Theos-Talk Archives (August 2006 Message tt00024)

Bill,

It sounds interesting (see below). You can do that, if Paul Johnson accepts the idea. 

I hope such correspondence will arrive here VERBATIM, that is, correctly reproduced. If that does not happen, or if you bring here incomplete informations, I may have to clarify and comment. 

I will let you know right now, in advance, my viewpoint on some aspects of my dialogue with Paul Johnson, which was not extensive. 

1) I never prejudge a person on hearsay, and PJ was no exception. 

2) I did not know what actually was Paul Johnson's updated position with regard to HPB and the Masters, and I wanted him to clarify. Once he finally clarified, I saw he was rather politically used by John Algeo and "David Green" as someone who could, in the name of "Science", bring doubt and skepticism on Theosophy and HPB. 

3) I do consider Paul Johnson basically an honest guy. He admits he is not a Theosophist. On the other hand, he also had to have some courage to face "David Green", "Terry", and "Daniel Caldwell". That clarification and sharing of information helped Theos-talk in my view. 

4) P. Johnson possibly had to spend some time and effort to gather all the informations on Caldwell's "work" which he brought here. It was an investigative work made by Paul Johnson and his texts have been not answered so far by Daniel. That makes his texts on Daniel remain very updated, six months later. A close look at P. Johnson's texts on Caldwell shows readers that there are real information in them. 

In time: Theos-talk people may be surprised to see who helped Paul Johnson in his investigation on Daniel, and I invite you to bring that info here. 

Quite open to the dialogue, Carlos Cardoso Aveline. 




De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Cópia:

