Theos-Talk Archives (February 2006 Message tt00646)

In a message dated 2/25/06 10:27:48 AM, carlosaveline@hotmail.com writes:

> 
> Dear Friends,
> 
> 
> Yes, I am getting really curious about all of this.
> 
> A lawsuit against Paul?  It might be most unlikely.
> 
> Why not such a sub-threat as a way to try to bully people psychologically?
> 
> You can bully some people all the time, you can bully all people for
> some time, but you cannot bully all people all the time.
> 
> And I am still waiting for Danniel's clarifications. Maybe he is
> innocent?
> 
> Really curious as Ethics is of the essence for us.
> 
> Best regards,  Carlos.
> 
> 
So you say...   

And, how ethical is your continued hounding of Caldwell through not so subtle 
accusative implications of his guilt by means of subtly sly reverse 
innuendo's (not to mention your repetitive subject lines with his name constantly being 
impugned) whenever you see an opportunity?   He may be innocent as you say, 
and undeserving of such treatment... But in such a case, you certainly would 
not be in the eyes of any perceptive theosophist on this list.   

What you are doing by such widespread and repetitive public disclosure of a 
personal suspicion so as to influence the thoughts of others -- you call 
"friends" (but whom are not necessarily so) -- appears to this observer to be highly 
unethical, from both a legal and a theosophical point of view. 

In addition, passing the libel and slander buck back to Paul, as well as 
adding further implications that Caldwell is a bully as well as a fraud, doesn't 
appear to be so ethical either... Especially, when you are safe behind a 
foreign border.    

In addition, your flooding of this list with your repetitive side issues, has 
almost completely shoved the discussion of theosophy into the mud and covered 
it over with slime in the form of gossip -- that would, in my view, make HPB 
disown you as her chela (if you ever were or could be one:)   

So far, all you seem to be doing is dominating this theosophical forum and 
spreading tension, apprehension, and dissension among its members.   (Not to 
mention wasting my time reading and responding to your overly repetitive and 
boring letters whenever they go beyond the boundaries of theosophically useful or 
interesting information.)   Stating your opinions about long dead teachers or 
members of this forum once -- is enough.   

Leonardo

> 
> >From: Bill Meredith <meredith_bill@earthlink.net>
> >Reply-To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> >To: theos-talk@yahoogroups.com
> >Subject: Re: Theos-World Did Daniel Create False Persons?
> >Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 20:06:12 -0500
> >
> >LOL John,  I think your last sentence might also accurately convey the
> >inquiring attitude of those who have raised the question of whether
> >Daniel and David are one and the same.  "I don't really know if that is
> >what Daniel is doing but I wouldn't be a bit surprised, lol."
> >
> >  I googled for some information on the formal court case  you reference
> >below and came up empty handed.  Still googling is a learned skill
> >which I have not mastered, so maybe you could send me the reference, so
> >I could "compare and contrast" the various points of view in the
> >specific case to which you are referring.
> >peace,
> >
> >
> >bill
> >
> >
> >
> >samblo@cs.com wrote:
> > > bill,
> > >   I don't necessarily see Daniel's absence as unusual under the 
> circumstance
> > > of the organized, preconceived, pre-agreed poison pen attack. I rather 
> think
> > > he is probably having to spend considerable time with his legal consul 
> putting
> > > together a well prepared brief for a court case. I recall that within 
> the last
> > > 90 days there was a formal court case here in the USA by a member of 
> another
> > > Yahoo Group who was subjected to defamation, slander, and libel, that 
> person
> > > took the parties to court and the court for the first time ruled in 
> favor of
> > > the plaintiff and set precedence in the award of damages to the yahoo
> > > Group Member. I don't really know if that is what Daniel is doing but I
> > > wouldn't be a bit surprised, lol.
> > >
> > > John
> 



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]