Theos-Talk Archives (January 1997 Message tl00528)

At 01:25 PM 1/16/97 -0500, you wrote:
>
>M K Ramadoss wrote:
>> 
>>As far as the cancellation of charters in Canada and Denmark
>>etc. no one who has first hand access to the information has
>>come forth and explained why the charter was canceled.
>>Cancellation of a National Section Charter is not a simple or
>>easy decision at the highest level, especially at a time the
>> membership world wide is perhaps at its lowest and perhaps
>>shrinking. So there should be some valid and strong reasons. The
>>questions is what is preventing anyone who knows full facts to
>>come out with details.
>> 
>> Again why the secrecy? What or who is/are being protected?
> 
> 
>JHE
>Doss, what specific questions do you feel have not yet been
>answered concerning the expulsions of the Canadian and Danish
>sections?  Please list them.  Maybe we can find the answers. 
> 
        Question is very simple. 

        What is *the* real reason for expulsions? 

Not the simplistic legal or other reasons usually given (or not given) for
public consumption. When cancellation/expulsion is done, I believe *no*
reason or *justification* is required to be given.

        I will give you an example. I believe when Adyar group sued (I
believe the Danish Section for recovery of assets) and lost, the allegation
by Adyar attorneys was that there was some question about the
appropriation/misappropriation of funds, while everyone knew that the key
members in the Section were all extremely honest and spotless in their
reputation and would not misuse even a single penny. So the real reason is
not what is seen in public domain papers.


>Cancellation of a National Section Charter is a decision made by
>the International President with the approval of the General
>Council.  However, I have never heard of the General Council
>opposing any decision of the President.  Considering the fact
>that Radha has canceled the charters of three sections since she
>has become president, I would suggest that such cancellations are
>indeed a "simple or easy decision at the highest level" (at least
>for Radha)  regardless of whether the worldwide membership is
>shrinking or not. 
>
        While this may be true in general, I am aware of an instance in
which when Annie Besant was at the height of popularity and power, her
suggestion to modify the Object of TS was turned down by the General Council.


> 
>Bart Lidofsky writes:
> 
>>There WAS an official explanation of Canada: According to
>>Canadian law, the Canadian section lost some tax breaks by being
>>part of the Theosophical Society (Canadian only organizations
>>got breaks which organizations that were part of an
>>international organziation did not get). The Canadian section
>>therefore amended its bylaws so that it no longer declared
>>itself to be part of the Theosophical Society. The Theosophical
>>Society therefore revoked its charter; if it allowed the
>>Canadian section to keep its charter, then it would have been
>>participating in a fraud.
> 
>JHE
>Your explanation seems quite different from the one Stan Trelor
>published in the CANADIAN THEOSOPHIST at the time.  What is the
>source of your information here?  
> 
> 
>------------------------------------------                        
>   |Jerry Hejka-Ekins,                      |                     
>      |Member TI, TSA, TSP, ULT                |                  
>         |Please reply to: jhe@toto.csustan.edu   |               
>            |and CC to jhejkaekins@igc.apc.org       |            
>               ------------------------------------------         
>                  
> 
>