Theos-Talk Archives (March 2005 Message tt00247)

--- In theos-talk@yahoogroups.com, Cass Silva <silva_cass@y...> wrote:

> Dear Perry
> The Beuracracy has established its point, in its opinioncy on


R. Burnier wrote:

> A number of your statements are based on incomplete information or 
> no knowledge, for instance the accusation of his being a pedophile. 

It's two quite different issues. If R. Burnier is a beauraucrate, it 
doesn't prove that CWL was a pedophile. And in the contrary, if he 
wasn't a pedophile it doesn't mean that his works are in full 
consistency with those of HPB. And R. Burnier doesn't deny these 
descrepances in her message.

If CWL was really a pedophile, why there was no any legal percecution 
anf court decision against him? 100 years ago homosexuality was 
condemned (and persecuted in most counties), even it was practiced 
quite apart from pedophilia. And if so happened that there was no laws 
against pedophilia, an anti-gay law could be applied.