Theos-Talk Archives (January 1998 Message tt00178)

At 04:33 PM 1/17/1998 -0800, Jerry Hejka-Ekins wrote:

>Between you, Bart and Ramadoss, I'm beginning to feel a lot of regret for
>ever mentioning Mr. Gomes name in the first place.  I never said that Mr.

Since you mentioned me in your reply, I need to make a few items clear.

First of all, as I already responded, I am generally in the habit of
communicating directly with others, and that was why I was asking if Gomes
has a direct e-mail address. If either he does not have one or wants to
keep his unlisted/private that is his choice and no body should have any
problem with it.

When I posted a response on the subject, it was simply because I felt that
disclosure of available documents can benefit everybody and no one should
be afraid of truth.

With all due respects to all scholars, while they can and do produce
wonderful analysis and publications, there could still be problems. There
could be pressures -- direct and indirect -- from various sources on the
scholars and researchers. If the scholar/researcher is also a member of the
organization such as TS, then there could be additional means of exerting
direct and indirect pressures. So the ideal situation is the full public
disclosure of available documents so that any researcher can research them
and come to their own conclusions. While this is the ideal situation, what
actually happens in this particular case no one knows. We have to wait and
see.

BTW, this is the second time I hear of Gomes on the Internet. On theos-l,
there was a info posted by a subscriber as coming from Gomes on certain
details of Krishnamurti litigation matter. I did not think that the info
was correct. Hence I inquired with the msg poster and Gomes was supposed to
check the details and let the poster know. In spite of my public follow-up
with the poster, that was the last I heard on this matter.

I hope this clarifies where I am coming from on this issue.

MKRamadoss