To understand how long of a problem the censorship has been, under the
fundamentalists among my fellow bahais on AOL, please read a 1998
message by an AOL member.
Subj: Board Posting at Keyword: Spirituality
Date: 4/7/2002 3:06:24 AM Eastern Daylight Time
From: LDRS LFST Shahid
To: Fglaysh12002
CC: LDRS LFST Mgr
Dear Member,
Regarding your message posted at Keyword: Baha'i>General Discussion>Re:Disagreements with AOL guidelines
In order for all members to enjoy our message boards, our community has certain standards of conduct for members to follow. Please review Keyword: Message Board Product Guidelines and Keyword: Lifestyles Board Standards for information on what is appropriate in our community. Based on these standards and guidelines, your post was removed to avoid disruption to the message board discussion.
Depending on the severity of the disruption, a report may have been submitted to AOL's Community Action Team for further review.
We appreciate your taking the time to read this letter. Thank you. If you have any questions or comments, please forward them to LDRS LFST Mgr.
Regards,
LDRS LFST Shahid
Volunteer Message Board Leader
AOL Lifestyles Community
======== Copy of Your Message ========
Subject: Re: Disagreements with AOL guidelines
Date: 4/6/02 11:19 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020406111940.10643.00003266@mb-fo.aol.com>
The problem on these bahai messages boards is not with AOL guidelines but the unfair, unjust, and aribitrary manner in which they are abused by those in whom AOL has misplaced its trust.
FG
www.google.com Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: AOL Legal Department's Address
Date: Monday, April 01, 2002 9:35 AM
Those interested in justice may file their lawsuits with
AOL Legal Department
22000 AOL Way
Dulles, Virginia 20166
--
FG
The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: AOL - continuing bahai fundamentalist dishonesty and exploitation
of AOL
Date: Friday, March 29, 2002 9:18 AM
Subject: Shahid: Non-elected Forum Leader who trashes our First
Amendment
rights
Date: 3/28/2002 2:14 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Ruletherod
Message-id: <20020328141440.08650.00000536@mb-cp.aol.com>
Shahid, forget AOL's un-Constitutional restrictions on
our free speech long enough to answer me rationally,
without any of your politically correct excuses or
Baha'i spin:
Why did you remove my post?
In a message dated 3/27/2002 10:10:28 PM, LDRS LFST Shahid writes:
Subj:Board Posting at Keyword: Baha'i
Date:3/27/2002 10:10:28 PM Mountain Standard Time
From:LDRS LFST Shahid
To:Ruletherod
CC:LDRS LFST Jerry, LDRS LFST Mgr
Dear Member,
Regarding your messages posted at Keyword: Baha'i>Announcements>
Fred: What
I learned in Baha'i detention>3/25/2002 6:05 AM
In order for all members to enjoy our message boards, our community has
certain standards of conduct for members to follow. Please review Keyword:
Message Board Product Guidelines and Keyword: <link to your community's
message board standards> for more information on what is appropriate in
our
community. Based on these standards and guidelines, your post was removed
to
avoid disruption to the
message board discussion.
Depending on the severity of the disruption, a report may have been
submitted to AOL's Community Action Team for further review.
We appreciate your taking the time to read this letter. Thank you. If
you
have any questions or comments, please forward them to <contact screen
name>.
Regards,
LDRS LFST Shahid
Volunteer Message Board Host
Spirituality Forum
Subject: Fred: What I learned in Baha'i detention
Date: 3/25/02 3:31 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Ruletherod
Message-id: <20020325153116.18185.00000087@mb-fd.aol.com>
Subject: Re: SHAHID RETURNS LIKE A POST-THIEF IN THE NIGHT!
Date: 3/25/2002 6:05 AM
From: Fglaysh12002
>removing every dastardly idea
>from this board
Well, in all seriousness, that is precisely the problem
here on AOL's bahai message boards, which are regularly
censored and manipulated by the fundamentalists among
my fellow bahais.
--FG
Don't you feel patronized by this kind of censorship?
We have one adult (a religious peer) using
AOL's ad hoc rules -- rules that generally suit the
authoritarian mindset of the Baha'i administrative
types -- to suppress the "improper"...or rather unpopular
(politically incorrect)...expressions of malcontents.
We had no active forum leader here for a number of months
in 1998, you'll recall. Nothing bad happened. The board was
at its most active and diverse. It was completely democratic
in that no one was given unfair advantage. AOL didn't care that
we were taking advantage of our freedom. But insecure Baha'i
conservative and fundamentalist camps gradually pushed behind
the scenes until they got a religious thought-policeman on duty
to watch over us like we're a bunch of juvenile delinquents ...as if
"they" were/are somehow superior in taste and wisdom. The way
I see it, it was a religious coup on the part of self-serving and
bossy Baha'is, mostly females....people I thought I had escaped
offline. The religious extremists want their special place in heaven
while making this Earthly life a hell for the rest of us.
Each year, our public libraries produce lists of banned books --
books deemed too risky for reading by "good intentioned"
religious
folks -- reminding us how fragile our First Amendment freedoms are.
The banned books represent both popular and classical fiction.
But the government (so often blamed for everything) isn't banning
them. Our fellow citizens are getting this stuff removed through
loopholes in the law...or because they know that the squeaky wheel
gets greased. In other words, if the righteous religious minority is out
to censor our thoughts, they will succeed insofar as enough people do
nothing to challenge them; to keep them in check. This is why I feel
most Baha'is are probably unwitting accomplices in these First
Amendment violations. Their excuse: "obedience" and "loyal
servitude." ("It's the Covenant, STUPID!")
AOL is merely a global enterprise...a moneymaking business.
It has no moral authority over us, but our Baha'i forum leader(s)
wants us to believe they do somehow. It's just a convenient front
for extending Baha'i censorship onto the global Net....a "place"
that's a godsend so long as it remains *free.*
Censorship has no place but the home. Censorship goes
hand-in-hand with religious fundamentalism or secular
authoritarianism: tyranny and dictatorship (by whatever
degree).
I wish that all of the American Baha'i fundamentalists
could spent a decade living in Iran or Saudi Arabia under
existing religious censorship codes to finally appreciate
why our democratic freedoms are more sacred than the
Kitab-i-Aqdas, the Bible or the Quran.
Without free expression, the Baha'i Faith would cease
to exist. But the ONLY freedoms that authoritarian Baha'is
are concerned with are their OWN: to worship, preach,
dictate...and to control opposing viewpoints as much as
possible.
Children under cussing-age don't lurk here. Children
are not concerned with the issues we've been discussing
here. Only young, middle and old adults visit here. And yet
the "children" excuse is one (among others) that's used to
remove posts. The only "children" here are the adults...because
that's how we're treated by our forum leaders -- as children.
We're continually being patronized as naughty boys and girls.
Let's make rules so we can censor the censors for a bleepin'
change. That would be justice! Let's have a board mutiny! Let's
invent four-letter words that no one has ever heard before!
--Rule Beard
From: "Mr Mahdi" <mrmahdi@aol.com>
Subject: Bahai extremism on AOL's bahai message board
Date: Saturday, April 06, 2002 2:24 AM
For years I have complained about the extremist elements from amongst the bahai
faith who happen to take control as "forum leaders" and "moderators" of the
bahai message board on AOL. When I mention that I know people that not only
had their accounts terminated not once but two or three times due to bahai
extremists' manipulation of AOL's TOS and deceiving AOL staff, many of them
think I am lying or exageration. They think so because it would never cross
the people's mind for a moment that a forum on an ISP will be playground for a
ultra-extremist and intolerant agenda of a group of people trying to promote
their world view and harrass those who do not agree or toe their line.
For years, people have lost their accounts, been harrassed and slandered by the
ultra-fanatical elements from amongst the bahais on AOL. I have never
witnessed in any other forum on AOL where two successive moderators/forum
leaders with the SAME intolerant extremist agenda controlled it with an iron
fist, censoring non bahais and bahais who are not dogmatic extremists. I have
never heard on ANY AOL forum where many people who did not toe a certain line
had their accounts terminated or at least suspended because the forum leaders
and other bahais have reported them to AOL. Fred Glaysher's website shows us
extensive evidence of years of bahai extremist manipulation and outright
double-standards.
I am confused as to why AOL has allowed this to go on and on and on and on and
on for so many years, despite the fact that several AOL members have complained
and even documented the abuse of the bahai extremist forum leaders/moderators.
I would like for AOL to offer an explanation as to why they have allowed this
to go on for so long. It is either they don't know or don't care. I hope that
it is the former because if it is, we can inform them (once again) as to what
goes on so they can take action.
