Date: Thurs, Oct 26, 2000 at 02:23:50 (GMT) From: Michael Dettmers Email: dettmers@gylanix.com To: EddyTheTurtle Subject: The Swiss foundation Message:

Eddy: You are entitled to your opinion and, I’m sure if you were in my position, you may have done things differently. In any case, I created the Élan Vital Foundation in Switzerland in 1979 and not in the USA or the UK for several reasons. First, Maharaji had recently disbanded Denver as his International Headquarters, so it wouldn’t make much sense to turn around and set up the new international coordinating structure in the USA. Nor would the UK be a suitable choice because we had just won a long drawn-out battle with the UK Charity Commissioners over the control of DLM against Maharaji’s mother who had laid claim to it, and we didn’t want to have to deal with them to make whatever changes were necessary to fulfill the Foundation’s aims. Second, we were able to start fresh in Switzerland and set up a Foundation whose aims and objectives accurately reflected what it was intended to do, that is to support Maharaji’s programs and tours around the world. Third, we named it the Élan Vital Foundation (the term was coined by the French philosopher Henri Bergson and means “life force”) because the name did not need to be translated in all of the countries where DLM existed. And it wasn’t too difficult to have all of the DLM’s around the world change their names to Élan Vital. Even though these newly named Élan Vital organizations were independent of each other, they were able to contribute some of their funds to its sister organization in Switzerland because their purposes were aligned and their names were the same. Fourth, from an international perspective, Switzerland is very highly regarded and its strict laws governing Foundations is well known, again making it easier for countries around the world to gain permission, if such was required, to contribute some of its funds to the Foundation. Finally, Maharaji had devotees around the world, including Switzerland, who were willing to volunteer their time and money to handle the logistics and costs, so that was not really an issue in this case. I was the only non-Swiss Director. The foundation presented its books and records for review to the Swiss authorities every year and there was no latitude to spend the funds on anything other than for its stated aims and objectives. From my perspective, the structure fulfilled its intended purpose very well. What, if anything, has become of it since I left, I have no idea. I will grant you one point, however. Despite the Foundation’s struggles with cash flow and meeting expenses as I mentioned in an earlier post, that factor didn’t dampen our delusions of grandeur. We may not have been the UN or the Red Cross, but we were certain that it was only a matter of time before Maharaj’s mission dwarfed those organizations, and we would be ready. Michael

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 26, 2000 at 10:38:32 (GMT) From: TeddyTheTurtle Email: None To: Michael Dettmers Subject: The Swiss foundation Message:

Mike You say that M disbanded his international HQ in Denver and therefore it did not make sense to have the foundation in the usa. I dont see really the connection between the two, what was the reason M disbanded his international hq in denver?. He or someone obviously decided that international was not gona come out of usa period. Was the IRS chasing that hard...? You also say that DLM as a registered charity in the uk was going through legal problems re: Mataji. But you would have had to register EV anyway as a charity again in the UK so you would have had to deal with the charities commision. As you know, running a foundation in switzerland requires significant legal and financial expertise , and I would be surprised if the swiss premies were up to that task. You are telling us that the CEO or the Commander in Chief and his HQ staff are based in one country (us) whereas the foundation and the logistics of running an international organisation is based in another countery who's mother tongue is an obsecure dielect of german, just because M has some local premies and it is a prestigous location. Sorry it does not make much sense. Also Mike, remember in those days ('79) I would be extremely surprised if such a complex idea of running a swiss international foundation has come from premies. We were running soup kitchens and launderets and car wash shops, albeit loss making. It sounds to me the whole idea came from very astute financial advisors...

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 26, 2000 at 20:40:53 (GMT) From: Michael Dettmers Email: dettmers@gylanix.com To: TeddyTheTurtle Subject: The Swiss foundation Message:

Teddy and Eddy the Turtles, I will explain why M disbanded Denver as DLM HQ when I respond to Joe and Susan’s question about that period. You will see that it had nothing to do with the IRS, nor did M make Switzerland his new HQ. It was simply the place where the activities I described in my earlier post were funded and coordinated. Your point in paragraph 2 is exactly why we didn’t want to get further involved with the UK Charity Commissioners. I think that many premies, some of whom may now be ex-premies for all I know, will find your suggestion that the Swiss premies were not up to the task, or that most premies were only capable of running soup kitchens, launderettes and car washes at a loss, to be insulting. While what you say may be have been true in some cases, it does not reflect the capabilities of premies in general, nor those with whom I worked. I have always acknowledged that I secured expert legal and financial advice, but the idea of coordinating the Élan Vital operations out of Switzerland was my idea. TM (Transcendental Meditation) had had its international HQ there for years. Michael

