Date Posted:11:00 Author: ketch - 31 Aug 2001 Subject: Re: Ananda and NTLA article In reply to:
Yogananda Devotee - 31 Aug 2001
's message, "Re: Ananda and NTLA article" on 10:58
At least now we can see what evidence your accusations are based upon, and everyone here can judge for themselves how reasonable your conclusions are.
Personally i do not believe that the evidence and reasoning you have provided is very strong.
As far as Anandainfo is concerned I take it that you are referring to the documents concerning the blood tests and the letters to NTLA and others. It would certainly be interesting to know what anandainfo.com's source is, and it may be reasonable to speculate that the source could be SRF, but it is only speculation, nothing more.
"These documents are not publicly available and were not posted, published, or sent to anyone else." How could you possibly know this?
A few years ago I worked for a large company which was in talks with another company concerning an major deal. I was part of a team of 3 looking at one aspect of the deal. Several times reports appeared in the press which were amazingly accurate despite the security measures we had taken. On one occasion an entire paragraph of a report I had prepared was quoted. A director of the company told me that reports in one newspaper of high level merger talks were accurate even in small details. The company held an enquiry into how the newspaper obtained it's information, but did not find out the source.
The reason I mention these things is simply to show that journalists do have their sources. It is not reasonable (in my opinion) to state that the site has the tacit approval and support of SRF on the basis of the evidence you have presented, but people must decide for themselves.
Nor do I see anything in this to suggest that the website is run by SRF members. We do not know who runs it.
The other matters you mention may be convincing to you, but for the rest of us they are at best second hane reports.
One person (you), writing under a false name, who we know virtually nothing about claims that someone else we have never heard of told him (or her) that they overheard one SRF monk say that Kriyananda was the Antichrist. Not much weight can be attached to this type of evidence.
Nor is the evidence in the aeroplane incident much stronger. Even if the incident took place it is a very tenuous link to SRF, and hardly indicates any long term anti-Ananda activity by SRF. For all we know the person allegedly flying the plane could have been an Ananda member.
I'm sorry but the evidence is just not strong enough in my opinion.
