Comment on this article |
Email this Article
News :: Politics
Procter&Gamble, Satanism And Charls Schlund...
by Martin F. Abernathy
Email: abemarf59 (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified!)
01 Jul 2005
There WERE links between high-level people at Procter&Gamble and Satanism, in the 1970s!
The "rumors" about high-level people at the Procter&Gamble corporation having ties to Satanism were TRUE! Charles Schlund saw documented evidence of this in 1977. Is this where the "rumor" started?
From: "mf_abernathy" <abemarf59 (at) hotmail.com>
Date: Thu Jun 30, 2005 7:49 pm
Subject: Question For Chuck
Do you have any information about the Procter & Gamble corporation
having any ties to Satanism? Thanks.
From: Charles Schlund <cschlund@...>
Date: Fri Jul 1, 2005 12:58 am
Subject: Re: [mcforums] Question For Chuck
Yes we had papers on them and one of the people running the company at the time
we had the files sold his soul for $500,000.00.
I found this unbelievable when the Justice Department offered me 3,000,000.00
for my soul.
In the CIA files I had some people sold their souls for very little money. Most
wanted sex or stardom or some other thing. Some were just evil or pedophiles.
I do not remember the names of anyone from Procter & Gamble. Chuck
The Washington Post
July 2, 1982, Friday, Final Edition
SECTION: Style; Personalities; D2
BYLINE: Kathryn Buxton
Procter & Gamble Co., fighting rumors that it supports Satan and that its trademark is a satanic symbol, said yesterday it has filed suits against three people.
Named in the suits were Mike Campbell of Atlanta and Mr. and Mrs. William J. Moore Jr. of Pensacola, Fla.
The company, which manufactures and markets cleaning and food products, said last week it would take aggressive action to stop the persistent rumors. The company reported receiving more than 12,000 calls a month from people asking about the rumors. In addition, boycotts of P&G products have accompanied the reports, the company said.
P&G said certain people have made statements and distributed literature falsely asserting that P&G supported Satan and its trademark is a satanic symbol.
P&G spokesman Stuart Kunkler said the company has intercepted the literature and plans to file more suits if warranted.
"We haven't distributed any literature," said Mrs. Moore. She refused further comment.
Campbell could not be reached for comment.
The New York Times
July 22, 1982, Thursday, Late City Final Edition
SECTION: Section D; Page 1, Column 3; Financial Desk
LENGTH: 1524 words
HEADLINE: P.& G.'S BATTLES WITH RUMORS
BYLINE: By SANDRA SALMANS, Special to the New York Times
Cathy Gebing's telephone rings every few minutes, and the question is always the same: Is the moon-and-stars design on Procter & Gamble's 70-odd products the mark of the Devil?
''No, sir, that's a false rumor,'' Mrs. Gebing answers patiently. ''That's our trademark, we've had it about 100 years.'' Normally the consumer services department, this is now the rumor control center for Procter, the consumer goods giant that has lately become the focus of a nationwide rumor campaign.
The rumors, first appearing about two years ago, essentially contend that Procter's 132-year-old trademark, which shows the Man in the Moon and 13 stars representing the original colonies, is a symbol of Satanism and Devil worship. The rumor-mongering also urges a Christian boycott of Procter's products, which include Pampers, Duncan Hines and Folger's plus dozens of other well-known names.
Libel Suits Filed
After a great deal of indecision about how to combat the rumors, Procter took formal action this month, filing libel suits against seven individuals for spreading ''false and malicious'' rumors. The company has said that it may file more suits. ''What we have to do is make people realize that we mean business,'' said Robert Norrish, Procter's public relations director.
It is, in fact, a public relations problem and a difficult one, as experts in that field note. ''Legal recourse isn't a happy way to go,'' said Robert Schwartz, president of Manning, Selvage & Lee, a leading New York public relations firm, ''but they probably had very few alternatives. The company was diverting resources to deal with this and, at some point, you have to call a halt.'' However, Mr. Schwartz added, if Procter loses the suits, its image will certainly suffer.
Procter has firmly rejected suggestions that it simply remove the offending symbol from its packages. That, however, increases the suspicions of some consumers.
''If it causes controversy, I don't see why they have to have it,'' said Faye Dease, a clinic supervisor at Womack Army Hospital in Fort Bragg, N.C. Mrs. Dease said that, when a mirror is held up to the logo, the curlicues in the man's beard become 666 - the sign of the Antichrist. ''I just don't understand the coincidence,'' she said.
Whispers About McDonald's
Procter is not the only company to have fallen siege to rumors. McDonald's has found itself subject to whisper campaigns contending alternately that the restaurant chain was giving to Satan or that it was putting worms in its hamburgers. Entenmann's, the bakery owned by the Warner-Lambert Company, was rumored to be owned by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church.
But the rumors have been more enduring at Procter, and the company's course - to go not only to news organizations and the clergy for help, but also to the courts - has been more aggressive.
Procter is going after the rumor with all the diligence that it devotes to a new product introduction. A three-inch-thick file documents the company's strategy: a map of the United States, showing the geographical sweep of the rumors; tallies, state by state, of the queries to the consumer services department; tallies, day by day, of the nature of the complaint (''Satanic''; ''Mentions lawsuits''; ''Has heard/ seen media reports''; Check more than one if appropriate'').