From a concerned member of AOL,
Mahdi Muhammad
From: "Mr Mahdi" <mrmahdi@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Bahai extremism on AOL's bahai message board
Date: Saturday, April 06, 2002 2:27 PM
If anyone here doubts that there is an bahai extremist agenda on the AOL bahai
message board, ask yourself how on earth did Mark Foster pass and give the
forum leader role to Susan Maneck? Both are viewed by many bahais as religious
fundamentalists who have a history of intolerance and clear-cut double
standards.
I would like to receive an explanation from either AOL or someone familiar with
their policies to explain the process of HOW a forum leader pass his position
to someone else of his or her own choosing.
I would like to know if there is any process where AOL members can participate
in choosing a forum leader. If there is, why wasn't the election process
present on the AOL bahai message boards? If there isn't, why on earth not???
Mahdi Muhammad
From: "Mr Mahdi" <mrmahdi@aol.com>
Subject: Re: Bahai extremism on AOL's bahai message board
Date: Saturday, April 06, 2002 2:17 PM
Greetings Fred,
>Any chance you could share
>this with people on AOL in General Discussion, AOL
>Legal Department thread?
I would love to discuss this and other things of a similar nature in General
Discussion on AOL. But I must admit, I have to be careful these days, because
I do not want my account terminated or suspended due to the bahai extremists
TOSing my relevant posts to AOL staff.
I would join in the current discussion on AOL, but I am not sure if I am going
to post the last message I put on TRB. I just had enough with the
ultra-fanatical censorship of Maneck/Shahid, so I am extremely cautious these
days. But if you want to forward what I posted on TRB to AOL, please feel free
to do so.
Peace,
Mahdi Muhammad
Subj: Board Postings at Keyword: Bahai
Date: 3/30/2002 1:47:02 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: LDRS LFST Shahid
To: Fglaysh12002
CC: LDRS LFST Mgr, LDRS LFST Jerry
Dear Member,
Regarding your messages posted at Keyword: Baha'i>Announcements>
In order for all members to enjoy our message boards, our community
has certain standards of conduct for members to follow. Please review
Keyword: Message Board Product Guidelines and Keyword: <link to your
community's message board standards> for more information on what is
appropriate in our community. Based on these standards and guidelines,
your post was removed to avoid disruption to the message board discussion.
Depending on the severity of the disruption, a report may have been
submitted to AOL's Community Action Team for further review.
We appreciate your taking the time to read this letter. Thank you.
If you have any questions or comments, please forward them to <contact
screen name>.
Regards,
LDRS LFST Shahid
Volunteer Message Board Host
Spirituality Forum
Subject: Re: Baha'i Brown Shirts
Date: 3/29/02 8:17 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020329081707.02886.00000960@mb-ba.aol.com>
>Double-standards equal hypocrisy.
>
>Censorship is hypocrisy.
>
>This board has been hijacked
>by a Baha'i cleric.
>
>And Baha'i cowards will do nothing
>about it.
>
>Seekers:
>This is a Baha'i Spin Zone.
Thank you for your courageous attempt to inform our fellow citizens
of what is actually happening behind the facade.....
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Shahid: Non-elected Forum Leader who trashes our First
Amendment rights
Date: 3/29/02 8:19 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020329081941.02886.00000961@mb-ba.aol.com>
Thanks again for speaking candidly about the distortions and
suppressions that are taking place here under the guise of
"moderating."
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
LDRS LFST Shahid
Volunteer Message Board Leader
Baha'i Message Board
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: AOL - bahai fundamentalists suppress freedom of speech &
conscience
Date: Friday, March 29, 2002 9:13 AM
FYI
Subj: Board Postings at Keyword: Bahai
Date: 3/28/2002 12:22:03 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: LDRS LFST Shahid
To: Fglaysh12002
CC: LDRS LFST Mgr, LDRS LFST Jerry
Dear Member,
Regarding your messages posted at Keyword: Baha'i.
In order for all members to enjoy our message boards, our community
has
certain standards of conduct for members to follow. Please review Keyword:
Message Board Product Guidelines and Keyword: Spirituality Message
Board
Standards for more information on what is appropriate in our
community.
Based on these standards and guidelines, your posts were removed to avoid
disruption to the message board discussion.
Depending on the severity of the disruption, a report may have been
submitted to AOL's Community Action Team for further review.
We appreciate your taking the time to read this letter. Thank you. If
you
have any questions or comments, please forward them to <LDRS LFST
Mgr>.
Regards,
LDRS LFST Shahid
Volunteer Message Board Leader
Baha'i Message Board
Subject: Re: SHAHID RETURNS LIKE A POST-THIEF IN THE NIGHT!
Date: 3/25/02 8:05 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020325080531.00535.00000004@mb-md.aol.com>
>Thanks for the removing every dastardly idea
>from this board
Well, in all seriousness, that is precisely the problem here on AOL's
bahai
message boards, which are regularly censored and manipulated by the
fundamentalists among my fellow bahais.
The real question is when will AOL personnel demonstrate a sense of
understanding and responsibility for what they are permitting to take
place.
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Fred: What I learned in Baha'i detention
Date: 3/26/02 7:23 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020326072317.00989.00000336@mb-cu.aol.com>
Rule,
I couldn't agree more with everything you say here....
Maybe AOL has to be sued before they wake up to what's going on around
here
on the bahai messages boards, the way the Muslims are now suing AOL....
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Maneck/Shahid's Duplicity
Date: 3/25/02 8:03 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020325080325.00535.00000003@mb-md.aol.com>
ATTN - AOL Personnel
We're still waiting for an answer and justice here on these bahai
message
boards.
Please appoint someone who can be fair and honest.
Thank you.
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: ATTN - AOL Personnel
Date: 3/25/02 8:35 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020325083530.02614.00000008@mb-dh.aol.com>
I highly recommend Karen Bacquet's article in the American Family
Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal, to any AOL representative attempting
to
understand what is taking place here on these bahai message boards, as
perhaps the best introduction:
"Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i
Community"
may be found on her website:
https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html
See note below from the AFF's website.
Again, I request that AOL intervene and appoint an impartial and
fair-minded
person as the community leader.
--
FG
The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship
----
"AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt research
center
and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study
psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and
professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a
cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a
growing
network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from
education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and
business." Further details about AFF: https://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: FWD AOL - Re: Article in American Family Foundation's Cultic
Studies Journal by Karen Bacquet
Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 6:38 PM
FWD from AOL's bahai message boards, General Discussion:
In a very important message, Steven Scholl, author of Crisis of Faith,
which enraged the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais, accuses
Susan Maneck of lying and misrepresenting the incidents surrounding
his decision to withdraw from the bahai faith.
--
FG
The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Scholl" <>
Newsgroups: talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: Article in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies
Journal
by Karen Bacquet
> Several people on this forum have fwd to me Susan Maneck's
comments on
> the inner workings of my mind. Susan has a history of telling the
> world what I really mean and what my true motives were in relation to
> events surrounding my exodus from the Baha'i community. At one point
> she informed the world that it was my belief that the Baha'i covenant
> went null and void in 1921 with the passing of Abdul-Baha, which was
> a rather outrageous lie on her part. She also claimed that she was
> serving as my confidant and guide in the rocky days leading up to my
> resignation of membership and that she was counseling me in some way.
> In short, she has lied and made misleading statements about me in the
> past and this recent statement of hers is just another example of her
> lack of honesty.
>
> She writes:
>
> > > The real reason that Steve Scholl was so concerned is that
at the
> > time he received this letter from a Counselor he had
already planned to
do
> > this big expose in the press (the Rankin article.) Steve
was well aware
that
> > such an attack on the Faith after having received such a warning
from
the
> > Counsellor would assuredly result in his being declared a
Covenant
breaker.
> > If he had not been so determined to go forward with this, there
> > would not have been a problem.
>
> Let me emphasize that Susan Maneck has never been privy to the real
> reasons for my concerns and actions. That said, I am not even clear
> what she is trying to say here. The statement of mine that Karen B.
> quotes in her excellent article was a simple look back at one aspect
> of my thinking about the internal Baha'i culture wars a few years
> after the fact. I think the statement indicates clearly that there
was
> no big concern on my part about possibly being declared a Baha'i
> covenant breaker, that the problems associated with such a move
> against me would land more on my family and friends than on me. At
> that point I could have cared less what the UHJ or NSA did re: my
> Baha'i rights since they had already trampled on them for years and
> had acted duplicitously and in violation of their own stated
> administrative principles in handling my "case".
