Theos-Talk Archives (January 2007 Message tt00075)

Friend,

Nothing of this stuff below,  and in other postings by Cadlwell on P. Johnson, has to do with the falses names used and therefore frauds possibly done by Cadlwelll / Green.


Carlos. 

De:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Para:theos-talk@yahoogroups.com

Cópia:

Data:Wed, 03 Jan 2007 18:06:09 -0000

Assunto:Theos-World Paul Johnson's "ad hominem" tactic in 2002

> ------------------------------------------------
> Paul Johnson's "ad hominem" tactic in 2002
> 
> Below is my reply to one of Paul Johnson's commentaries
> on me back in 2002
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Dear Paul,
> 
> ....
> 
> In your posting at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/4657
> 
> it is really sad to find you using the same "ad hominem" tactic
> against me as Dallas Tenbroeck and Frank Reitemeyer used about one
> year ago against Brigitte Muehlegger and you.
> 
> At that time I wrote a reply to both Dallas and Frank. It can be
> found at:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/755
> 
> Much of what I said in that letter to Dallas and Frank now applies to
> your email above.
> 
> From what you write, I see that you have no understanding whatsoever
> concerning my motives, actions, etc. But what you write would make
> for a good tv drama!
> 
> I like being characterized as a heretic slayer. . . . ... :)
> 
> What you say is basically downright silly and sounds almost
> delusional. Believe it if it somehow comforts you.
> 
> Look at the following four priceless gems that you wrote about me:
> 
> ---------------------------------------
> ". . . Daniel's worst enemies are those Theosophists that have
> encouraged him to be a hatchet man. . . "
> 
> " . . . in order to curry favor with the organizations who wanted
> someone to refute the Johnsonian heresy. . . . "
> 
> "In all sincerity I believe that what has happened here is that by
> becoming an attack dog serving Theosophical orthodoxy, despite
> knowing full well that he could have attacked Cranston just as
> viciously as he did me using the same criteria, that he sold his
> birthright for a mess of pottage."
> 
> "But by acting on his *interests* (to be somebody respected in the
> movement, to be published by TPH, and whatnot) and violating his
> stated *principles* he has become a sectarian apologist and heretic-
> slayer, and thrown away all opportunity to be taken seriously in the
> world of scholarship."
> --------------------------------------------------
> 
> I guess you're trying to say here that I was motivated by
> various "negative" INTERESTS to critique your books. But how do you
> really know what did or did not motivate me? Sheer speculation it
> would appear to be....possible, yes ....plausible, yes but is any of
> it really true?
> 
> Paul, did those INTERESTS also motivate me in 1993? It was in
> January of that year that you first wrote to me asking me for input
> on your first self-published book. I took the time and effort to
> write to you an 18 page letter and added appendices of relevant
> material. What initially motivated me at that time to critique your
> book??
> 
> Were Theosophists encouraging me at that time to be the hatchet man?
> 
> Was I trying to "curry favor with the organizations who wanted
> someone to refute the Johnsonian heresy" when I wrote that critique?
> 
> Was I hoping to be published by TPH when I wrote that critique?
> 
> The answer to all three questions is: "No"
> 
> Yet even back then after receiving just this one letter/critique from
> me you wrote back in a letter dated April 14, 1993 and questioned my
> motives.
> 
> In my reply to that 1993 letter, I wrote to you the following:
> 
> "...it is not my intention to be adversarial with you. No doubt, you
> are a sincere individual who has devoted alot of hard work and money
> to your research. I can and do appreciate that. But if you want my
> honest opinion, then I must give it to you."
> 
> "Also in your letter to me of April 14th, you seem to think I have
> not been fair and objective in my criticism of your books; you also
> question my motivations. On this score all I will say is that I have
> given my criticisms of your thesis and you should be able to assess
> the validity of my criticisms, regardless of my own motivations."
> 
> Even at the beginning of our correspondence in 1993 it appears that
> you wanted to assign to me some kind of "negative" motivation
> although you were then and have been incensed since then by
> theosophists who have ascribed to you various negative motives for
> writing your books.
> 
> In summary, as pointed out by one of my correspondents, your
> latest "ad hominem" essay on me MAY reflect more about you than about
> me.
> 
> You might want to follow the advice I gave to Dallas and Frank last
> year. See:
> 
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/755
> 
> Daniel, the H.S. of the T.M.
> http://hpb.cc
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
> 
> E-mail classificado pelo Identificador de Spam Inteligente Terra.
> Para alterar a categoria classificada, visite
> http://mail.terra.com.br/protected_email/imail/imail.cgi?+_u=carlosaveline&_l=1,1167848278.588424.25208.tulear.hst.terra.com.br,7687,Des15,Des15
> 
> Esta mensagem foi verificada pelo E-mail Protegido Terra.
> Scan engine: McAfee VirusScan / Atualizado em 03/01/2007 / Versão: 5.1.00/4931
> Proteja o seu e-mail Terra: http://mail.terra.com.br/


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