Theos-Talk Archives (February 1998 Message tl00187)

Bart,

Sy Ginsburg has not written on this list for more than a year. He told
me you are mistaken, he has no memory or reason to have contacted you in
any manner.

You may insert "Chutzpa" for balls. I believe that is gender neutral
enough. By the way, have you ever asked yourself why you are always on
the defensive here?

As to Wheatons structure, if it is round, brown, rolls down hill and is
malodorous, can you think what it is. How do JA & Co. justify their
actions when they will  brook no democratic process in their imperial
rule?. Does the profound reduction in membership, nationally and
internationally, the ouster of Lodges and whole countrys not tell us
something? Can one not see that the ES has control of the entire officer
corp and BOD at Wheaton & Adjar? Your certainly cannot deny the truth of
this. By the way, are you ES Bart?

The Wheatonists are more polished and refined in their manner, but
remove six or eight layers of armour and they act as you do. Think on
this before you puff out your pride filled chest. Your oft use eptithet
speaks volumes to your personal approach "If you can prove that the
power structure at Wheaton is corrupt, then why don't you go to court to
have them removed, or give your evidence to someone who can, such as
Sy?" this approach, repetitious as it is, further indicates the weakness
of your position.

Your "traditionalist" mentality is ... to abide. E.G. Gardner states
rather nicely what happens to those who remain bound up in the first
round (chosen, tradition etc.) of the current root race.

"But. at least according to HPB, theosophy IS religion." Bart, where may
I find this please? Your childish rejoinder to YOUR self described
justification to the tax man of your "Religious status" speaks volumes.

Lastly, why  do you always resort to school yard banter as retort? May I
take your interest in my wife as affirmation of some inadequacy?

Ken Malkin