UK 40th Anniversary Celebration.

[David Dunn]

Indar seems content to continue to deal in innuendo and allusion. It is an unpleasant way to behave, and Mike is quite right to call him on it. I think Indar (and Huw) would do well to withdraw their besmirchments. While I quite agree with what Mike has written, there is one point that is overlooked, namely that Mizuno sensei and WSKO have settled this once and for all, with a legally binding contract. There is absolutely no question of any of the types of criminality that has been suggested, and Mizuno sensei would be fully entitled to seek legal remedy for any untrue and defamatory statements. I wonder why people think that there are no consequences to attempting to destroy someone's reputation.

I have also seen the documents. My overwhelming reaction was "so what?". All they showed was that travel expenses had been claimed, and paid. As Mike mentioned, Richard Jarman and Chris Lloyd both saw them at a meeting in Kensington. Richard, who doesn't want to join e-budo, said I can quote this:

"At one meeting attended by Arai and Aosaka Senseis I asked to see evidence of their claims regarding Mizuno Sensei. After some discussion, Chris Lloyd and myself as BSKF President were shown a number of photo copies purporting to be falsified tickets. I was not convinced that what I was being shown amounted to falsified claims, it is my recollection that Chris Lloyd was of a similar opinion. I asked Arai Sensei if he was prepared to see the BSKF break apart over this matter, he replied through the interpreter "right is right". The BSKF did not decide to leave WSKO.

We could not stand still and see our national organisation interfered with and emasculated by the so called Supreme Leader of the World Happiness Movement."

That said, the approach that some people in the BSKF took of trying to work out if what WSKO had alluded to was true, was entirely the wrong approach, and it was very damaging for British Shorinji kempo. The job of working out if someone is guilty of a crime is best left to a court, and again I agree with Mike. You make accusations through the proper channels, or not at all. The BSKF needed to work out if it was proper for WSKO to tell us who we could and couldn't allow to train with us, whether we might be in breach of employment law, who we may or may not talk to and whether we wanted to become salesmen in a franchise. In the end a strong majority of both branches and kenshi decided that we did not want this.

It is clear to me that Mizuno sensei had refused to take orders that he believed were against the interests of some BSKF members (such as who they may or may not work for), and that this whole affair and the trumped-up claims were in retaliation for that. Everyone else is entitled to make up their own minds. WSKO's actions since speak for themselves. They have pursued us through years of civil litigation, which was not only pointless, but malicious. When people like Indar make the claim that we should live and let live, I'll take that seriously if you petition WSKO to leave us alone to do what we're doing.

[Kari MakiKuutti]

...
Mizuno sensei and WSKO have settled this once and for all, with a legally binding contract.
...

When did this happen?

[David Dunn]

I don't know exactly when Kari, but earlier this year. Frankly, it's none of my business. I believe that the contract is not confidential, so you could ask either party to let you see a copy.

[Indar]

Indar seems content to continue to deal in innuendo and allusion. It is an unpleasant way to behave, and Mike is quite right to call him on it. I think Indar (and Huw) would do well to withdraw their besmirchments.

I don't think that you have thought this through. Do you want W.S.K.O. to say "Tameo Mizuno was the Chief Instructor in the U.K. and a W.S.K.O. instructor and board member for many years until we discovered that he had been stealing from us. We made a deal to enable him to save face and eventually resume training, however he did not honour the deal so we dismissed him" ?

I'm not saying that this is an historically accurate account, because I don't know. But it is W.S.K.O.'s version, and I assume that they feel that it's better for both sides if it remains unsaid. Which it would have done if Dave hadn't hijacked this thread.

I don't see any innuendo or allusion in what I said. It seems to me to be open and direct.

You are complaining that W.S.K.O. are re-writing history. It is true that they are not telling the whole story. But it is possible that they are motivated by kindness rather than malice.

[Indar]

Where WSKO played their hand very well was by relying on rumour and insinuation. It is impossible to defeat a rumour of wrong-doing, as you can't prove a negative. Although WSKO lost most of the UK, they can continue to rely on the rumours being circulated by their supporters to undermine the BSKF. British law doesn't approve of this type of character assassination -you either challenge openly or say nothing. I have no idea whether this is the case or not in Japan, but to me it seems honourable to make good on your allegations or withdraw them.

You will have to judge WSKO on how they behave towards you and others. If they have behaved consistently honourably in front of you, then I am happy for you. I now remember little incidents that I found odd before 2010, and wish I hadn't just ignored them.

Best regards,

Mike

Hi Mike.

I completely agree. You say that W.S.K.O. have acted dishonorably. If this is true, then myself and other W.S.K.O. members are also dishonourable by remaining in W.S.K.O.

The issue that I have is that The B.S.K.F. acted against me in exactly the way that you accuse W.S.K.O. of doing.

If your allegations against W.S.K.O. are correct, then of course two wrongs don't make a right. But you are not in any position to claim the moral high ground.

In 2008 I received a letter from the General Secretary of the B.S.K.F which made serious allegations against me. I wrote back asking for the opportunity to reply to these allegations. This was denied by the B.S.K.F.
If any W.S.K.O. or B.S.K.F members would like to see a copy of the letter then please p.m. me.

I believe that the B.S.K.F. also contacted other federations in Europe in an attempt to stop me from training in Shorinji Kempo seminars in those countries.