Calls Began 2 Years Ago
At the consumer services department, whose toll-free telephone number is printed on every Procter package, the calls first began trickling in two years ago, the company said.
Individuals in a handful of Middle Western states said they had heard that Procter was owned by the Rev. Sun Myung Moon's followers. In November 1980, Procter felt compelled to answer the charges by writing to news organizations in those states.
But in December 1981, there were suddenly 1,152 queries, by the company's tally, mainly from the West Coast, and the focus shifted from the Moon church to the Devil. ''In the beginning, God made the tree,'' a 75-year-old woman wrote the company. ''Where did Satan get Charmin?''
Many callers reported hearing that Procter's ''owner'' had appeared on a television talk show where he admitted selling his soul to the Devil in order to gain the company's success.
Anonymous fliers, usually mispelling the company's name, began to appear at supermarkets. ''Proctor & Gamble,'' one said, ''announced on the Phil Donahue Show Friday that they contribute 10% of their earnings to the Satanic Religion (which is Devil worship).''
''Do you realize,'' another anonymous flier said, ''that if all the Christians in the World would stop buying Proctor and Gamble Products this Company would soon be out of business?''
Procter did a second mailing, to news organizations on the West Coast. But this time there was no letup. By last spring, Procter was getting 12,000 queries monthly about its relationship with the Devil. There were reports of ministers, mainly in small Fundamentalist churches, attacking Procter from the pulpit and urging their congregations to boycott its products.
Given the dubious results of the news media campaign, John Smale, Procter's president, decided on a less public line of attack. The company wrote to local clergy and enclosed testaments of faith from prominent clerics, including preachers who led an earlier attack on Procter for sponsoring television shows of what they regarded as questionable morality. The Rev. Jerry Falwell, leader of Moral Majority, a church-based conservative political action group, wrote that he had talked with Procter's chairman ''and I am certain neither he nor his company is associated in any way with Satanism or Devil worship.''
By June, however, the center was receiving more than 15,000 queries monthly about the trademark, including a few from Alaska and Hawaii.
Taking 'the Offensive'
Mr. Smale told Procter's public relations department to forget his earlier cautions. On June 10, ''We presented our recommendations to Mr. Smale,'' William Dobson, of the public relations department, recalled. ''It was essentially to go on the offensive.''
On July 1, Procter announced its first lawsuits. The litigation was ''a very hard-nosed way to generate publicity,'' Mr. Dobson said. ''We were working on the traditional Procter concepts: reach and frequency.''
The subjects of those lawsuits and a second wave this week - Mike Campbell of Atlanta, William and Linda Moore of Pensacola, Fla., Guy Sharpe of Atlanta, Elma Ed Pruitt of Clovis, N.M., and Sherman and Margaret McCord of Tullahoma, Tenn. - were chosen simply because ''they just happened to be the first people where we felt we had enough evidence to go to court,'' Mr. Dobson said.
Most of the leads to ministers had evaporated, and in any case a suit against a member of the clergy, ''frankly, wasn't our optimum choice,'' Mr. Dobson said.
All but one of the defendants sell products of competing consumergoods companies, according to Procter. The Moores and Mr. Pruitt are distributors for the Amway Corporation, which sells soap and other consumer products door-to-door. The McCords are distributors for Shaklee, which sells vitamins, household cleaners and personal care products. Mr. Campbell works for a grocery brokerage firm that represents manufacturers of household cleaning products.
However, ''there is no evidence that companies are pushing this rumor,'' Mr. Norrish said. Nor is it clear that they were economically inspired. ''We didn't try to figure out motives,'' he added. ''We just want to stop them.''
Most of the defendants denied the charges or said that they had become convinced that the rumors were false.
Mrs. McCord said that she had printed the rumor in her newsletter to other Shaklee distributors, but had realized her mistake and apologized in both the newsletter and a letter to Procter. Mrs. Pruitt said she and her husband stopped distributing anti-Procter leaflets after learning that the rumor was false.
William Hurst, the lawyer for Mr. Campbell, said that his client did hand an anti-Procter circular to a supermarket clerk when he was stocking the shelves with Clorox, but it was his only copy and ''he did not believe it.''
Mr. Sharpe, a well-known weatherman for WXIA-TV in Atlanta and a Methodist lay preacher, issued a categorical denial that he had made defamatory remarks against Procter.
The lawsuits provoked the hoped-for flurry of publicity, including network television coverage, and the number of queries to the consumer services department has fallen by half, Procter says. But few of the remaining 250 or so callers each day have heard of the lawsuits. ''How do you reach them?'' Mr. Norrish wonders.
GRAPHIC: Illustrations: photo of Procter & Gamble symbol photo of Marcie Pace of P&G
This work is in the public domain
Please Don't Feed the Trolls
Wikipedia defines an Internet Troll as: "An Internet troll is either a person who sends messages on the Internet hoping to entice other users into angry or fruitless responses, or a message sent by such a person." Boston IMC strives to provide both a grassroots media resource as well as a forum for people to contribute to a meaningful discussion about local issues. Please, when posting comments, be respectful of others and ignore those trying to interrupt or discourage meaningful discourse. Thank you.
-- Boston Indymedia volunteers
Add a Comment
Due to on going anti spam work quick comments are currently broken please use the full comment form. We do hope to have quick comments back on line soon.