Theos-Talk Archives (March 1999 Message tt00220)

Dear Mr Richard Taylor-----

Thank you for your email with the most insightful "look" into your 
personality.

You wrote-----"Do you think you are owed an explanation for anything 
about which you have a question?"

You wrote---"I don't see why you are owed a response."


Mr Taylor, I never thought I was OWED an explanation or response from 
anyone.  I ask questions---some people answer them; some don't.


You wrote---"You have not asked permission of anyone to engage in your 
personal research here, nor were you invited."

You wrote---"I protest against your personal use of this forum for your 
invasive academic research."


Mr Taylor, strange what you wrote.  Did YOU ask permission of anyone to 
engage in your personal research here on theostalk about the origin & 
derivation of certain terms used by Mrs Blavatsky?  Were YOU invited to 
post numerous emails here on that research of yours?  No, I don't think 
so.  And if memory serves me, a number of persons on the list strongly 
protested your "word origin" research on fohat, etc. So are you saying 
that you can do all of your research & post it here, but on the other 
hand you are more than eager to censor my socalled personal research on 
the same forum?


You wrote---"I don't see why you are owed a response, nor why you should 
become aggressive and angry that Theosophists aren't springing up to 
rush to your assistance.

You wrote---"You appear angry that you haven't made more progress in 
understanding U.L.T. dynamics, despite my (at first) long and thoughtful 
replies to your inquiries."

Mr Richard Taylor, I believe I've made good progress on understanding 
what you call "U.L.T. dynamics" & instead of being aggressive & angry as 
you make me out to be, I've been more than grateful to the more than 
dozen Theosophists who have offered me information & documents with no 
strings attached.  Mr Cooper in Australia & a U.L.T. person in London 
have sent me hundreds of pages of material.  And others have also 
helped.  Quite recently, a theostalk subscriber informed me of the 
whereabouts of more than 30 letters written by Mr Crosbie.  Quite a 
find! 

In regards to your "long and thoughtful replies" to me, you offered 
nothing substantial.  And I point blank told you that if you wanted to 
share information with me, it would be with no conditions attached.  Any 
info that you gave me could end up in my paper.  You never answered that 
reply.  Fine with me.  I have more than enough information for my 
project without you dribbling me facts with various  limitations & 
condition imposed.  Thank you but no thank you.

You wrote---"So for now, Mr. Green, I will confine myself to criticizing 
*your* behavior, and your use of this private discussion list.  You have 
begun with repeating the criticisms of others toward HPB (like Bharati 
and others) and moved on to "unveiling" the private conversations 
between William Q. Judge and HPB. (Which were already known and 
publicized)  Ever more aggressively, you have attempted to uncover 
esoteric studies, and to criticize events and people in
history."

No doubt, these are grave sins of mine!!!!!  I thought (& I'd appreciate 
if Mr Eldon Tucker would clarify this point) that this was a public 
discussion list.  In other words, anyone in the world could subscribe to 
this list.  No questions asked.  Does one have to promise that he is a 
true believing Theosophist who will not question HPB, Judge or Crosbie 
to be a subscriber to this list? Sometime ago Ramadoss was harshly 
criticizing the Wheaton TS & Dr Algeo & I don't remember you or anyone 
else protesting what he did.  Dallas TenBroeck has said negative things 
about Mr Leadbeater on theostalk.  Have you reprimanded him for such 
behavior?  Do we have different standards  for different people on this 
list? 

BTW, did I announce to the list that I agreed with Bharati's criticisms 
of Mrs Blavatsky?  And Mr Taylor weren't you the one who wrote me asking 
me to tell you where the complete article by Dr Bharati could be found?  
And I told you the web site where the complete article could be found.  
Was that another sin on my part?  How do we know what you intend to do 
with Bharati's complete article? Should we question your motives & 
intentions.
  
Yes, Mr Taylor, I'll continue my research on the U.L.T., their  claims & 
their esoteric school.  Your latest response is only an extra incentive 
to me to dig deeper.  And I also intend to post on theostalk my finding 
in this area. . . . . .unless Mr Tucker decides to censor my 
contributions to this list.  But if he censors mine, I would expect that 
he would also censor the postings of others including yours.  What will 
be acceptable & not acceptable for posting?  What will pass the litmus 
test?

Although several other comments of yours are misleading & misguided, 
I'll end my email at this point. 

David Green

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

-- THEOSOPHY WORLD -- Theosophical Talk -- theos-talk@theosophy.com

Letters to the Editor, and discussion of theosophical ideas and
teachings. To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message consisting of
"subscribe" or "unsubscribe" to theos-talk-request@theosophy.com.