Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [anthroposophy_tomorrow] To Mike T

Expand Messages
  • dottie zold
    Hey Tarjei, Pete has been very uncompromising when it comes to speaking about how wacked Anthroposohy is and uses his children to show it. He or others may not
    Message 1 of 39 , May 1, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      Hey Tarjei,

      Pete has been very uncompromising when it comes to
      speaking about how wacked Anthroposohy is and uses his
      children to show it. He or others may not be aware of
      that this is a using of sorts to achieve his own goals
      it is. His role as a father is not to put his chldrens
      supposed behavoiurs online. If my father had done that
      I would be humiliated. I imagine his c hildren don't
      read PLANS so they may not be aware of how their
      father has portrayed them. I have spoken to Pete about
      this at PLANS and told him it was an outrage that he
      dragged his children into this. And he agreed.

      It is one thing to speak on what you disagree with and
      quite another to out their most inner feelings on line
      to get his point across. I get is it is a fine line
      and it is one I had to learn from my first trip to
      PLANS three or so years back. He has since shown a
      greater reluctance to bring them in and I appreciate
      that as a daughter who has been through the divorce
      issue.
      I reminded him whether or not he is happy about the
      divorce or what have you those ladies are his family
      and he should at least uphold that protective part in
      front of the world versus leaving them open for
      discussion. He has spoken not so kindly of his wife
      through little insinuations and such and Mike T hasn't
      slandered him because he has involved them when it
      suited him and become outraged when what he wrote was
      responded to. It's mostly my experience of him on line
      whereas he seems to say whatever he wants but all hell
      is set up when someone holds him accountable to what
      he has stated. He only wants to say it and be heard
      and have it accepted as truth. We all know divorce is
      sticky. And unfortuately Pete is in the thick of it
      and speaks at times of a court case and so forth.
      Although, again, he is much better at it and I also
      recognize it takes a while to get used to not using
      others experiences to justify what I am trying to
      share.

      And, I am done with the conversation. I just wanted to
      jump in and just say that Mike hasn't slandered anyone
      and if anyone wanted to take the time to check the
      story out they would indeed find what I have shared
      above to be true.

      Now, onto Shekinah :) in my next post. I am sure you
      can't wait.

      Happy Sunday,
      Dottie

      __________________________________________________
      Do You Yahoo!?
      Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
      http://mail.yahoo.com
    • pete_karaiskos
      ... Dottie - I m not going to explain this to you. Please learn to read and understand what you are reading. You are a waste of my time. Pete
      Message 39 of 39 , May 5, 2005
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In anthroposophy_tomorrow@yahoogroups.com, "dottie zold"
        <dottie_z@y...> wrote:
        > Pete:
        > > You're confusing Anthroposophy with Waldorf here. I'd like you to
        > > point to a reference here.
        >
        > and
        >
        > Pete over at the critics:
        >
        > Pete:
        > Let me ask you - if Waldorf schools are not trying to
        > promote Anthroposophy, to
        > produce Anthroposophists, then why have morning
        > verses.
        >
        > Dottie:
        > Okay Pete, so who's confusing Waldorf with Anthroposophy here? Had to
        > go back and just double check my reference for such comments thrown my
        > way by you that 'Anthroposophy and Waldorf are not one and the same
        > Dottie, what don't you understand about that'? Well, Pete, I'd like to
        > know whay 'you' don't understand about that?
        >
        > Best,
        > Dottie

        Dottie - I'm not going to explain this to you. Please learn to read
        and understand what you are reading. You are a waste of my time.

        Pete
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.