4th, 5th or 6th website will form within days of any successful closing of Peebs.Net or their replacements.

This disclosure will not fill you with horror! Why should it? Your client, the Exclusive Brethren, have deep pockets and it is their instructions you follow.

If it were not for the Exclusive Brethren, your researchers would not have been perusing the discussion threads deep within a relatively unimportant corner of the Internet. If it were not for your interest in maintaining and extending the scope of your relationship with your client, you would doubtlessly have not considered a lawsuit in the first place. The hyper-sensitivity of your organization to a handful of comments in a difficult to find corner of the World-Wide Web is indicative of a tactical decision being implemented. Your brief is to close down public discussion of matters relating to the Exclusive Brethren through all means available to you. To date you have successfully closed down two websites and are understandably anxious to add another notch to your tally! Every site closure, every lawsuit simply results in a fresh invoice being presented. Our mission is good business for you. (You're welcome!)

The fact that we now face each other in a legal dispute, arguably of your creation, is perhaps to be expected. However, we believe that this situation is worthy of analysis. Although we suspect that a court of law could eventually be the arena where our joint dispute will be presented, we also anticipate that the perceived slight upon your reputation, as described in the lawsuit, is not only so minor as to be on the boundary of tempting ridicule, such analysis is a key to understanding why you, your legal firm and the Alberta legal system would seemingly waste so much time, money and energy on such a superficially insignificant case.

So what is our perception regarding the 'lack of significance' within the lawsuit you continue to process? We believe analysis provides clues to understanding our joint objectives. One aspect is the essence of our joint Motivations - surely a base component of any legal confrontation? We believe that we can present the factual components of this dispute in any forum: private, public or legal and allow a dispassionate third-party to see the truth and begin to understand how this growing pile of paper began to form.

We can conduct the confrontation you seek in a courtroom - it is not a place that overwhelms us. Financially of course, this may not be a preferred route ... but you tactically already assume that! Your advantage in that scenario is that any confrontation would be in your arena of expertise and would be charged by the man-hour. If such action was heard in Alberta, we would also add the aspect of playing an 'away game' in your own backyard. We are aware that this would probably not assist us. We would not be acting in a intelligent manner if we chose to ignore our instincts and simply accepted your invitation to do battle in Calgary, Alberta.

From our perspective, we prefer to do battle in the media - here we have a number of advantages based upon our existing relationships and connections. Frankly, here we possess considerable advantage. We believe that most intelligent independent observers will view our position with a level of sympathy - not only due to the size of the weapon aimed at us over a comparatively minor issue, but also the factually-based stance that we and others have taken over the familial destruction wrought by your client, the group known as the Exclusive Brethren.

A further advantage to seeking the assistance of the media in this situation is that our voice will become louder in the exact place that your client wishes to silence us. It is a perfect rejoinder from our perspective. In our cause, no publicity is bad publicity. We do not believe that the same holds true in your situation.

It might be asked what any of this has to do with the ghost in your lawsuit - the unnamed third-party - the Exclusive Brethren. But we both know full well that this has everything to do with them - they are the reason we both stand facing each other as 'combatants'. The Exclusive Brethren are your client. The Exclusive Brethren are also our 'raison d'etre'. The reason we meet here or anywhere is ... the Exclusive Brethren.

Basically we can continue with Chipeur vs. Peebs.Net ... or we can simply cease hostilities. We cannot believe that you consider this rather poorly constructed defamation suit to be a ‘crushing blow’ to our mission. It is merely a lever to help you extract further information regarding ourselves. Our admittedly radical suggestion to shelve your lawsuit is unlikely to be a popular strategical option in your morning tactical discussions, but we believe it holds some components that you might find attractive. We do not wish you harm or misfortune in your sparkling career, your political ambitions, your continued financial success and personal or professional enterprises. Our 'beef' is not with you Mr. Chipeur.

The strength of Peebs.Net lies not in bank accounts or public positioning. Our public persona is not those of individuals, but lies within a growing base of information, informants and media connectivity. It is the information that we possess and carefully disseminate that represents our currency; and our strength is simply based on facts and a worldwide media contact list that trusts us to represent accurate and truthful information to them.

There should be no confusion in considering the varied outpourings in the busy Peebs.Net Forums with our news releases and editorialized summaries that the press devours on a regular basis. On the other hand, the content of the Forums is a mish-mash of thoughts, ideas, guesses and conversation. It is a 'noisy' area with a life and substance of its own. The editorialized portion of the site is a different scenario and has always been the main thrust, content and purpose of Peebs.Net. Indeed, the Site Objectives state quite clearly that the Forums are used to initiate, discuss and confirm reports and rumors.

