Theos-Talk Archives (November 2001 Message tt00194)

Poor Brigitte Muehlegger. Unable to justify theft or plagiarism she now attempts to divert from the issue by lies and slander.
1. Professor Rindler, whose secretary she used to be, declares that the stolen and plagiarized material is not on a web site associated with the University of Vienna and therefore the matter does not concern them. He fails tonote that the material was on a University of Vienna associated website, and that the University (as the publisher) was and is still legally liable for publication during that period. That the material has now been moved off-shore does not alter the fact of its original publication.
2. Professor Rindler¹s ³investigations² must have been extensive indeed. He did not contact any of the leading international academics in the field, or the relevant academic authorities at the University of Sydney (despite another of Ms Muehlegger¹s claims). The Professor concerned at the University of Sydney has been so angered by Ms Muehlegger¹s violation of DrFrench¹s rights that he has referred the breach of copyright to that University¹s lawyers believing that the University of Sydney should initiatelegal action against Ms Muehlegger.
3. Ms Muehlegger¹s own research into me appears to be on a level with herpreviously published work and may explain why she needs to steal material from reputable scholars. I am not now nor have I ever been a member, let alone a ³priest², of any OTO organization or any group associated with Crowley. Should, I continuing the McCarthyist line, add, nor a communist, nor a fellow-traveller.... Ms Muehlegger¹s source with such inside knowledge of the ³Sydney occult scene² (of course, unnamed, in the best tradition of those who peddle gossip) clearly knows as little about the subject as she does. With what I can only assume to have been the incompetence of an amateur blackmailer, Ms Muehlegger recently sent me an e-mail where the subject was given as ³Rev. Gregory Tillet and his OTO group² but which had no content. I presume I was supposed to quake in fear at the secrets about to be exposed! Obviously this ³OTO group² is so secret that even I have never heard of it. Daniel, is of course, right to note that whether I am or am not anything in particular is irrelevant to the central issue. But no doubt we can all await further revelations from Ms Muehlegger¹s unidentified (bit "informed") sources (or fertile imagination) - although not, itwould seem, answers to the charges of theft and plagiarism, or details of how the mysterious Dr Vishana came to acquire the stolen property. I¹m still awaiting the letters from the (of course, unidentified) Sydney lawyer who was rushing documents to Ms Muehlegger by international courier to enable her to initiate court action against me. Or, indeed, the local police, with whose attentions she threatened me. I never realized the study of Theosophical history would prove such a source of excitement!!

Dr Gregory Tillett