>
> Furthermore, I had gone on record in my correspondence with the UHJ
> and Counsl Birkland that I would not hesitate to discuss their
actions
> with "people of capacity" outside of the Baha'i community
and with the
> media, and I had already passed on information to several religion
> writers for major newspapers about what was going on inside the
Baha'i
> community. This was not something I was trying to hide from them.
>
> I don't know what Maneck's last sentence is referring to. Couns.
> Birkland's threatening letter to me made it clear that if I said or
> did *anything* he or his handlers disapproved of then I would be
> declared a CBer. The list of my Baha'i crimes included theological
> deviations and not accepting EVERY WORD from the pen of Baha'u'llah
> and Abdul-Baha as true. Birkland made it clear in his letter to me
> that he did not think I was a Baha'i and that he would not hesitate
to
> recommend my removal from the community.
>
> What I understand Maneck to be saying here is that my big sin was to
> talk with the media about internal Baha'i crackdowns on intellectuals
> and scholars, and that if I had not planned to spill the beans to the
> media "there would not have been a problem." If this is
what she is
> implying, then she is dead wrong. First, if I had not resigned, I
> believe I would have been declared a CB because I had no intentions
of
> changing my beliefs based on the fundamentalist rants of the members
> of the UHJ.
>
> But what is telling in this line of Maneckian cult thinking is what
> she is really saying: The problem in her cult view of the world
is
> the "dissident act" of shining a light on internal
Baha'i affairs so
> that outsiders (and insiders) can learn about what really takes place
> in the Baha'i world. The great sin is ignoring the Baha'i taboo
> against speaking out against internal injustices because to do so is
> to tarnish the reputation of the Baha'i institutions. Good Baha'is
are
> expected to take their abuse in silence. If they speak out against
> abuse, they are regarded as internal opposition and come under
> investigation from the Baha'i Inquisition. They are villified and
> threatened, even told that their status in the afterlife is
threatened
> if they don't change their ways. And, yes, this was a key element the
> little drama that played out between the Baha'i leadership and
myself.
> What I told the UHJ and Birkland was something like this:
>
> I know you are all excited about emerging from obscurity and taking a
> larger role on the world stage. Well, that means you are also going
to
> be examined more closely. Your financial misdeeds, your cover ups of
> sexual exploitation by Baha'i leaders, your fundamentalist leanings,
> your sexist views, your 1950s view on homosexualty, are all going to
> be opened up for public scrutiny. Your days of a free ride in the
> media are over.
>
> Susan can try to nip at Karen's heels and claim that Karen's article
> is flawed this way and that. But such partisan harping is only
> preaching to the fundamentalist Baha'i choir. Outsiders and many
> insiders will read Karen's article as a clear and honest attempt to
> discuss recent Baha'i events. Susan can try to attack Karen's lack of
> "methodology" or that Karen's work is not serious
scholarship. But
> this is laughable when one looks at Dr. Maneck's publishing career.
> She has penned a few Baha'i articles of marginal value published by
> internal Baha'i agencies. In short, she has one of the weakest
> publishing histories I have ever seen in academics and her academic
> profile is nearly nonexistent. Maneck has attempted (unsuccessfuly)
to
> discredit the work of Juan Cole and now Karen with her Baha'i
blather.
> Yet it is Juan and Karen who are publishing in refereed academic
> journals, and Karen has done this as a freelance writer rather than
as
> a trained academic.
>
> Susan, if you think you really have something to say, write it up and
> submit it to a non-Baha'i publisher and see if they will accept YOUR
> methodology and YOUR use of sources.
>
> Steve Scholl
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: AOL - What I learned in Baha'i detention - Ruletherod
Date: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 8:21 AM
Shahid is the fundamentalist "community leader" on AOL's
bahai message
boards:
Subject: Fred: What I learned in Baha'i detention
Date: 3/25/2002 3:31 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Ruletherod
Message-id: <20020325153116.18185.00000087@mb-fd.aol.com>
Subject: Re: SHAHID RETURNS LIKE A POST-THIEF IN THE NIGHT!
Date: 3/25/2002 6:05 AM
From: Fglaysh12002
>removing every dastardly idea
>from this board
Well, in all seriousness, that is precisely the problem
here on AOL's bahai message boards, which are regularly
censored and manipulated by the fundamentalists among
my fellow bahais.
--FG
Don't you feel patronized by this kind of censorship?
We have one adult (a religious peer) using
AOL's ad hoc rules -- rules that generally suit the
authoritarian mindset of the Baha'i administrative
types -- to suppress the "improper"...or rather unpopular
(politically incorrect)...expressions of malcontents.
We had no active forum leader here for a number of months
in 1998, you'll recall. Nothing bad happened. The board was
at its most active and diverse. It was completely democratic
in that no one was given unfair advantage. AOL didn't care that
we were taking advantage of our freedom. But insecure Baha'i
conservative and fundamentalist camps gradually pushed behind
the scenes until they got a religious thought-policeman on duty
to watch over us like we're a bunch of juvenile delinquents ...as if
"they" were/are somehow superior in taste and wisdom. The way
I see it, it was a religious coup on the part of self-serving and
bossy Baha'is, mostly females....people I thought I had escaped
offline. The religious extremists want their special place in heaven
while making this Earthly life a hell for the rest of us.
Each year, our public libraries produce lists of banned books --
books deemed too risky for reading by "good intentioned"
religious
folks -- reminding us how fragile our First Amendment freedoms are.
The banned books represent both popular and classical fiction.
But the government (so often blamed for everything) isn't banning
them. Our fellow citizens are getting this stuff removed through
loopholes in the law...or because they know that the squeaky wheel
gets greased. In other words, if the righteous religious minority is out
to censor our thoughts, they will succeed insofar as enough people do
nothing to challenge them; to keep them in check. This is why I feel
most Baha'is are probably unwitting accomplices in these First
Amendment violations. Their excuse: "obedience" and "loyal
servitude." ("It's the Covenant, STUPID!")
AOL is merely a global enterprise...a moneymaking business.
It has no moral authority over us, but our Baha'i forum leader(s)
wants us to believe they do somehow. It's just a convenient front
for extending Baha'i censorship onto the global Net....a "place"
that's a godsend so long as it remains *free.*
Censorship has no place but the home. Censorship goes
hand-in-hand with religious fundamentalism or secular
authoritarianism: tyranny and dictatorship (by whatever
degree).
I wish that all of the American Baha'i fundamentalists
could spent a decade living in Iran or Saudi Arabia under
existing religious censorship codes to finally appreciate
why our democratic freedoms are more sacred than the
Kitab-i-Aqdas, the Bible or the Quran.
Without free expression, the Baha'i Faith would cease
to exist. But the ONLY freedoms that authoritarian Baha'is
are concerned with are their OWN: to worship, preach,
dictate...and to control opposing viewpoints as much as
possible.
Children under cussing-age don't lurk here. Children
are not concerned with the issues we've been discussing
here. Only young, middle and old adults visit here. And yet
the "children" excuse is one (among others) that's used to
remove posts. The only "children" here are the adults...because
that's how we're treated by our forum leaders -- as children.
We're continually being patronized as naughty boys and girls.
Let's make rules so we can censor the censors for a bleepin'
change. That would be justice! Let's have a board mutiny! Let's
invent four-letter words that no one has ever heard before!
--Rule Beard
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: FWD AOL - Re: Article in American Family Foundation's Cultic
Studies Journal by Karen Bacquet
Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 6:38 PM
FWD from AOL's bahai message boards, General Discussion:
In a very important message, Steven Scholl, author of Crisis of Faith,
which enraged the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais, accuses
Susan Maneck of lying and misrepresenting the incidents surrounding
his decision to withdraw from the bahai faith.
--
FG
The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship
----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Scholl" <>
Newsgroups: talk.religion.bahai
Sent: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 12:55 PM
Subject: Re: Article in American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies
Journal
by Karen Bacquet
> Several people on this forum have fwd to me Susan Maneck's
comments on
> the inner workings of my mind. Susan has a history of telling the
> world what I really mean and what my true motives were in relation to
> events surrounding my exodus from the Baha'i community. At one point
> she informed the world that it was my belief that the Baha'i covenant
> went null and void in 1921 with the passing of Abdul-Baha, which was
> a rather outrageous lie on her part. She also claimed that she was
> serving as my confidant and guide in the rocky days leading up to my
> resignation of membership and that she was counseling me in some way.
> In short, she has lied and made misleading statements about me in the
> past and this recent statement of hers is just another example of her
> lack of honesty.
>
> She writes:
>
> > > The real reason that Steve Scholl was so concerned is that
at the
> > time he received this letter from a Counselor he had
already planned to
do
> > this big expose in the press (the Rankin article.) Steve
was well aware
that
> > such an attack on the Faith after having received such a warning
from
the
> > Counsellor would assuredly result in his being declared a
Covenant
breaker.
