by Kort E Patterson, Editor
As the letters from Brewster Gillett and Dan Boone indicate, efforts are under way to censor and restrict the contents of Port of Call. The contents of Port of Call are considered "dangerous" by those seeking to gain control over the newsletter. Note that the complaints do not allege that the contents are obscene, fraudulent, or even factually in error. Those complaints could be easily disproven and overcome. Instead the allegations are that Port of Call contains dangerous information from which the members and organization must be protected.
The readers of Port of Call are by definition highly intelligent - among the top 1% of the population. If any population group should be able to "safely" consider controversial ideas and concepts it is this group. As a member of Intertel myself, I find the whole concept that someone would consider him/herself competent to decide what was "safe" for me to read offensive and insulting. But the intention of the self proclaimed censors is that the members not even be aware they are being "protected".
The substance and production quality of Port of Call is unique in Intertel. Except for politically correct articles advocating world government and gun control in Integra, all Intertel regional newsletters are bland empty mailings containing nothing that could possibly offend or cause any form of "undesirable" intellectual stimulation.
At least Mr. Boone had the decency to address me directly with his complaints. Most of the alleged complaints have been directed at leveraging the power structure of Intertel to impose "regulations" on Port of Call that will accomplish the effect of censorship without the censors having to reveal themselves and their actions to public scrutiny.
The Intertel "ruling elite" and those seeking to impose controls on Port of Call have not seen any need to include me in their discussions. I suppose this effort to silence my dangerous diatribes shouldn't come as a surprise since this same type of campaign to suppress politically incorrect thought has been so successful in nearly every other media. The Soviets proved that you don't have to worry about the truth if you can effectively suppress the free flow of information among your intended victims.
The misguided or malevolent morally and ethically bankrupt power seekers actively destroying the very foundations of our liberty, freedom and principles of personal responsibility, faced with the inability of their transparent dogma to withstand even the most cursory critical examination, have adopted the Soviet strategy of suppressing embarrassing truths so that their lies can persist unchallenged. To this end, even Port of Call with its minuscule distribution poses a threat to the fabric of lies being woven over our increasingly blindfolded eyes.
At least one woman has officially demanded to be reassigned to a different region so she won't receive Port of Call - bolstering the claims that members will quit Intertel unless I am controlled. The few positive responses I've received have been verbal or "not a submission" I can print. The last couple issues have been largely composed of my submissions lending apparent credibility to the claim that Port of Call only represents one person's point of view.
On the financial side, Intertel has failed to provide any funding for Port of Call in over a year. When none of my expenses were reimbursed after the first issue, I assumed that most of the 1994 newsletter budget had been spent before I took over as editor. But none of my invoices have been honored this year either. Port of Call received a member contribution but the check was made out to Intertel. Unable to deposit an "Intertel" check, I sent it in, expecting the funds to be returned in a form I could use. I have not even received back from Intertel those funds donated to Port of Call. Considering the concurrent political attacks on Port of Call, I must interpret the failure of Intertel to reimburse my production costs as just another part of the campaign to force me into compliance.
For what it's worth, the range of production costs for the newsletter are as follows. A minimum newsletter (single page) would cost $ 88.40 for printing and postage. The cost to produce a quality 8 page (4 sheets printed both sides) newsletter is $143.60, with the extra non-labor cost of quality being $ 55.20 per issue. Total cost to produce Port of Call is $861.60 per year. The Intertel budget is supposedly around $350 per year, leaving approx. $500/year as the extra cost that Overall Technology was expecting to cover.
Unfortunately, the behind the scenes pressure tactics of Port of Call's adversaries are too often successful. Those who have no life of their own have lots of time to attack those more fully occupied in productive and creative pursuits. I have too many demands on my time to both produce the newsletter and fight a political inside campaign to fend off the censors. Baring the unlikely event of an overwhelming groundswell of support among the members, I expect that eventually the secret lobbying campaign to impose restrictive guidelines on Port of Call will succeed.
I agreed to edit Port of Call because I personally believe we are in the midst of a major struggle over the free flow of information and ideas, as well as our personal freedoms. As a responsible citizen, I feel an obligation to make a contribution to the preservation of our civilization. I view publishing Port of Call as one of my more effective contributions to the defense of freedom. My ego and sense of self worth requires that if I'm going to be involved in producing a newsletter, the result has to be something I can be proud of. I am unwilling to be involved in the kind of newsletter that my attackers would have me produce.
Instead of wasting my valuable time fighting with those who fear the truth of my words, I am considering taking Port of Call private. It would only take a couple minutes to remove any references to Intertel. The financial considerations would be no different - Intertel hasn't paid any of the costs anyway. The occasional member submissions could be easily replaced.
If I am removed as region 7 editor and you wish to continue receiving Port of Call, send your name and address to the PO Box on the front page. Otherwise I shall seek readership outside of the increasingly manipulated and controlled "high intelligence" organizations. Far more "smart" people chose not to belong to Intertel and Mensa than join, and both organizations are currently experiencing declining memberships. When the censors prevail, I expect to join the nonmember majority.