The following summary contains a factual progression of your dispute and although some areas remain intentionally in reserve, we believe the essence of the following is clear enough to stand-alone in a courtroom or in any arena of our joint choosing.

- Your law firm (Chipeur) was retained by the Exclusive Brethren relative to the closing down of the 'Richard Wyman Site'. This perhaps was the beginning of your relationship with them.

- Richard Wyman was forced to retain legal representation and was eventually advised by his legal team to close his website. The full defense was not heard by a court of law as a settlement was reached before this could occur - Dick was tired after 7 years of dedicated effort in his campaign. Peebs.Net does not suffer the same restriction.

From our perspective, an Exclusive Brethren initiated action was expected from Day One and a cell structure was proactively created to prevent the impact of known Exclusive Brethren tactics. The web site describes this philosophy is some detail. The site content is backed-up and ready to be made live in several other geographical locations at a moments notice.

- Daniel Little then attempted to commence a simple website that held the Guest book content from the Wyman site, but was also persuaded to stop this process via Exclusive Brethren litigation. The closure of Littles’ site is highly indicative of a brief to prevent discussion and information regarding the Exclusive Brethren from being freely disseminated. We and others view this action to be an affront to the right to free speech and is reminiscent of darker political times and, of course, the actions of a cult terrified that the truth might set some free.

- Chipeur took possession of both web sites (exclusivebrethren.net and withdrawnfrom.com) and published purported statements on behalf of both site administrators. Knowing Dick and Daniel well, we know that it is not their words that are published, but rather the words of a legal dictation. It reminds us of a banner fallen in battle that is replaced by the colors of the new ‘owners’ of the hill...

- Once the electronic links were established between the physical positioning of the closed sites and Chipeur, several individuals started to ask questions about your company. These conversations took place on the Forums. We have some inquisitive members and they sometimes do good work in digging and suggesting new roads of inquiry. We know some of the correspondents ... others are completely anonymous.

- The first Peebs.Net heard regarding your objection to some forum statements that concerned your organization was a $500,000 lawsuit targeted at ourselves, Tim Twinham and several other entities. There was no prior contact from Chipeur. This is felt to be significant and will be presented as such to the media and in any eventual hearing. What sort of individual slaps a half million-dollar lawsuit without at least an attempt at a civilized resolution by direct request? Only an individual who has other objectives is the obvious response. The key here is Motivation - the heartbeat of any courtroom.

- The immediate reaction by ourselves, when notified by Tim Twinham of the lawsuit, was to remove the disputed thread from public access. This could also have been accomplished by a simple request from yourself to do so, but your decision to deliver a $500,000 lawsuit produced an equivalent response. Our immediate reaction to news of your lawsuit is therefore significant. It demonstrates that we were willing to remove the problematic content ... Mr. Chipeur - all you had to do was ask! The image of using a howitzer to crush an ant is perhaps germane?

- The only individual to be personally targeted so far is Tim Twinham. You do not know our identities and are unlikely to uncover them. We view our identities to be unimportant and our anonymity is deemed a 'necessary evil' in the light of the previous abilities of the Exclusive Brethren to close down websites with your professional assistance.

- In our opinion, there appears to be a level of 'desperation' in the way names, entities and pseudo-individuals have been added to the lawsuit. At least one of the named entities has nothing to do with any aspect of Peebs.Net and this alone demonstrates either sloppy research capabilities or is perhaps just another example of your true Motivation.

Tim Twinham is a self-taught computer software engineer who has assisted Richard Wyman in the past and has similarly assisted the various administrators of Peebs.Net on occasions. He has formatted web pages upon request and provided technical consultancy when requested. Our editorial content is entirely separate and should not be confused with Tim's contributions.

Your insistence on hounding Tim Twinham has perhaps temporarily slowed our ability to generate fresh material recently, but there is a backlog of information that is being prepared for publication - including of course, the details of this dispute should we decide to publish. Peebs.Net is run voluntarily; it therefore depends upon the availability of ourselves and those who help us. But as you know, we have a large pool of willing participants.

We mention all this for one simple reason ... we are hoping that you will find it within you to intellectually pause and 'step back' for a moment. We understand what it will mean to you to halt the proceedings you have commenced and we are somewhat doubtful that you are capable of so doing - however, we are intending that if nothing else, this document will be read into proceedings and become part of the evidence of the case – a case that is potentially far larger in scope than the existing documentation would indicate.