> > If he had not been so determined to go forward with this, there
> > would not have been a problem.
>
> Let me emphasize that Susan Maneck has never been privy to the real
> reasons for my concerns and actions. That said, I am not even clear
> what she is trying to say here. The statement of mine that Karen B.
> quotes in her excellent article was a simple look back at one aspect
> of my thinking about the internal Baha'i culture wars a few years
> after the fact. I think the statement indicates clearly that there
was
> no big concern on my part about possibly being declared a Baha'i
> covenant breaker, that the problems associated with such a move
> against me would land more on my family and friends than on me. At
> that point I could have cared less what the UHJ or NSA did re: my
> Baha'i rights since they had already trampled on them for years and
> had acted duplicitously and in violation of their own stated
> administrative principles in handling my "case".
>
> Furthermore, I had gone on record in my correspondence with the UHJ
> and Counsl Birkland that I would not hesitate to discuss their
actions
> with "people of capacity" outside of the Baha'i community
and with the
> media, and I had already passed on information to several religion
> writers for major newspapers about what was going on inside the
Baha'i
> community. This was not something I was trying to hide from them.
>
> I don't know what Maneck's last sentence is referring to. Couns.
> Birkland's threatening letter to me made it clear that if I said or
> did *anything* he or his handlers disapproved of then I would be
> declared a CBer. The list of my Baha'i crimes included theological
> deviations and not accepting EVERY WORD from the pen of Baha'u'llah
> and Abdul-Baha as true. Birkland made it clear in his letter to me
> that he did not think I was a Baha'i and that he would not hesitate
to
> recommend my removal from the community.
>
> What I understand Maneck to be saying here is that my big sin was to
> talk with the media about internal Baha'i crackdowns on intellectuals
> and scholars, and that if I had not planned to spill the beans to the
> media "there would not have been a problem." If this is
what she is
> implying, then she is dead wrong. First, if I had not resigned, I
> believe I would have been declared a CB because I had no intentions
of
> changing my beliefs based on the fundamentalist rants of the members
> of the UHJ.
>
> But what is telling in this line of Maneckian cult thinking is what
> she is really saying: The problem in her cult view of the world
is
> the "dissident act" of shining a light on internal
Baha'i affairs so
> that outsiders (and insiders) can learn about what really takes place
> in the Baha'i world. The great sin is ignoring the Baha'i taboo
> against speaking out against internal injustices because to do so is
> to tarnish the reputation of the Baha'i institutions. Good Baha'is
are
> expected to take their abuse in silence. If they speak out against
> abuse, they are regarded as internal opposition and come under
> investigation from the Baha'i Inquisition. They are villified and
> threatened, even told that their status in the afterlife is
threatened
> if they don't change their ways. And, yes, this was a key element the
> little drama that played out between the Baha'i leadership and
myself.
> What I told the UHJ and Birkland was something like this:
>
> I know you are all excited about emerging from obscurity and taking a
> larger role on the world stage. Well, that means you are also going
to
> be examined more closely. Your financial misdeeds, your cover ups of
> sexual exploitation by Baha'i leaders, your fundamentalist leanings,
> your sexist views, your 1950s view on homosexualty, are all going to
> be opened up for public scrutiny. Your days of a free ride in the
> media are over.
>
> Susan can try to nip at Karen's heels and claim that Karen's article
> is flawed this way and that. But such partisan harping is only
> preaching to the fundamentalist Baha'i choir. Outsiders and many
> insiders will read Karen's article as a clear and honest attempt to
> discuss recent Baha'i events. Susan can try to attack Karen's lack of
> "methodology" or that Karen's work is not serious
scholarship. But
> this is laughable when one looks at Dr. Maneck's publishing career.
> She has penned a few Baha'i articles of marginal value published by
> internal Baha'i agencies. In short, she has one of the weakest
> publishing histories I have ever seen in academics and her academic
> profile is nearly nonexistent. Maneck has attempted (unsuccessfuly)
to
> discredit the work of Juan Cole and now Karen with her Baha'i
blather.
> Yet it is Juan and Karen who are publishing in refereed academic
> journals, and Karen has done this as a freelance writer rather than
as
> a trained academic.
>
> Susan, if you think you really have something to say, write it up and
> submit it to a non-Baha'i publisher and see if they will accept YOUR
> methodology and YOUR use of sources.
>
> Steve Scholl
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: Maneck seeking revenge AOL for my Letter to the Editor &
Bacquet's Article
Date: Tuesday, March 12, 2002 6:26 PM
FYI
--
Subj: Board Posting at Keyword: Bahai
Date: 3/10/2002 3:36:30 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: LDRS LFST Shahid
To: Fglaysh12002
CC: LDRS LFST Mgr, LDRS LFST Jerry
Dear Member,
Regarding your messages posted at Keyword: Baha'i>General
Discussion.
In order for all members to enjoy our message boards, our community
has
certain standards of conduct for members to follow. Please review Keyword:
Message Board Product Guidelines and Keyword: Spirituality Message
Board
Standards for more information on what is appropriate in our
community.
Based on these standards and guidelines, your posts were removed to avoid
disruption to the message board discussion.
Depending on the severity of the disruption, a report may have been
submitted to AOL's Community Action Team for further review.
We appreciate your taking the time to read this letter. Thank you. If
you
have any questions or comments, please forward them to <LDRS LFST
Mgr>.
Regards,
LDRS LFST Shahid
Volunteer Message Board Leader
Baha'i Message Board
Subject: Re: karen Bacquet's Article
Date: 3/10/2002 9:35 AM Central Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020310103546.05954.00001018@mb-fo.aol.com>
See Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family
Foundation's
Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now on
AOL's message boards:
Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community"
may be found on her website:
https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Letter to the Editor - O&E Newspapers - 3/7/02
Date: 3/10/2002 9:38 AM Central Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020310103825.05954.00001022@mb-fo.aol.com>
Damage control by fundamentalists among my fellow bahais....
See Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family
Foundation's
Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now on
AOL's message boards:
Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community"
may be found on her website:
https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Letter to the Editor - O&E Newspapers - 3/7/02
Date: 3/10/2002 9:39 AM Central Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020310103943.05954.00001023@mb-fo.aol.com>
>warmest, Susan
>
>https://www.susanmaneck.com
>
For newcomers to AOL bahai message boards, here is a link that will
provide
you with the full story that the fundamentalists among my fellow bahais do
not want you to know about: See Karen Bacquet's article published in the
American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is
really taking place now on AOL's message boards:
Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community"
may be found on her website:
https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: American Family Foundation - Cultic SJ - Article
Date: 3/10/2002 9:43 AM Central Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020310104306.05954.00001027@mb-fo.aol.com>
You and other fundamentalists among my fellow bahais are not really
fooling
anyone but yourselves. Maneck regularly spams her URL and has with
impunity
for years now on AOL while she/Shahid or whoever the "community
leader" is
protects her while suppressing such links as mine and Bacquets which
provide
the unsuspecting with knowledge about the oppression that truly hides
behind
the facade that has supplanted
Baha'u'llah's Teachings:
See Karen Bacquet's article published in the American Family
Foundation's
Cultic Studies Journal to understand what is really taking place now on
AOL's message boards:
Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community"
may be found on her website:
https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Avoiding spam
Date: 3/8/2002 4:46 PM Central Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020308174645.11900.00000747@mb-dh.aol.com>
>Subject: Avoiding spam
>Date: 3/8/2002 12:27 PM Eastern Standard Time
>From: LDRS LFST Shahid
>Message-id: <20020308122741.24729.00000289@mb-mv.aol.com>
>
>
>Dear Members,
>
>I would like to remind you that it is contrary to to community
standards to
>keep posting the same message over and over again. Tag lines should be
>limited to three or four lines, otherwise the tag line becomes the
message
>and when repeated constitutes spam.
>
>LDRS LFST Shahid
>AOL Lifestyles
Again, does that apply when you post as Susan Maneck, using your
double
standard to spam your URL all over these message boards?
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: American Family Foundation - Cultic SJ - Article
Date: 3/8/2002 6:44 AM Central Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020308074450.05994.00000534@mb-fo.aol.com>
False. The uhj is not interested in hearing and addressing the
concerns of
honest bahais, only fundamentalists. What it is interested in is
squelching
and suppressing all honest and open discussion about ANYTHING that
disagrees
with its own views....
