Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00196)

On Thu, 9 Jan 1997, Tom Robertson wrote:

> >	Perhaps you could get Willamay to come clean about the entire
> >money trail in the situation. Certainly those who have attempted to
> >investigate it - including lawyers and accountants fully capable of
> >understanding financial information - have been met with quite a brick
> >wall. 
> 
> I am not about to read 336 lines of your personal vendetta.  I just wanted
> to see how you responded to my business offer.  First you say that the TS
> spent half a million dollars suing the Boston Lodge because discussing
> Alice Bailey was forbidden.  Then, in demonstrating the connection between
> the lawsuit and their discussing Alice Bailey, all you say is that they
> discussed Alice Bailey and were sued over a property dispute.  Then, when
> confronted with a chance to make some money if the half a million dollar
> figure were true, the best you can do is ask me how much money was spent on
> it.  If anyone has any reason to consider your credibility to be more than
> negligible, I would love to hear why.  Maybe Alexis will vouch for you.	  
> 
Oh, I see, so you wrote delibrately to destroy my credibility. Gee Tom,
that's mighty "theosophical" of you. Oh, by the way a good number of those
"366" lines were lines written by you that I was replying to - my response
to your personal vendetta. Apparently when confronted by your own face in
a mirror, you storm off in a snit and refuse to answer. What fun! And I
suspect my credibility is just fine ... especially among those that *did*
take the trouble to investigate the situation before forming an opinion.
While my intention has been to raise the issue of the HQ activities in
relation to the Boston Lodge, I fear as a side effect your "credibility"
may have been damaged somewhat. You came down on one side of a dispute - a
side that accused a number of Theosophists of bad intentions - and did not
first even try to talk to them. But perhaps the Board will "vouch" for
you, they've been in need of a mouthpiece, and will, I'm sure, reward one.
But I don't want to go on too long here. Tell you what, since you think
the tactic of "I'll bet ya" is actually an intellectual argument ... I'll
happily talk about the terms and definitions of how much was "spent" on
the whole fiasco after you accept *my* wager ... I'll bet you any money
you wish that Headquarters will not make a presentation, in the American
Theosophist, of their side of the story, their reasoning, accusations, and
a complete and verifiable accounting of the costs of their actions, and
allow equal space for a response from those they accused, and whose Lodge
is to this day badly damaged. But I'll keep this personal vendetta short,
as it is a response to a short one from you.
							Tally Ho, JRC