Theos-Talk Archives (November 2006 Message tt01186)

Dr. Tillett,
    Again thank you for your response and comments they are once more 
appreciated. I understand you busy conditions of the present and await with interest 
your later presentments on the Cooper matter I am sure they will be valued 
here on this Forum.

    As to the Committee as I said I think it's particulars are an important 
knowledge if they can be accessed. Your letter to the members explaining you 
concerns provided them all with direct knowledge if they each actually read the 
letter. I would desire to know more in this area concerning the minutes of the 
Committee if they still exist they could reveal much worth knowing.

   Do you have a complete copy of John Coopers Contract with the THP with all 
the stipulations you enumerate? I assume you have as Executor.

   Yes, I can agree with your definition of "thieves" in the moral context 
the conscience is relational to receipt of knowledge. I asked about the 
Committee's freedoms and knowledge in particular in the case where they may have been 
over ruled in their advice on actions based on knowledge they obtained from 
your letters.
In your example of the mechanic the most simple form is presented and of 
course he should refuse to make his services available. But life is not always so 
basic and simple in form. What perhaps might be the "Ideal" would take the 
context of the Committee as a Group Standing and serving notice of resignation. 
We know this did not take place. So far as I understand none Seated arose and 
resigned. Then it is necessary to know the fullest reasons why none, assuming 
they all had direct knowledge undertook the expected action. I can't know that 
now, but all must be subject to identically level standard in all fairness. I 
don't see that happening as far as what is posted here. This is one reason I 
tend to conclude that the Committee part is not he most important goal here 
some wish to achieve. I recall that the most attention was given to Daniel's 
Websites. That there were others here who also had Theosophical websites who 
complained they were not being given the same exposures as Daniel's. In this 
context one has to wonder about organized actions that are intended to injure a 
member here and what underlies the motives. And I say in the free open Forum yes I 
do wonder and have reservations. There has for instance been a long standing 
degree of friction presented here that is directly indices to "Lodge" 
loyalties playing off diverse sentiments having very strong developed perspectives 
relative to others. The dynamic is that of Groups that suborn the individual 
context. And the Flow is "Other to Others" again suborning the individual. The 
Socratic and Platonic is reflected here. When the Dynamics and Flows are sane is 
the ideal but most often not reality. It is a matter of degree. I recall when 
this all began when Carlos arrived he noticed us all that he was then in 
agreement a certain group of "Theosophists" in regard to Daniel Caldwell. He placed 
the most significance then to sentiments and perceptions principally in 
matters concerning Paul Johnson's Book. That later came to slide into other 
widening circles of accusations of many types which continue now for more than a 
year. This was also coincidentally to the departure of some very nice members here 
who posting their considerations about Daniel had at the same time had 
announced their own "new" Forums and/or Websites and encouraging members here to 
leave and join them. I have no idea how many stayed or left in that context. I 
will always choose free speech, free thoughts, freedom to have perceptions of 
realitlie(s) in accordance of what actually did exist and take place particular 
to Theosophy which must include the real interactions that actually happened 
in the fullest understanding I can find (subject to augmentation based upon new 
truths that I come to know).

 Regards, hope you have very Merry Holidays,

John


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]