Bacquet's article, in the American Family Foundation's Cultic Studies
Journal, presents the evidence:
"Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i Community"
may be found on her website:
https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html
"AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt
research center
and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study
psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and
professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a
cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a
growing
network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from
education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and
business." Further details about AFF: https://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Letter to the Editor - O&E Newspapers - 3/7/02
Date: 3/8/2002 6:41 AM Central Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020308074110.05994.00000532@mb-fo.aol.com>
>The Bahai's are offering solutions to a world that is engulfed in
terrorism,
>hatred, and fear. For you to discount this by attacking the Faith in
the
>paper saddens me. It makes your motives suspect as well.
>
False. The fundamentalists among my fellow bahais are not offering
"solutions" to those problems but the very dynamics that create
many of them
as evidenced by the many lives that have been severely damaged within and
without of the bahai faith by such practices. See Karen Bacquet's article
for an excellent discussion of many such incidents, exactly what
fundamentalists here on AOL do NOT want you to know about:
"Enemies Within: Conflict and Control in the Baha'i
Community"
may be found on her website:
https://www.angelfire.com/ca3/bigquestions/enemies.html
"AFF (American Family Foundation) is a nonprofit, tax-exempt
research center
and educational organization founded in 1979. AFF's mission is to study
psychological manipulation and cultic groups, to educate the public and
professionals, and to assist those who have been adversely affected by a
cult-related experience. AFF consists of a professional staff and a
growing
network of more than 150 volunteer professionals in fields ranging from
education, psychology, and religion to journalism, law enforcement, and
business." Further details about AFF: https://www.csj.org/aff/aff_about.htm
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: More of Maneck's Deleting of Messages on AOL.
Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 2:04 PM
Subj: Board postings at Keyword: BAHA'I
Date: 2/10/2002 10:01:37 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: LDRS LFST Shahid
To: Fglaysh12002
CC: LDRS LFST Jerry, LDRS LFST Mgr
Dear Fglaysh12002,
Regarding your messages posted at Lifestyle>Spirituality>Baha'i
Message
Board>General Discussion
To avoid further disruption to the message board, your posts has been
removed. Please review Keyword: TOS and the Spirituality
Message Board
Standards for more information on what is appropriate in our
community.
Depending on the severity of the disruption, a report may have been
submitted to AOL's Community Action Team for further review.
Thanks for taking the time to read this letter. Please note, I cannot
respond to replies. Please address any questions or comments to LDRS LFST
Mgr.
Regards,
LDRS LFST Shahid
Volunteer Message Board Leader
Baha'i Message Board
Subject: Re: Prof. Juan Cole - Cowardice of NSA
Date: 2/10/02 2:37 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020210143748.02080.00000733@mb-ch.aol.com>
A word of warning to the unitiated: the community leader is a
fundamentalist
bahai who has presented a distortion of prof Cole's views.
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Prof. Juan Cole - Cowardice of NSA
Date: 2/10/02 2:36 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020210143644.02080.00000732@mb-ch.aol.com>
The post in question has been censored by the community leader.
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Spirituality Forum Guidelines
Date: 2/10/02 2:39 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020210143950.02080.00000735@mb-ch.aol.com>
Censorship by any name remains censorship....
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Prof. Juan Cole - Cowardice of NSA
Date: 2/10/02 2:39 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020210143929.02080.00000734@mb-ch.aol.com>
>Thanks for the clarification on the background of all of this
noise, Susan.
>
CAUTION - Non-bahais. Please read and decide for yourself on an
uncensored
forum: Keyword Newsgroups, Expert Add, talk.religion.bahai
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Spirituality Forum Guidelines
Date: 2/10/02 2:40 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020210144045.02080.00000736@mb-ch.aol.com>
>I am very unclear on what was not appropriate. Could you explain
please?
>Thanks
>
An opinion was expessed other than the fundamentalist one required by
the
bahai Taliban in Haifa, Israel....
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Spirituality Forum Guidelines
Date: 2/10/02 2:42 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020210144216.02080.00000738@mb-ch.aol.com>
Censored, clear and simple....
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: Re: Maneck on Juan Cole on AOL
Date: Sunday, February 10, 2002 3:41 PM
FYI
Subj: Board posting at Keyword: BAHA'I
Date: 2/9/2002 11:24:05 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: LDRS LFST Shahid
To: Fglaysh12002
CC: LDRS LFST Jerry, LDRS LFST Mgr
Dear Fglaysh12002,
Regarding your messages posted at Lifestyle>Spirituality>Baha'i
Message
Board>General Discussion>Prof. Cole on Kazemzadeh, Semple and al-Qaida>
2/8/02 3:15 PM
To avoid further disruption to the message board, your posts has been
removed. Please review Keyword: TOS and the Spirituality
Message Board
Standards for more information on what is appropriate in our
community.
Depending on the severity of the disruption, a report may have been
submitted to AOL's Community Action Team for further review.
Thanks for taking the time to read this letter. Please note, I cannot
respond to replies. Please address any questions or comments to LDRS LFST
Mgr.
Regards,
LDRS LFST Shahid
Volunteer Message Board Leader
Baha'i Message Board
Subject: Prof. Cole on Kazemzadeh, Semple and al-Qaida
Date: 2/8/02 3:15 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Fglaysh12002
Message-id: <20020208151544.08536.00000325@mb-fo.aol.com>
FYI
also on talk.religion.bahai
--
The Baha'i faith stands for universal love, for tolerance, and for a
separation of religion and state. The need for religious leaders to
let politicians do the ruling is a key value stated over and over
again in Baha'i scripture.
Unfortunately, a weird Baha'i sub-cult has arisen. It
structurally
resembles al-Qaida, and differs from al-Qaida only with regard to
methods, not ideals. It does not usually employ violence or
terrorism
(though persons with this mindset have beaten up friends of mind).
And, most frighteningly of all, it has taken over and subverted the
main institutions of the Baha'i faith.
1)
Al-Qaida believes in the destruction of secular, civil governments and
replacing them with a fascist theocracy.
Baha'i theocrats believe in the destruction of secular, civil
governments and replacing them with a fascist theocracy. Ian Semple,
a member of the Baha'i Universal House of Justice, has for decades
cast scorn on civil governments and spoken of his dream of a future
when Baha'i Institutions will rule in their stead.
One pilgrim wrote,
"I recall being in Haifa in the '70s ('72 and '78) and hearing
long
talks about this from Ian Semple, on how the world was destined to be
ruled by houses of justice and there will eventually be no distinction
between church and state, with rather snide and smug comments about
how at last the world will finally get it right and have God and
Government fused through the power of the Baha'i covenant."
Note that this is the opposite of what `Abdul-Baha says in the
Treatise on Leadership:
https://www2.h-net.msu.edu/~bahai/trans/vol2/absiyasi.htm
Semple also put out a letter from the Secretariat of the UHJ:
"As for the statement made by Shoghi Effendi in his letter of 21
March
1932, the well-established principles of the Faith concerning the
relationship of the Baha'i institutions to those of the country in
which the Baha'is reside make it unthinkable that they would ever
purpose to violate a country's constitution or so to meddle in its
political machinery as to attempt to take over the powers of
government. This is an integral element of the Baha'i principle of
abstention from involvement in politics. However, this does not by any
means imply that the country itself may not, by constitutional means,
decide to adopt Baha'i laws and practices and modify its constitution
or method of government accordingly."
In this passage he basically argues for a Nazi-like tactic of getting
elected democratically and then abolishing democracy. By the way,
the
Islamists (with al-Qaida links) tried this in Algeria, and the
democrats and secularists fought back, embroiling the country in a
civil war that has cost 100,000 lives. This is the sort of conflict
between theocratic Baha'is and the rest of society that Semple is
urging on the world. At that point would the Baha'i theocrats
refrain
from violence?
2) Al-Qaida wishes to reestablish the Islamic Caliphate as the
One
World Government.
Baha'i theocrats substitute the House of Justice for the Caliphate and
envision it ruling the world.
3) Al-Qaida despises parliamentary democracy as corrupt, money-driven
and unrepresentative. It wishes to overthrow parliaments and
institute authoritarian religious rule instead.
Baha'i theocrats despise parliamentary democracy and wish to
substitute their religious institutions, which are not freely elected,
for civil government. Long-time Baha'i leader Firuz Kazemzadeh said
in 1988:
"If somebody is dissatisfied with a local assembly, he is not
prevented from appealing to the NSA . . . It is something else when
whispering campaigns or petitions are sent around for signatures
objecting to the activities of the institutions. That also may be
something which is countenanced by American democracy but has nothing
to do with the Bahai Faith. We must always remember that our
institutions are an unusual and unique combination of theocracy in the
best sense of the term with democracy. The institutions of the
Bahai Faith have not been created by us, the institutions have
been created by God.
