Theos-Talk Archives (October 2003 Message tt00101)

I guess that says it all. (At least, I hope so. :-)

In a message dated 10/07/03 12:23:33 PM, bill_meredith@earthlink.net writes:

>The freed leaves dive quickly to mother earth as a covering for the cold
>yet still venomous coil of snake laying curled on its back -- that soft 
>snake belly bathed in virgin bright sunlight. Lo here, the air is putrid. Lo
>there, the snake is dead.


----- Original Message -----

From: "Daniel H. Caldwell" <danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com>

To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>

Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2003 11:43 AM

Subject: Theos-World More on Leon's phrase: "certain disgruntled

'organizationalists'. . . "



> Leon, you wrote:

>

> "This whole discussion does nothing but obscure the

> teachings of fundamental theosophy, still sounds

> like a vendetta against ULT and WQJ by certain

> disgruntled 'organizationalists'. . . "

>

> I replied:

>

> "Please be more specific, WHO are the

> disgruntled 'organizationalists'?? Do you

> refer to me? To Tony? To Peter?"

>

> Leon, you then replied in turn:

>

> "No offense intended. If the shoe fits, wear it.

> If not, forget it. :-)"

>

> Leon, I have looked up the terms in the dictionary

> but it is NOT clear to me why you felt the need

> to bring up the phrase "certain

> disgruntled 'organizationalists'. . . " or exactly

> what it means.

>

> You even put in quotation marks the word:

> organizationalists. You must have had

> some idea in your mind especially to add

> the word "disgruntled".

>

> If you really believe Peter, Tony and I are

> "disgruntled 'organizationalists'" then don't

> be shy, call a spade a spade if that is the case.

>

> All I ask is that you explain exactly

> what you mean by this phrase. I can't read

> your mind.

>

> As written without further explanation, the

> phrase reads like an "ad hominem" remark possibly

> thrown out by you to distract attention from the issue

> being discussed.

>

> Daniel

>