Re: Theos-World Re: CALDWELL & JESUITS
May 02, 2006 11:13 PM
by Frank Reitemeyer
I was responding to your argument, that Daniel
produces hate, is lying and slanders in a jesuitic
way etc., while I observed that his motive is to
find out the truth and share his knowledge with
My other point was that you force Daneil to proof
that he is innocent, while I would rather say
that it's up to you, that he guilty.
Here you are ironically using the same logic as
Annie Besant did in the so-called Judge case.
And as to your new argument below, that Daniel is
using details to exaggerate differences, the same
could be said from you, although I never observed
that he exaggerates differences, but rather breaks
taboos, clearifies differences in the way that he
considers both sides.
If any theosophical student feels discriminated by
logic, argument, clear sources etc. that it is not
the fault of Daniel or any other student, but the
fault of that Theosophist who sticks on his/her
You get no unity between theosophists with errors,
falsehoods or lies as its basic. Then you a
church. And stop thinking is really the Jesuitical
I find that your argument that Daniel deals with
differences between leading personalities it
wrong. He deals more with the differences between
the presentation and interpretation of facts or
That is really theosophical. HPB did exactly the
same. OTOH, an observer could with the same or
more right sqay, that it is rather you and not
Daniel, who deals with personalities.
Often you are attacking him personally and ignore
his argument instead the other way round.
One example that Daniel is a honest researcher is
that he once made the little mistake in publishing
on his website my name with a paraphrase of mine.
I critizied it, because I could not identify
myself with it and found it misleading and I
begged him to drop my name. He then in return did
it. Why did he do it??
Furthermore there are many myths the ULT has
created and upholds them until today. ULT
publishes falsehoods about Purucker and Tingley.
Not the person who quotes these ULT texts is
guilty, but the persons who wrote and spread these
To use an example: If someone robbs a bank, runs
out and a policeman runs after him to catch him,
would you also say, the policeman uses Jeusitical
methods, deals with the personality, breaks the
harmony and acts unbrotherly?
----- Original Message -----
From: "carlosaveline" <email@example.com>
To: "theos-talk" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 02, 2006 9:45 PM
Subject: Theos-World Re: CALDWELL & JESUITS
Look at the way Caldwell constantly uses small
details to exaggerate
differences between leading PERSONALITIES
belonging to different
Daniel, unfortunately, rotates too much around
personalities. I am inviting him to see the unity
of the movement; to get rid ot fancies and false
initiates like Leadbeater (Daniel already likes
Tillett's book on Leadbeater...); and to help the
movement take its next step -- to care for mankind
and to study real Theosophy and its application in
I invite Daniel to stop circulating the old
slandes which he knows all too well to be pure
I hope I clarified my point. I feel the same with
regard to Paul Johnson, Katinka Hesselink, John
Algeo and others who propagate falsehoods.
I acknowledge the fact that historians like
Michael Gomes and Leslie Price are NOT in the
business ofcirculating lies against W.Q. Judge or
H. P. Blavatsky.
Best regards, Carlos Cardoso Aveline
[Back to Top]
Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application