Actually, Kazemzadeh's version of the Baha'i institutions has been
created by Kazemzadeh.
4) Al-Qaida establishes cells throughout the world to work for
theocracy, and recruits innocent Muslims at mosques.
Baha'i theocrats have secret cells within the Baha'i community, and
recruit Baha'is at deepenings and other events into their twisted
world-view. Many "Auxiliary Board Members" and Assistants
are secret
theocrats who play dirty tricks on ordinary Baha'is to force them out
of the Faith.
The Ian Semple/Kazemzadeh theocratic ideology aims at destroying
American democracy. It aims at gutting the Constitution and
abolishing Congress in favor of Kazemzadeh's weird, secretive,
authoritarian way of ruling.
5) Al-Qaida demands absolute obedience from its recruits, and no
dissent is permitted.
Baha'i theocrats demand absolute obedience to "the
Institutions" and
tolerate no dissent. Kazemzadeh told a group of Baha'i
intellectuals,
"the word dissent implies separating oneself from the activities
of
the group and putting oneself outside the mainstream of the community,
and that is contrary to Baha'i practice.”
You can't disagree with the NSA.
The dangers to the pristine Baha'i faith, with its values of
tolerance, allowing the expression of diverse points of view, and firm
commitment to the separation of religion and state, of this theocratic
cult that has taken control of the community cannot be overstated.
Moreover, it is a threat to the whole world.
Now that we have seen where such authoritarian theocracy leads, on
September 11, I call upon all Baha'is to step back, reread the
scriptures, and adhere to the real values of our religion.
cheers Juan Cole
FG
Google Search Engine:
Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: Re: Maneck on Juan Cole on AOL
Date: Sunday, February 10, 2002 3:39 PM
FYI
Maneck has removed another message I posted to AOL from Cole as well.
Subject: Re: Spirituality Forum Guidelines
Date: 2/10/2002 11:07 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: LDRS LFST Shahid
Message-id: <20020210110739.23877.00001493@mb-fy.aol.com>
>
>I am very unclear on what was not appropriate. Could you explain
please?
Dear Paul,
I try to avoid discussing individual posts and generally when I post
messages like the one I did last night I cc it to the person directly
involved so that there will be no doubt who I am intending. So if you
didn't
receive a private message you can be sure that it was not your post I had
in
mind, though as I mentioned some posts may be removed which are not in
themselves violations of TOS rules if they are responses to a post which
has
been TOSed.
But what I was trying to say in my previous post is that the Message
Boards
exist for the support and/or fellowship of the religion to which it
is
dedicated. Posts which aim at attacking the religion in question are
therefore inappropriate. Usually before I start removing such posts I will
put up an educational message such as the one posted last night. However,
in
cases of chronic offenders I may TOS the message without warning.
LDRS LFST Shahid
AOL Lifestyles
Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com> wrote in message
news:a46i7n$1ck674$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de...
> Subject: Re: Prof. Juan Cole - Cowardice of NSA
> Date: 2/9/2002 11:10 PM Eastern Standard Time
> From: Smaneck
> Message-id: <20020209231007.23060.00000356@mb-mb.aol.com>
>
>
> >Dear Pat Kohli:
> >
> >Since you have been out here backbiting me and using foul
language and
> >treating me to a little auto-da-fe of your own in typical
> >Inquisitorial fundamentalist-Baha'i Style,
>
> Dear friends,
>
> For the record let me state what Pat Kohli actually did. Juan Cole
had put
> up a post on TRB to the effect that the NSA had forbidden Baha'is
from
> saying the prayer for America following the 9-11 tragedy or from
publishing
> the same in newspapers. Based on this slander, he accused the Baha'i
> community of treason. Pat Kohli repeatedly demanded that Cole post
the
> message from the NSA which Dr. Cole claimed to have seen. Now Freddy
here,
> in his usual
> spamming style would constantly repost Juan's false accusations on
TRB.
And
> everytime he did so Pat repeated his demand for proof of this
accusation.
> That apparently constitutes the inquisitorial Baha'i fundamentalism.
I
would
> think it constitutes the independent investigation of truth. So now
Juan
> changes his tune. The NSA is cowardly, not treasonous. And it is now
accused
> of refusing to blame any government (in accordance with the long
establish
> policies of Shoghi Effendi) rather than telling us we shouldn't even
pray
> for America.
>
> Juan writes:
>
> >appended to the message of a private individual below, the NSA
urges
> >that Baha'is in the wake of September 11 avoid criticizing the
Taliban
> >Government of Afghanistan.
>
> The statement that we should avoid assigning blame to any government
is a
> general one and could just as easily be interpreted as discouraging
us
from
> criticizing US policy.
>
> >Not only I but
> >the poster below, posting in the same period, had heard that it
might.
> > I heard the same things, and was not unusual in giving them
credence.
>
> Ahh, but the problem is that Juan didn't say he had *heard* we
*might* do
> this. This is what he actually said:
>
> "I have seen a directive from the US NSA instructing Baha'is not
to say
> the> "prayer for America" publicly in response to the
horrid assault on
our>
> country of September 11."
>
> However, now Juan states:
>
> > I am glad to publicly acknowledge that the NSA does not appear,
at
> >least openly, to have banned the saying of the prayer.
>
> But is he prepared to admit he lied about having seen the directive
himself?
>
> > What
> >instructions it has given its legion of Secret Police (Assistants
&
> >ABMs) behind the scenes we do not know.
>
> Right. Since the documentation demonstrates that Dr. Cole's former
> accusations were complete fabrications we will move on to other
delusions
> which *might* have happened. But at least now Juan isn't claiming to
have
> *seen* the directives he imagines.
>
> >I got that detail wrong in the heat
> >of the moment, and here it is. I got it wrong.
> Like Nixon, he just mispoke himself.
>
> > Unlike some people, I
> >don't claim infallibility. I correct my errors.
>
> A correction would have consisted of saying "I'm sorry, I
lied." All of
this
> is just venting at Pat for having caught him in a lie. But instead we
get
> more paranoid delusions and threats along these lines:
>
> >But if you keep bringing me up I
> >will be coming after the cultists who have infiltrated and
mutilated
> >the Baha'i administration vocally, with good evidence, every day.
>
> There was, by the way, a directive asking Baha'is to observe caution
in
the
> way they present Baha'i prayers for America to the media. The
directive in
> question stated the following:
>
> "While it is appropriate to submit a Bahá'í prayer to the
newspaper, to
> attribute it to the Bahá'í sacred writings, and to sign it from
your
> localSpiritual Assembly, attaching any additional message such as the
> 1-800-22-UNITEnumber may not be appropriate and could create the
impression
> that Bahá'íswere exploiting this terrible tragedy as an opportunity
to
> promote our owninterests or to proselytize. Our genuine expressions,
in
word
> and deed,
> ofshared grief, sympathy, and prayers for healing, unity, and love
are
> perhapsthe best that we or anyone else can offer at this time."
>
> Note that is not saying don't say the prayer for America in public,
it is
> noteven saying don't publish it. It is saying don't *use* such
prayers for
> proselytizing purposes. This is a far cry from the motivation which
Juan
> ascribes to the BNC namely,"this instruction derives from a fear
that
> Baha'is will be seen as pro-American."
>
> Indeed, elsewhere the External Affairs Committee makes it even more
explicit > what their motivations are on this matter: "Bahá'ís should be
extremely
> cautious in their teaching activities not toexploit this or any other
tragic > situation as an opportunity to promote theFaith. If we were not
sincere in
> our efforts when rendering service to othersin our communities, it
would
not > only be counterproductive, but could actuallybe damaging to the
Faith."
>
> I can only draw two possible conclusions from this, either Juan can't
read
a > text or he deliberately twisted the truth. In either case his
credibility
is> more than suspect.
>
> warmest, Susan
> warmest, Susan
>
> https://www.susanmaneck.com
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: Maneck on Juan Cole on AOL
Date: Sunday, February 10, 2002 3:36 PM
Subject: Re: Prof. Juan Cole - Cowardice of NSA
Date: 2/9/2002 11:10 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Smaneck
Message-id: <20020209231007.23060.00000356@mb-mb.aol.com>
>Dear Pat Kohli:
>
>Since you have been out here backbiting me and using foul language and
>treating me to a little auto-da-fe of your own in typical
>Inquisitorial fundamentalist-Baha'i Style,
Dear friends,
For the record let me state what Pat Kohli actually did. Juan Cole had
put
up a post on TRB to the effect that the NSA had forbidden Baha'is from
saying the prayer for America following the 9-11 tragedy or from
publishing
the same in newspapers. Based on this slander, he accused the Baha'i
community of treason. Pat Kohli repeatedly demanded that Cole post the
message from the NSA which Dr. Cole claimed to have seen. Now Freddy here,
in his usual
spamming style would constantly repost Juan's false accusations on TRB.
