Open Letter from Kristen Maaherra concerning Urantia Foundation  
November 20, 1997

On October 17, 1997, Carol Herren sent me an e-mail: Hi, I have a question -- someone posted this on the lists, do you have a response for me to pass on?

 "On the subject of Kristen and Eric specifically, I understand that the UF offered to drop its litigation some time ago if Kristen would just cease and desist from distributing her Folio version. It is my understanding that Kristen refused because one of her substantial financial backers refused to cover her outstanding legal bills if she did."

Instead of continuing to ignore this rumor, here's a (public) reply:

Lately I've been hearing the rumor that you posted above from every direction. I guess we should have "nipped it in the bud." The version I keep hearing is that trustee Tom Burns talked to me and offered settlement, but the "big money" interests backing me wouldn't let me settle. (Concerning a "cease and desist" from distributing the Folio Index disks: I had not been distributing the Folio Index disks since the lawsuit began -- there was a restraining order on me.)

Here's my version: Tom Burns and I did talk, in the fall, about 3 or 4 years ago. We walked by Lake Michigan, had lunch together, and spoke of many things -- including how we both would like to see a "Franklin Bible" version of the Urantia Papers Index. Mr. Burns asked that we both promise not to speak of the details of our conversation. (Which I am breaking now, in light of these rumors -- the half truths of which had to come from Tom Burns).

Mr. Burns told me he did not have the authority to settle the case, or to speak for all the trustees -- his was an information-gathering mission. But if I were willing to settle the case, he told me that he was sure that the Foundation would insist that I sign a consent order (not just a settlement agreement) which included admitting that the Foundation had valid trademarks and a valid copyright.

I told Mr. Burns that I do not believe that the Foundation has valid trademarks or a valid copyright. (Same old reasons: the name of a religion can't be trademarked; a religious symbol can't be trademarked; and works by superhuman authors can't be copyrighted.) God willing, I hope I will never be so pressured by the Foundation that I betray my faith that the Urantia Papers are actually an epochal revelation. I told Tom Burns I would not sign my rights away to my religion.

In telling Tom Burns that I would not sign anything that denied the revelatory nature of the Urantia Papers and the Banner of Michael, I was not influenced by any donor, wealthy or otherwise. (There was no opportunity to consult with anyone else, even if I had wanted to: this all happened in the course of one conversation with Mr. Burns, during which time we were constantly together.)

Carol, you can post this all over the lists, if you want to -- if you think it will help stop these rumors. However, I've noticed that some folks believe what they want to believe -- regardless of the facts.

If the Foundation wanted to settle, they would settle. It's the difference between words and actions. They're still "snarking." ("What I tell you three times is true."-- Lewis Carroll). What they have been doing is telling this Tom Burns story to everyone who mentions settling the lawsuit. I would be glad to settle the lawsuit, if I didn't have to deny Jesus and the revelation to do so. And don't forget: it was the Foundation who brought 3 new motions to the court-mandated settlement conference last spring in the Colorado lawsuit.

Another point: the Foundation has never made any offer to settle the Colorado lawsuit with me. (The discussion with Tom Burns was for the Arizona lawsuit).

It's ridiculous for people to believe that I'm following orders from big money backers when I don't even have a lawyer in the Colorado lawsuit! If I had such wealthy backing, wouldn't I at least have a lawyer? Can't folks see that these Foundation rumors fall of their own ill-logic? It's typical Foundation disinformation. And the Foundation's disinformation usually doesn't come straight from them, so they also have complete deniability (is that spelled right?) of the "information" when it proves to be false. This is how the Foundation cult of authority does business -- it has "deceived deceivers" sounding sincere, dispensing its lies.

Also, this rumor is typical of the Foundation's "blame the victim" attitude.  ("I had to hit her; she wouldn't give me her purse!") They can "pretend" they want to settle -- to the point of convincing people like Mo Siegel and Fred Harris to try to mediate a settlement -- when, actually, they're just trying to put to sleep their own people.  As well as trying to distract me from any effectiveness and drive away any support. (Why should anyone support me if I'm unwilling to settle?)

An example of the trustee's disinformation plus deniability is the story Tonia Baney told the newspaper in Boulder: "the Urantia Papers themselves make clear that readers are not to form a religion from the work." And we all know that on page 966 of the Urantia Papers, the revelators say that every new revelation gives rise to a new cult!

While we're on the subject, another rumor I've been hearing is from the trustee from France.  Apparently, he tells people that "Kristen is suing the Foundation -- she started the Appeal."  Again, falling with its own weight: Why would I initiate an appeal?  I WON in the lower court! So the trustee from France is being used as a "deceived deceiver."

Also, I have never counterSUED the Foundation.  When you answer a complaint (i.e. the lawsuit filed by the Foundation), your answers (any answers, usually defenses) are called "counterclaims." This is different from a counterSUIT, which I have not done -- contrary to more disinformation given out by the Foundation.