Theos-Talk Archives (May 2006 Message tt00422)

You are right.
My own website badly needs to be changed.
Do you have any constructive ideas?

But Daniel do not need to discard his website.
I rather talked about, that changing its content
could be fruitful and helpful in delivering the
world from the Jesuit nightmares.
Some of us might however need to do something
else so to break our own thought-patterns
tendencies to crystallize. Daniel could be included
in this view.

The importance of ones website depends
on the number of visitors, who visits the website,
its language and when it is visited...etc...


from
M. Sufilight

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Bill Meredith" <meredith_bill@earthlink.net>
To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2006 12:58 AM
Subject: Re: Theos-World Several good reasons for not accepting Coulomb's 
and Hodgson's explanations


> Very good.
>
> Morten, I did a search for your competing website, but must have used
> the wrong search terms.  I used "theosophical religion", "dogmatic
> thinker", "determined defender of HPB from slanderers, liarers, and
> scholarers", "hider of  the truth about certain falsehoods", and a few
> others, but maybe I just missed it.  I think you do have a website that
> I visited once before.  Perhaps you and Carlos have not had much time to
> turn your web space into a truly competitive alternative to Daniel's
> dark hole in cyberspace. I'm sure yours would be one that offers all the
> good side of the movement and none of the controversial or false and
> evil side.  After all if no one hears evil, see evil, or says evil, does
> evil really exist?   Recently, you have tirelessly dedicated so much
> time and energy to critiquing Daniel's site and telling him what he
> should and should not put on his own site, that it is little wonder that
> your own site may have been somewhat neglected.  I understand how you
> must feel.   If that dugpa Daniel would only 'burn' and discard from
> public view whole sections of his web site -- all for the good of
> theosophy mind you -- then theosophy would be the better for it.
>
> peace within,
>
>
> bill
>
>
> M. Sufilight wrote:
> > Very good.
> > Now you just need to add the following extra info on each relevant page - 
> > or
> > at least something similar:
> >
> > Published by the Blavatsky Study Center
> > (A place supporting theosophical teachings)
> >
> >
> >
> > from
> > M. Sufilight with a happy smile...
> >
> > ----- Original Message ----- 
> > From: "danielhcaldwell" <danielhcaldwell@yahoo.com>
> > To: <theos-talk@yahoogroups.com>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2006 5:24 PM
> > Subject: Theos-World Several good reasons for not accepting Coulomb's and
> > Hodgson's explanations
> >
> >
> >
> > > Several good reasons for not accepting Coulomb's and Hodgson's
> > > explanations.
> > >
> > > See:
> > >
> > > http://blavatskyarchives.com/mahatmasapparitions.htm#1
> > >
> > > Daniel
> > > http://hpb.cc
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links