And
everytime he did so Pat repeated his demand for proof of this accusation.
That apparently constitutes the inquisitorial Baha'i fundamentalism. I
would
think it constitutes the independent investigation of truth. So now Juan
changes his tune. The NSA is cowardly, not treasonous. And it is now
accused
of refusing to blame any government (in accordance with the long establish
policies of Shoghi Effendi) rather than telling us we shouldn't even pray
for America.
Juan writes:
>appended to the message of a private individual below, the NSA
urges
>that Baha'is in the wake of September 11 avoid criticizing the Taliban
>Government of Afghanistan.
The statement that we should avoid assigning blame to any government
is a
general one and could just as easily be interpreted as discouraging us
from
criticizing US policy.
>Not only I but
>the poster below, posting in the same period, had heard that it might.
> I heard the same things, and was not unusual in giving them credence.
Ahh, but the problem is that Juan didn't say he had *heard* we *might*
do
this. This is what he actually said:
"I have seen a directive from the US NSA instructing Baha'is not
to say
the> "prayer for America" publicly in response to the horrid
assault on our>
country of September 11."
However, now Juan states:
> I am glad to publicly acknowledge that the NSA does not appear,
at
>least openly, to have banned the saying of the prayer.
But is he prepared to admit he lied about having seen the directive
himself?
> What
>instructions it has given its legion of Secret Police (Assistants
&
>ABMs) behind the scenes we do not know.
Right. Since the documentation demonstrates that Dr. Cole's former
accusations were complete fabrications we will move on to other delusions
which *might* have happened. But at least now Juan isn't claiming to have
*seen* the directives he imagines.
>I got that detail wrong in the heat
>of the moment, and here it is. I got it wrong.
Like Nixon, he just mispoke himself.
> Unlike some people, I
>don't claim infallibility. I correct my errors.
A correction would have consisted of saying "I'm sorry, I
lied." All of this
is just venting at Pat for having caught him in a lie. But instead we get
more paranoid delusions and threats along these lines:
>But if you keep bringing me up I
>will be coming after the cultists who have infiltrated and mutilated
>the Baha'i administration vocally, with good evidence, every day.
There was, by the way, a directive asking Baha'is to observe caution
in the
way they present Baha'i prayers for America to the media. The directive in
question stated the following:
"While it is appropriate to submit a Bahá'í prayer to the
newspaper, to
attribute it to the Bahá'í sacred writings, and to sign it from your
localSpiritual Assembly, attaching any additional message such as the
1-800-22-UNITEnumber may not be appropriate and could create the
impression
that Bahá'íswere exploiting this terrible tragedy as an opportunity to
promote our owninterests or to proselytize. Our genuine expressions, in
word
and deed,
ofshared grief, sympathy, and prayers for healing, unity, and love are
perhapsthe best that we or anyone else can offer at this time."
Note that is not saying don't say the prayer for America in public, it
is
noteven saying don't publish it. It is saying don't *use* such prayers for
proselytizing purposes. This is a far cry from the motivation which Juan
ascribes to the BNC namely,"this instruction derives from a fear that
Baha'is will be seen as pro-American."
Indeed, elsewhere the External Affairs Committee makes it even more
explicit
what their motivations are on this matter: "Bahá'ís should be
extremely
cautious in their teaching activities not toexploit this or any other
tragic
situation as an opportunity to promote theFaith. If we were not sincere in
our efforts when rendering service to othersin our communities, it would
not
only be counterproductive, but could actuallybe damaging to the
Faith."
I can only draw two possible conclusions from this, either Juan can't
read a
text or he deliberately twisted the truth. In either case his credibility
is
more than suspect.
warmest, Susan
warmest, Susan
https://www.susanmaneck.com
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: More on Maneck's hikmat - Juan Cole
Date: Monday, February 04, 2002 8:12 AM
BASICALLY, hikmat as interpreted by Maneck means she may lie and
deceive all
she wants in "service" of the faith..... It's her modus
operandi....
https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck1.htm
For her "hikmat" or wisdom or dissimulation see Susan
Maneck's :"Wisdom
and Dissimulation: The Use and Meaning of Hikmat in the Baha'i Writings
and
History."
For a Muslim perspective on Bahai dissimulation, see Amir Butler on
""Taqaiya"
On H-Bahai: The Practice of Taqiyyah (Dissimulation) in the Babi and
Bahai
Religions by Sepehr Manuchehri
------
For Cole's comments back in January on Maneck's slanderous tactics,
essentially "hikmat":
https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Cole2001.htm
Then click Edit, Find "Maneck" for message below and other
comments:
JuanFrom: "Juan Cole" <jricole@my-deja.com>
Subject: Re: common ground
Date: Sunday, January 14, 2001 3:20 AM
I do not have the time or the inclination to spend a lot of time
on
usenet right now, but since I have been slandered (and not for the
first time) by Susan Stiles Maneck in her recent posting, I am
forced to reply (yet again) to these falsehoods.
But first, I would like to make my own mea culpas. I retract
almost
everything I said about the faith on email between May 4, 1996 and
January 30, 1999. I was very depressed in the wake of the false
charges that were launched against me, and as a result had temporarily
lost my faith, which had been at the core of my being for 24 years.
I
am a very sensitive person, and this was a nightmare ordeal for me.
I
had the misfortune of being among the first persons in history to live
through such a period of disorientation in the age of the Internet.
Lots of rightwing Baha'is were eager to misrepresent themselves as my
friends so as to get out of me my innermost thoughts, and these have
been archived in Haifa, and Maneck posts private messages from me from
that period occasionally in order to discredit me. Well, if it
matters, I know I said a lot of things that were overdrawn or overly
emotional, in my hurt, and I disavow them now.
I consider myself a follower of Baha'u'llah again, now (however much I
am unwanted), and while I am empathetic with my unbelieving self, that
is no longer me.
I am glad to admit I got lots of things wrong. Peter Khan's
family was
Muslim before becoming Baha'i. An Australian Baha'i misled me that
they had at one point been Christian. I was wrong. The members
of the
House of Justice have all kinds of cars and not just Mercedes.
However, they do preside over a budget that runs to hundreds of
millions of dollars, and their refusal to publish any budget breakdown
does raise questions about the nature of finances in Haifa. However,
if I got their car types wrong or imputed to them chauffeurs they don't
have, I am glad to retract. Accuracy means a lot to me.
Pilgrims had
told me these things, and they were pilgrims I trust more than I trust
Maneck, but where there is doubt one cannot claim certainty.
Moreover,
some of my motives in talking about the members' lifestyle were hurt at
the enormous injustice they had done to me, which was an unworthy
motive.
>And the hypocrisy of their actions became increasingly apparent.
They
>would complain of censorship and then tell me when I was moderator of
>H-Bahai that I shouldn't allow somebody to post because they were
>an "ultramontanist" and a "big Nixon supporter."
Let's talk a little bit about hypocrisy. From about August of
1997,
when Maneck started secretly working for "counselor" Ghadirian,
she
began sending him regular spy reports of the confidential deliberations
of its academic editors. She began attempting to disrupt the list
and "muddy the waters" in accordance with her
instructions. We have a
rule that subscribers should have a master's degree or more in the
humanities or social sciences, to ensure an academic tone to
discussions. She suddenly announced that she was going to start
enrolling persons without those credentials. One of the persons she
proposed to enroll in this maverick way was a lawyer who is also an
Auxiliary Board Member for Protection, and who is no academic. I
said
no. I said that, moreover, the person had kooky ideas about Nixon
having been innocent & etc. I mentioned his thinking Dick Nixon
was
the innocent target of a smear campaign (!!!) as yet another piece of
evidence that this person was not a bona fide academic; but lack of
credentials was what was determinative.
Maneck's announcement that she would ignore the rules and do as she
pleased; her frequent rejection of posts from Steve Scholl and other
liberals on purely ideological grounds; her vicious insults directed at
a prospective liberal moderator with the intent of scaring him away
from helping the list; her constant spy reports to Ghadirian; her
expression of delight that a subscriber had signed off that she viewed
as a 'covenant breaker' because she intended to mount a campaign on the
list to firm the academics up in the covenant; were all capped by a
demand that I resign as editor. Ultimately she voluntarily resigned
from her editorship in disgrace because she inadvertently supplied
evidence, in the course of her persecution of me, that she was spying
on the list for Ghadirian. She later publicly accused me on this
very
list of having fired her! While I would have if I could have, that
was
for the Editorial Board, and she did not give even them the opportunity.