Data:Tue, 01 Aug 2006 13:52:39 -0400

Assunto:Re: Theos-World On David Green

> Carlos, with your permission, I can ask Paul Johnson to make the 
> personal correspondences between you and him that were exchanged just 
> prior to your arrival here on theos-talk available so that everyone here 
> can experience for themselves the thought processes from which you 
> operate. 
> 
> Do I have your permission?
> 
> --bill
> 
> carlosaveline wrote:
> >
> > Dear Friends,
> >
> > Take a look in this well-documented text, published in Theos-talk.
> >
> > Regards, Carlos.
> >
> >
> > K.Paul Johnson writes:
> >
> > DAVID GREEN'S CRUZADE AGAINST THE ULT
> >
> > Feb 10, 2006 05:44 AM by kpauljohnson
> >
> > Folks,
> >
> > Now that the feud between ULT members and Daniel Caldwell has entered
> > theos-talk as a two-way street (rather than Daniel just posting his
> > side of things) I feel obliged to share some background material that
> > will help explain the dynamics.
> >
> > As might be expected, I disagree entirely with the objections that
> > have been made to the HPB Letters volume and Daniel's compilation.
> > TPH books should be more in line with scholarly standards, not less.
> > Suppressing damaging information out of spiritual loyalty is
> > something that TPH has done too much, not too little. Nonetheless,
> > whether or not David Green is an independent entity, Daniel has been
> > on an anti- ULT crusade for a long time, and having been on the
> > receiving end of a similar crusade it looks like it is falling to me
> > to point out what has been happening:
> >
> > David Green and theos-talk
> >
> > Posting on theos-talk from 1998 through 2000, "David Green" appeared
> > obsessed with attacking the United Lodge of Theosophists. For
> > example, in one month alone, March 1999, he contributed more than 20
> > posts to theos-talk critical of the ULT, and a dozen more the
> > following month. A year later in April 2000 he was still obsessed,
> > contributing a dozen more such posts. His website includes twenty
> > articles he authored which are critical of Robert Crosbie, and
> > another four critical of William Q. Judge and Katherine Tingley:
> > http://members.tripod.com/davidgreen_2/ 
> > 
> >
> > All remaining articles there were written by others. No one in theos-
> > talk (with one exception) reports having met David Green in person,
> > which is unusual in the small world of Theosophical history
> > research. But he is clearly associated with Daniel Caldwell;
> > claiming to be an Australian posting from Sydney, "Green" was in fact
> > posting from the same Tucson ISP as Caldwell. A "see also" link to
> > Caldwell's Blavatsky Archives website appears prominently at the top
> > of Green's site. The two share a literary style that includes
> > relentless rhetorical questions and extensive quotations from primary
> > sources. They share a narrow set of obsessions, mostly attacking
> > Theosophical and related organizations other than the Adyar TS. In
> > addition to literary style and subject focus, Green and Caldwell
> > created websites that are remarkably similar in appearance, which can
> > be judged by comparing them; here is Caldwell's:
> >
> > http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/ 
> >
> > Google shows 82 appearances of the email address
> > davidgreen@hotmail.com , every one of 
> > them in posts on Theosophical
> > subjects within a period of about three years. One clear difference
> > between Green and Caldwell, however, is that Green was regularly and
> > overtly hostile to individual Theosophists in the ULT; e.g. these
> > remarks to and about Dallas Ten Broeck and Jerome Wheeler:
> >
> > http://theos-talk.com/archives/200004/tt00073.html 
> > 
> >
> > http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/200005/tt00232.html 
> > 
> >
> > Another notable feature of Green's activity was his complete disdain
> > for reformist critics of the Adyar TS, who organized in the late 90s
> > as the Association of Concerned Theosophists. He presented himself
> > as Australian, residing in Sydney, wrote in a peculiar style in which
> > articles were largely absent, and always called HPB "Mrs.
> > Blavatsky." In general, he was contemptuously dismissive in tone
> > towards almost everyone, as in this post to Govert Schuller:
> >
> > http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/199808/tt00042.html 
> > 
> >
> > His hostility to the ULT even extended to Dr. James Santucci, accused
> > of excessive deference to ULT sensibilities, e.g.:
> >
> > http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/199905/tt00066.html 
> > 
> >
> > Occasionally a ULT member noticed something awry with Green, and
> > commented on it, e.g. Peter Merriott:
> >
> > http://theos-talk.com/archives/199902/tt00125.html 
> > 
> >
> > But no one ever seemed to connect the dots and suspect that Green was
> > a fictitious persona. His posts were often devoted to stirring up
> > antagonism, as evident in this post attacking HPB:
> >
> > http://theosophy.com/theos-talk/199907/tt00015.html 
> > 
> >
> > Here is an excellent article on Internet trolls, explaining the
> > phenomenon:
> >
> > http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm 
> > 
> >
> > which helps explain the history of Theosophical cyberspace. Some
> > relevant points from the article:
> >
> > "An Internet "troll" is a person who delights in sowing discord on
> > the Internet. He (and it is usually he) tries to start arguments and
> > upset people.
> >
> > Trolls see Internet communications services as convenient venues for
> > their bizarre game. For some reason, they don't "get" that they are
> > hurting real people. To them, other Internet users are not quite
> > human but are a kind of digital abstraction. As a result, they feel
> > no sorrow whatsoever for the pain they inflict. Indeed, the greater
> > the suffering they cause, the greater their 'achievement' (as they
> > see it). At the moment, the relative anonymity of the net allows
> > trolls to flourish."
> >
> > All this applies to Green and his "colleague" Caldwell, but there is
> > a big difference between the two in that Caldwell for many years
> > refrained from publicly attacking the ULT, while Green did so
> > relentlessly. Since Green disappeared from theos-talk, Caldwell has
> > gradually become more open about his hostility to the ULT. Another
> > difference is that Caldwell, more than Green, has been a practitioner
> > of the troll technique called "flooding":
> >
> > "When a troll attacks a message board, he generally posts a lot of
> > messages. Even if his messages are not particularly inflammatory,
> > they can be so numerous that they drown out the regular conversations
> > (this is known as 'flooding'). Needless to say, no one person's
> > opinions can be allowed to monopolize a channel."
> >
> > "I love a good fight" was a very telling line, and I suggest that
> > theos-talk deserves an honest explanation of the "good fight" waged
> > against the ULT by Mr. "Green."
> >
> > Paul [Johnson]
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
> > 


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