[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: Theos-World Vague speculation, or precise observation?

Feb 25, 2006 04:31 PM
by leonmaurer

In a message dated 2/22/06 10:33:25 AM, writes:

> --- In, leonmaurer@... wrote:
> >
> > Carlos,
> >
> > I think it might be about time that you cease your continuous
> insinuations and innuendoes about Daniel Caldwell's supposed
> fraudulent impersonations -- that seems to be supported by hearsay
> evidence based solely on the vague speculations of an alleged enemy
> of Caldwell who has a personal ax to grind because of
> Caldwell's disagreement with his historical findings. 
> >
> Hi Leon,
> It's interesting that you choose to discredit my motives by innuendo
> in a post in which you chide Carlos for doing so to Daniel.  The only
> hearsay evidence I presented was that a fellow theos-talker told me
> months ago that Daniel had used multiple personae in theosophical
> discussion fora.  Other than that, the evidence is circumstantial,
> but not hearsay.  You can check it all for yourself. 
Hi Paul,

I'm sorry if you took what I said as a discreditation of your motives.   But, 
if that's the way you interpret it, and the shoe fits, I suppose you'll just 
have to wear it. :-).   

If you would reread my statement carefully, you will see that the hearsay 
evidence I referred to is what Carlos has put forth, based on what he heard from 
you that you heard from someone else.   The circumstantial evidence is now 
what you are forced to bring forth to justify what you said, and possibly, to 
sidetrack further discussion of your motives (whatever they are ;-). 

Methinks that thou protestest too much... Since all you have accomplished is 
to extend this pointless (as far as theosophy is concerned) controversy even 
further -- which continues to fill our mailboxes with side issues that have 
nothing to do with theosophy per se, or its discussion.    

Accordingly, I have no time to waste reading any of the information you claim 
is indicative of Daniel Caldwell's supposed fraud -- which seems to serve 
your own purposes rather than the interests of theosophists with relation to 
theosophy and its teaching -- that should be the purposes of this forum... And, 
NOT its use as a courtroom in which you and Carlos, among others who similarly 
appear to have some antagonism toward Caldwell, also appear to be acting as 
Judge Jury and Prosecutor.  

In fact, It might be that in your zeal to defend yourself against your 
imagined attack by me of your motives, your so called evidence against Caldwell may 
even add to the possible evidence of libel or slander that Caldwell might be 
in process of gathering against all those who continue with this prosecution by 
innuendo and inference -- while he justifiably stays silent, and lets all his 
accuser's put their feet in their mouths.    And, of course, I expect the 
blame to be put on me if that happens (as I am being blamed below for Caldwell's 
silence).   </;-)>

The only thing I can add here with reference to the rest of this letter is 
that you are continuing to accuse Caldwell of fraudulent actions based on both 
hearsay and circumstantial evidence... None of which has any relevance to the 
cause of theosophy -- which I and I hope the rest of this forum have as our 
prime interest.

Also, I hope that this might be the end of these personalized threads that 
have nothing to do with theosophy, its philosophy or its useful history -- which 
I for one would prefer goes as far back as its initial proponents in ancient 
Greece -- rather than discussing the foolishness of modern day theosophists, 
pseudo theosophists, their leaders and their organizations that came after the 
"real" HPB, along with the "real" Masters KH and M -- whom together, wrote 
Isis and the Secret Doctrine... And gave out the entire basis of pure 
unadulterated theosophy to the modern world. (Anything to the contrary, in my view, being 
pure hogwash by power hungry plagiarizers and poseurs.)   Now, let's gt back 

Best wishes,


>  The only way
> direct evidence would emerge is through a confession or the testimony
> of an eyewitness-- not very likely.  (And you are strongly
> discouraging a confession in your post!)  But the circumstantial
> evidence is extremely strong.  Just read the posts and articles
> originating from both "individuals" and ask yourself how many authors
> are really writing them.  For example, the obsession with certain
> topics, the style of relentless interrogation, the very similar
> appearance of websites, the prominent link to Caldwell's site at the
> top of Green's, all these can be observed.

> I did not want to be the person to make this public for the very
> reason that you are now demonstrating: the "blame the messenger"
> phenomenon would distract people from the message.  As far as having
> an ax to grind is concerned, I have known about this for six months
> but remained silent until the feud erupted here between Carlos and
> Daniel.  Feeling that we might be at the beginning of a long and
> nasty ordeal, I shared with Carlos my information on the phenomenon
> he was dealing with, and he pretty much insisted on making it
> public.  I don't mind anyone disagreeing with my historical
> findings.  But the relentless bullying here at theos-talk, of which
> you were a recent target, is just too much.
> The person who first told me about the impersonations is a regular
> here whom you would undoubtedly esteem and trust more than me.  But
> he has not wanted to address the issue publicly.  And the person who
> did the research on Green's posting from Daniel's Tucson ISP is
> likewise a regular here you would trust and esteem more than me.  But
> he too does not wish to confront the problem.  Since I have not asked
> permission to repost his message to me, all I can do is present the
> punch lines:
> the originating IP address for a theos-talk message by David Green,
> posted in April 2000, is; a lookup of that address shows
> it to be; that domain is owned by the
> ISP Azstarnet; in the same month Daniel posted from the same ISP.
> All these pieces of evidence can be examined by anyone for him or
> herself.  Bottom line, use your head and just read all the posts from
> May 2000 from Green and Caldwell, and ask yourself what was going
> on.  Here is a link to them, arranged by author:
> Regards,
> Paul

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

[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application