Theos-Talk Archives (April 2004 Message tt00489)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, "kpauljohnson" <kpauljohnson@y...> 
wrote:


> Hi Ali,


> 


> I would prefer not to have gotten involved in any discussion of
CWL, 


> because I have little interest in the subject and have found that 


> any reference to the facts of the matter leads to personal attacks 


> from his admirers. YOU ASKED QUESTIONS to which I responded 


> honestly; the brother Gerald business reflects on CWL's character 


> regardless of the nature of the relationship with CJ which I 


> specifically said can't be known for sure. The one line below, in 


> response to your further questioning, has now been turned into a 


> basis for an unjustified personal attack. Dennis is apparently
more 


> exercised by the anti-CWL true believers than by me, but then you 


> point the finger quite directly-- and all I was doing was trying to 


> respond to your questions which I did not really want to address 


> because CWL admirers ALWAYS ATTACK THE MESSENGER. Et tu, Ali?




No, Paul, non me. The roving finger may point where it may, but not
at 
you in this case.





> I wrote:


> 


> > > >Note that Krishnamurti denied an eyewitness account of his 
being


> > > >abused by CWL, when his father sued AB for custody.


> > >


> 


> You asked:


> 


> > > >Who was the eyewitness, and what was their credibility?


> 


> Dennis replied:


> 


> > >As I recall, the eyewitness was a maid who passed the room in 


> which the "ACT" was taking place. And since you don't seem to be 


> aware of the juicy details of the ACT, permit me to fill you in. As 


> I have pointed out here in past years, it seems to me that this is 


> more of a cultural misunderstanding than anything else.


> 


> We could go into this question in detail but I'm not interested in 


> it and folks like JHE and Dr. Tillett who know a hundred times more 


> than I do about the subject have learned from painful experience 


> that the response will be ATTACK THE MESSENGER. Suffice it to say 


> that Dennis's *explanation* is precisely that, and ignores some 


> relevant evidence. If you really care about this, read Tillett's 


> book or better yet his dissertation. Don't take Dennis's email as 


> the final truth and use it as a basis for attacking anyone.




Tillett seems pretty organized. 





> > > >But at some point, someone would have bugged him about the 


> alleged buggering, and he would have had to tell it frankly.


> > >


> He claimed amnesia, if I recall correctly.




I find that utterly out of whack. I cannot fathom an "enlightened 
being" as K was supposed to be, to suffer from amnesia in such a case.





> > >But, as you see, there was no "alleged buggering". You are 


> jumping to conclusions, and I don't see much evidence that many 


> people want you to know the facts.


> > 


> There is certainly plenty of jumping to CWL-defensive conclusions
on 


> Dennis's part and yours, rather than simply saying as I have
several 


> times that we don't know exactly what went on.


> 


> > Thanks, Dennis. If I jumped to conclusions, it was because of the 


> obviously misleading statements implying exactly that, in terms 


> of 'abuse'.


> 


> I implied no such thing! You inferred it.




Paul, I didn't infer it from your information. Relax, eh? 


The slings and arrows you have received, I did not initiate. In 
short, I wasn't referring to you. If you have wounds that cry out
from 
prior such engages, I exhort thee to apply the balm of a righteous 
conscience. heh heh. not will shakespeare, that's for damn sure.




> > What is sad is the way supposed truth-seekers resort to 


> backbiting and slandering someone whom they don't like for whatever 


> other reasons. It's dishonest.


> 


> It's extremely dishonest to ask someone for information, then ask 


> them for further explanations, and turn around and backbite and 


> slander them for their honest attempt at responding to your request.


> 


> Won't fall into such a trap again,


> 


> Paul




Whatever.


fwiw, I was referring to posts by steve, and possibly someone else, 
if memory serves. We could go back into the past posts, but I'd
prefer 
to put that off til Purgatory, what say?


Not yourself. As you say, your info was info, like Dennis's. That's 
all I asked for.




But, since you're into the mood, I guess I can think of some nasty
ad 
hominem...ah,... 


"That bowtie! It's, it's,..a secret Egyptian Ankh symbol, isn't it? 
Ah, and that Chevrolet with its bowtie symbol you drive. Same thing. 
Confess, conspirator!"









I'm not a CWL supporter, fan, or even admirer. I feel like he was a 
humbug. But if he is to hang, he should be hanged for the right 
crime(s), no?




regards-




Ali