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 16:16:02 (GMT) From: EddyTheTurtle Email: None To: Michael Dettmers Subject: The Swiss foundation Message:

SOrry...Mike..you misconstrued what I said. I am not insulting premies, I was one. The reality of the situation is that most premie businesses that I was aware of, did not require the level of sophistication of a swiss foundation. Your explanation of denver still does not answer why not relocate hq to somewhere else in the usa. You mention TM having its international hq in switzerland...sure , but did they also have a swiss foundation. One of the objectives of a swiss foundation, is that it actually hides the eventual benefeciaries or owners. The name 'foundation' is confusing and implies some kind of charitable status, in fact it is not. It is a construct that can be used for annonymous asset holdings. By the way, are you familiar with a Miami company sold in the mid 80's called 'Star enterprises' or a similar sounding name. The person who bought it told me that it belonged to a Mr Singh, and since it is a jet fitting business based in Miami, I thought there may be a connection with M. Were you involved in anyway with this outfit?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 20:29:42 (GMT) From: a0aji Email: and_on_anand@yahoo.com To: thread Subject: The Swiss foundation Message:

What about AITTA? What was the story on that?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 18:29:32 (GMT) From: Michael Dettmers Email: dettmers@gylanix.com To: EddyTheTurtle Subject: The Swiss foundation Message:

Eddy, I do not know anything about Star Enterprises. I will explain about the disbanding of the HQ when I respond to Joe's question. I don't know anything about the inner workings of TM. Michael

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 01:29:40 (GMT) From: Jim Email: None To: Michael Dettmers Subject: Michael, I've got a burning question for you? Message:

Did you ever in a million years imagine that you'd be explaining yourself to someone called Teddy the Turtle? The Lord works in mysterious ways, huh? :)

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Fri, Oct 27, 2000 at 13:15:50 (GMT) From: Michael Dettmers Email: dettmers@gylanix.com To: Jim Subject: Michael, I've got a burning question for you? Message:

No I didn't. Jim, does this mean that I'm finally on the road to true enlightenment? Michael

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 26, 2000 at 15:24:56 (GMT) From: a0aji Email: and_on_anand@yahoo.com To: TeddyTheTurtle Subject: The Swiss foundation Message:

TTT - M Dettmers said he's going out of town. You may wish to bookmark your post and refer him to it upon his return.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 26, 2000 at 02:35:49 (GMT) From: Rob Email: None To: Michael Dettmers Subject: The Swiss foundation Message:

Good evening Michael, You know, your explanation here sounds perfectly reasonable and not at all sinister, it just puzzles me as to why Elan Vital don't open up more on their website and lay everything out in the open. Admittedly I wouldn't have thought Switzerland was the only viable alternative, given the high cost of doing business there - I would have looked at different off-shore locations, like Jersey, Bermuda etc, what no matter. Still one thing bothers me. If I'm getting the correct message from what you are saying here, all their finances are completely above-board and accountable, so why not just publish audited accounts for each Elan Vital worldwide and put an end to all the speculation? This is not a 'loaded' question, I genuinely do not see a problem if they are squeaky clean. Did you ever suggest as much in your term of office?

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 26, 2000 at 03:05:47 (GMT) From: Michael Dettmers Email: dettmers@gylanix.com To: Rob Subject: The Swiss foundation Message:

Rob, No, I never suggested as much, nor was there ever a request to do so. Of course, when I was in office, the internet didn't exist . You will have to ask EV why they don't publish their numbers. You ask a very good question. Michael

Return to Index -:- Top of Index

Date: Thurs, Oct 26, 2000 at 02:08:31 (GMT) From: Bin Liner Email: None To: Eddy and gerry Subject: The Swiss foundation Message:

1st : thought MD was bullshitting. 2nd : thought he wasn't. 3rd : not sure what to think. It's the confidentiality clause that's bugging me. Got to think about that some more.

Return to Index -:- Top of Index