We believe that it is in your best interests to halt the proceedings and to re-examine your motivations and intentions regarding your dispute with Peebs.Net. You know as well as we do that this is not just about perceived defamation, libel or imagined damage. We both know that 'Chipeur vs. Peebs.Net' is a SLAPP attempt of textbook standard. All you are really interested in gaining are our names, location and sufficient information to enable your clients to file further suits. We are aware that you might eventually force a level of disclosure, but in terms of the longevity of our mission, you will always fail. More importantly to us, the people for whom we dedicate our time, energy and resources give us the encouragement and motivation to continue. During the process of ensuring the future of this mission, we train and prepare other volunteers for their task should we need to pass the responsibility for continuation.

Coming back to your lawsuit, it is important to note that what was written by electronically anonymous individuals on a public website forum could have come from literally anywhere, In fact, the comments which you include in your supporting documentation could have been planted by members of your own team in order to inflame or manipulate discord! It is feasible. The fact is that the anonymous comments could have come from anyone - several were from the Far East and the other from an equally unlikely geographic location. It is possible to 'anonymize' any Internet connection as your own Internet Consultants will confirm.

In terms of the media in which the disputed information temporarily existed, you stand on extremely shaky ground! There is an inalienable right of all Americans to enjoy Free Speech – indeed it is part of our Constitution. It is fiercely defendable. Tell an American that they cannot say something about virtually anything and you have a fight on your hands. It is no coincidence that the letters ACLU form a special folder in our correspondence archives! Oh yes they are interested! Do you realize the power of the resources available to us?

In our opinion, a prime Motivator here is the protection of income from wealthy litigious clients. In our opinion, your tactics and strategies highlight this conclusion. But we believe that this is not the only source of damage to your reputation that might result. A genuine problem zone is the fact that you continue to represent the Exclusive Brethren. We recommend you fully investigate your client from an objective viewpoint. When you do so, we believe it might be beneficial for you to consider how your firms' reputation might be affected when the Truth regarding the Exclusive Brethren increasingly becomes public knowledge. Perhaps it is fitting that the publication of the full content of the lawsuit and surrounding material will interest, enhance and attract further attention to our cause across the world. There are a number of special-interest groups that have asked us specifically to keep them informed.

The Exclusive Brethren are a flawed idea and today represent a dangerous sub-culture. A group formed from a desire to fulfill Gods' Plan most certainly, but a group that increasingly opted for the principles and demands of men rather than the Almighty. Today they split families; implement a psychologically destructive regime based on fear and manipulation; are dangerously arrogant and consider themselves the only true followers of Jesus Christ. The harm they have caused is extraordinary. They will be brought to public task for what they have done. It is simply a matter of time.

Do you wish to be tarred with the same brush Mr. Chipeur? You have an awesome reputation in your city, your province and your country. Why would you risk your enviable reputation for such a group as the Exclusive Brethren?

Do you really think that you will stop the flood of information regarding the activities of this cult-like group? The news items that you have seen are only the beginning. There are TV programs being prepared, books being written, articles being researched ... why on earth are you involved so deeply with them? Nothing in our research indicates any personal linkage between yourself and the Exclusive Brethren. Surely it is not just the income? Your website and marketing material goes to such pains to leverage your social awareness. Have you any concept of the credibility gap that will result when the public become aware of who you personally sue … and why?

There are so many other causes on our planet; so many other clients who need an advocate. Why take the tainted money of the Exclusive Brethren? Their cause is not your battle, you have simply been drafted as mercenaries on a battle field that, believe us, you do not want to win! The flashbulbs of success in this arena may damn you Mr. Chipeur. Your colleagues may congratulate and your accountants drool … but you will have traded a priceless commodity. You will have trashed your moral advantage.

Call off 'the dogs' Mr. Chipeur. We wish you no harm. We removed the words you found offensive immediately we were informed that there was an issue in your mind. We acted on your behalf even when there was no direct request to do so. Any court of law will recognize the good faith implicit in that action.

If it will assist your decision-making process, Tim Twinham has agreed to personally represent us in an off-the-record meeting with you or your representatives. We have asked him in a notation at the end of this document to print and forward a hardcopy on our behalf to ensure that you will have received our attempt at that most basic of human capabilities – communication.

If you do not feel that a face-to-face discussion would be beneficial, then we shall continue in our own single-minded objective: to pull back the curtains on the Exclusive Brethren, using our right to free speech in as public a manner as we are capable of. We are convinced that our motto - "The Truth will set you free" is the best way we can assist those trapped within the Exclusive Brethren to find the strength to leave … and in so doing, inform society in general about the darker side to a group of people who hold all of society, including yourself, in complete disdain.

 

Yours sincerely,

The Peebs.Net Team