My Reply to Michael Detwiler about false apology

Date: Sun, 30 Jul 2000 14:19:14 -0500
From: purnhrt <>
To: Michael Detwiler <>
References: 1 , 2

Shalom b'YHWH
Michael, you may read that as an apology if you wish. James does apologize for commiting his definition
of lashon hara, but he does not state that he falsely called me an anti-semite. There is a difference, one
which James has stated several times. James states in his reply e-mail to me, which I sent to the Beit Din,
"They have also spread both lies and lashon hara.  (Lashon Hara is information that is true but which is
spread maliciously.)" James is very clear about what he terms lashon hara and even makes a distinction
between lies and lashon hara.

This "apology" does not clear my name of the lies spoken against it. I have been quite clear as to what is
required to do that. It is interesting that in sending that e-mail to James, he did not respond to clarify
what he intended, by stating that he meant to apologize for calling me an anti-semite, since I am not one,
but rather you write to tell me what James is saying, with still no concrete statements that I am not an

As to the [H's] issue, you and James involved me, when you accused them to me and said you had
proof. You cannot accuse people of something and not have proof to back up your claims. It is my
responsibility as a hearer of such things to investigate, to see if you are being truthful. Proof was offered,
but none was given. This is something that should have been done by the forum members and anyone
else that you posted the charges to. As to dropping it, I can not do so.

As to the lashon hara thing, as I wrote to you before, this is more than lashon hara. I was lied about and
slandered. James has yet to make a full apology and a complete retraction of those lies and slanders and
the lashon hara, to the forum and his lists. You may be for Shalom, in this matter, but he is clearly not,
and there can be no shalom without the repentance.

Shalom, Kathryn