I believe that the reason for the letter, and the attempt y the B.S.K.F. to stop me from practicing Shorinji Kempo, was that Mr. Mizuno claimed that I owed him money resulting from my involvement in his restaurant business. I will expand on this when I have more time, but I will point out that I informed Mr. Mizuno that I was not prepared to pay him any more money until I had seen the accounts from the business, which b.t.w. I have still not seen.

I do not bear a grudge against the B.S.K.F., and I don't believe that anyone else in The U.K.S.K.F or W.S.K.O. does either. It looks as though you all had a good seminar, and I genuinely feel that we are happy for you. As far as I know, the only issue that W.S.K.O. has is the use of the name "Shorinji Kempo".

It seems from Daves comments that you do have a grudge against us. As I stated, if you feel that W.S.K.O. has acted maliciously then this is understandable.

Finally, for the moment, the strange thing is that none of this makes any sense. It is almost unbelievable that W.S.K.O. would act against their own interests in this way. The conclusion must be that either they are capable of being incredibly malicious, which I haven't seen any evidence for, or that they are genuinely willing to do the right thing. As the saying goes; "A principle isn't a principle until it costs you something".

Kesshu.

[SandM]

Hello Indar,

I certainly don't believe you or other people are dishonourable for remaining in WSKO, whatever I may think of WSKO's actions. We all see different things, and make our judgments accordingly. I have a great deal of affection and respect form many of the people I've trained with over the last two decades. The side of WSKO I've seen has been extremely unpleasant - but you have not seen that, and I would not expect you to take my word for it.

I was aware that you had some unpleasantness with Sensei Mizuno and the BSKF, but I never knew the details. I was vaguely aware there was a cloud hanging over you at the Basel seminar, but I sincerely hope you didn't feel I contributed to it in any way. From what you've said there does seem to be some ironic parallel here - and I'm certainly not going to stand up for anyone if you have been wronged along the line. What I can say (as one of the directors of the BSKF) is that such a thing would not happen nowadays - if there's one thing this affair has done it has made the BSKF re-structure along modern, constitutional lines.

As far as I'm concerned, I continue to train for the reasons I started to train: because I like the style and philosophy. I'm more than willing to train with or assist any other people who feel the same - no matter who they are affiliated with. If you or anyone else from WSKO came to train in Bristol I would happily welcome them and recognise whatever their current grade was. I am aware that you are not allowed to extend the same courtesy to me or my students, but my offer still stands.

Best regards,

Mike

[Indar]

Indar seems content to continue to deal in innuendo and allusion. It is an unpleasant way to behave, and Mike is quite right to call him on it. I think Indar (and Huw) would do well to withdraw their besmirchments.

Everyone else is entitled to make up their own minds. WSKO's actions since speak for themselves. They have pursued us through years of civil litigation, which was not only pointless, but malicious. When people like Indar make the claim that we should live and let live, I'll take that seriously if you petition WSKO to leave us alone to do what we're doing.

Why should I withdraw? If you can give me a valid reason, then of course I will consider your request, since I am nothing if not reasonable.

I think that there are two separate issues here which have become entangled. Perhaps we can make some progress by trying to separate them.

W.S.K.O., (or really Hombu), maintain that "Shorinji Kempo" is a proper name which belongs to them. You maintain that it is a generic term like "karate" or kung fu" which is not owned by anyone. The court case ensued, (I believe) as a result of you registering the name "British Shorinji Kempo Federation" and W.S.K.O. objecting. I actually side with W.S.K.O. for reasons that I have already explained, but I support your right to challenge this.

The other issue is the dismissal by W.S.K.O. of Mr. Mizuno. They claim that he acted dishonestly. You claim that he didn't.

Kari, Huw, and myself had formed opinions based on both the evidence presented to us, and our knowledge of the people involved. The main evidence available to the public, (including myself) is here. http://www.neopax.com/Artemis/shorinji/SKEGM.pdf

With regard to the people involved, my opinion is based mainly of my business involvement with Mr. Mizuno and Ms. Kadowaki. I lost a lot of money in this business, but more importantly I suffered a lot of stress due to their inability or unwillingness to comply with legal requirements.

This is not conclusive with regard to the allegations made by W.S.K.O., but when judging the evidence it seems reasonable to form a conclusion based on ones prior knowledge. Therefore I refute your accusations of behaving unpleasantly.

I have posted this because you continue to claim that members of W.S.K.O. and the U.K.S.K.F. are behaving unfairly and dishonourably. I don't see any purpose in continuing this confrontation, however I shall of course, defend my own reputation.

[David Dunn]

Indar,
I said two things. First, it's not for me (or you) to try to draw conclusions about someone's guilt of a crime. That's what courts are for. Unless someone has been convicted of a crime, it is wrong to say they are guilty of it, and they are fully entitled to remedy under the law. Second, Mizuno sensei and WSKO have finished that business and totally settled it, once and for all, and therefore it is nobody else's business to keep it alive. You could ask WSKO to show you the settlement since there was no confidentiality clause.

The only dishonesty I mentioned is that written by James Woodward about the UKSKF being 40 years old. All the other stuff was brought up by you, and is totally irrelevant to the original topic, which was the UKSKF's event, which you asked for feedback on, and which I provided.

Mysteriously, without a word, Huw's post and all mentions of it have disappeared. This thread will read very strangely in the future.

[David Dunn]

Actually, Huw's post re-appeared after I said that. Google+ strangeness.