The fact is that she was misusing her position on an academic list to
undermine its independence in favor of the imposition of some wacky
fundamentalist orthodoxy, and she is still sore at having failed.
>When they tried to persuade me that the Faith had been
> taken over by a secret cabal going back to Mason Remey and Horace
>Holley, I *really* had to step back and ask myself just what had I
gotten myself into?
If you knew anything about American Baha'i history you would know that
both those individuals were deeply involved in creating a rightwing
Baha'i culture. As for a cabal, I was upset when I said that.
But it
isn't far-fetched that the rightwing Counsellors who have taken over
the Faith have some sort of at least informal network that allows them
to politick so successfully and to come to power and remain there.
On
the other hand, this phenomenon could be more haphazard. I frankly
don't know. At the time, I was commiserating with someone I thought
a
friend. And people say I never admit having been wrong!
> Then I was sent a rough draft of the Panopticon article and saw
it
was filled
> with distortions about matters where they author had to know better.
The Panopticon article is not filled with distortions. I believe
every
word of it to be true, and I believed so when I wrote it. And, I
sent
it to Maneck for her comments, virtually all of which I incorporated
into the final draft. So, if it was 'filled with distortions' she
had
every chance to set me straight on *all* of them, and it is her own
fault if she did not.
> Meanwhile, unfounded charges were being made saying things like
the
House had
> ordered Abbas Amanat expelled from the Faith which I knew
simply
weren't true.
If that is what you thought was being said, no wonder you thought it
wasn't true. What I said was that Derek Cockshut waged a brutal
campaign to protest the Bahai Publishing Trust's carrying Abbas
Amanat's *Resurrection and Renewal* in 1989 when it came out. And
that
the NSA took the issue to the House of Justice. And that the House
of
Justice wrote that it was all right to carry the book because Abbas
Amanat "is not a Baha'i." Abbas, however, was and is an
enrolled
Baha'i in the US community, and he has never disavowed faith in
Baha'u'llah. In the wake of the 1990 letter the NSA sent him several
insulting letters demanding to know his conscience (I thought there was
no confession in our religion?) He declined to reply, last I knew.
`Abdul-Baha in the Hizar Bayti said we don't have the Muslim custom of
declaring believing Baha'is to be infidels because we don't like their
views, and I found the arrogance of the 1990 letter breathtaking. It
was my first clue that something was very rotten in Haifa, and it
wasn't just Wilmette. If Maneck turned against me because of this
statement, she *reallY* wronged me!
> Or I was told that the NSA of Canada had sold off a important
collection within
> their archives to prevent it from falling into the hands of
academics,
> something which proved to be utterly false.
First of all, I've said publicly a number of times that I was wrong
about that. It seems to me a relatively minor little affair, anyway.
I got the story's details wrong, and a more knowledgeable poster
corrected them. However, I am unaware that the NSA of Canada has
provided its INBA set (manuscript facsimiles of the Baha'i Writings) to
any scholars, and I think Maneck knows that it is problematic whether
they would do so.
> And something else would happen as well. I would
start have
arguments with
> people on Talisman on basic issues like the existence of
revelation
and began
> to realize that the people I was supporting didn't really believe in
it in any
> meaningful way.
In other words, we had to be basically fundamentalists or neo-
Calvinists or something, or else Maneck would gleefully join in the
auto-da-fe against anything we said. Her idea of
"Revelation" isn't
dogma that all Baha'is have to accept, and her problems with deism are
her problems.
>But it was becoming increasingly apparent that if I went down, I
> wasn't going down alone and began to realize that for the sake of
>these Baha'is I needed to search for solutions rather than add to the
>problems. So I began to behave much less recklessly.
If you had behaved less recklessly that would have been fine.
You
turned into a Stasi-like spy, a fifth columnist, and an Inquisitor. And
you decided that only by waging a smear campaign against me could you
hope to make Baha'i scholarship acceptable to the fundies. That, you
didn't have to do. These actions warped your personality and made
you
a poor Baha'i.
> Right around this time there was a very lurid thread going on on
Talisman
> discussing some prominet Baha'i's supposed sexual indiscretions.
Then Juan came
> bursting on to Talisman saying, "I've been backbitten and so
have
you!" It was
> in reference to a talk Counselor Gharian had made in London critical
of the
> Talisman list.
Ghadirian's talk in London wasn't critical just of the Talisman list.
He libelled me and David Langness and did all but issue Anathemas
against us just as though he were an ayatollah in a turban. (And I
thought you weren't supposed to backbite; David was a particular victim
in this). Ghadirian should be careful. In the U.K., libel is
easy to
prove. As for the other issue, that a high Baha'i official resigned
in
disgrace from his profession for sexual harassment and then was
immediately appointed to a cushy Baha'i job in Geneva was of interest
to talismanians like Linda Walbridge. She had been threatened with
being declared a covenant breaker for advocating more rights for Baha'i
women, including service on the House of Justice. And here was a man
in the old buddy system of high Baha'i administration who was actually
promoted despite a public scandal that was in the newspapers. It
wasn't just a matter of gossiping about someone's private life. It
was
outrage that innocent liberals were persecuted out of the faith and
calumnied, but if you had friends in high places you could get away
with anything.
> Ghadirian. how his saintliness and love eventually overcame my
fears
and
> suspicions.
Oh, yeah, all the saints I know call meetings in London to backbite
people, and then have their agents spy on people and make reports about
their confidential conversations. Why, the KGB was full of saints in
its heyday!! Maneck can't see that the only reason she got
love-bombed
by this manipulative physician was precisely because of his hope of
gaining a spy "asset" known to be in close contact with
me. And I have
to hand it to him, he did a world-class job of turning her into a mole.
>I began to realize that the House of Justice
> was not out to destroy academic scholarship on the Baha'i Faith as I
>had mistakenly believed all those years,
It seems to be pretty arbitrary. Some people seem to be able to
publish and not get in any particular trouble. Others are come down
on
like a ton of bricks, and it is not always clear why. I wonder if
the
unpredictability of it isn't intended to disrupt scholarship by making
the academics nervous about saying anything at all about the faith.
Denis MacEoin told me the story of how House of Justice members Ian
Semple and David Hoffman threatened him and chased him out, destroying
his faith. And, of course, we all saw what happened to the academics
who dared speak publicly on talisman-1.
>and that they did not eat scholars for breakfast
Mainly they seem to threaten them them with some form of ostracization
if they don't fall silent. But they do this to some and not to
others. I have never been able to figure out why.
sincerely,
Juan Cole
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: Maneck's "white powder" slander on AOL............
Date: Monday, February 04, 2002 8:10 AM
I believe AOL has left people who respect free speech
and discussion no choice but to sue them. I suggest you
call AOL and ask for their lawyer's email or telephone
number. Tell them a number of regular users of the AOL
bahai messages boards are fed up with their permitting
Maneck and the other fundamentalists to suppress their
rights to respond and post fairly. Remind the lawyers of
the lawsuit against AOL filed by the Muslims in Washington,
DC. Let them know this is AOL's last chance.
AOL: 800-827-6364.
Be sure to save copies of all emails or letters in order to
document further in court the fact that every effort has
been made to apprise AOL of the situation on the AOL
bahai message boards.
I have contacted a lawyer along these lines....
--
FG
The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship
"Mr Mahdi" <mrmahdi@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20011228065452.11823.00002076@mb-fx.aol.com...
> >Mr. Mahdi and I had both expressed
> >our displeasure with her double standard of posting her URL
> >all over AOL while TOSing or deleting URLs to my site or others.
>
> Fred, the other day I got a TOS on my account after posting the URL
> "www.answeringbahaullah.com" in a bahai forum on AOL.
Wendy and other
bahai
> extremist fanatics regularly post their URLs in chat room and message
boards on
> AOL without ever being TOSed.
>
> I would like to know how can we make AOL realize the double-standards
in
its
> own forums? I mean, I tried calling and other means but to no
avail.
There
> must be some other means because if not, I might give up on all
attempts
to
> notify AOL.
>
> Mahdi Muhammad
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: Re: Maneck's hikmat and deceptive slandering
Date: Monday, February 04, 2002 8:09 AM
ALSO, The non-bahai observer happening along here might want to
consider
this 2nd message from Professor Juan Cole's on Susan Maneck:
https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Cole19.htm
--
FG
The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship
"BIGS - Bahai in *Perfectly* Good Standing" <patrick_henry@liberty.com>
wrote in message news:a0hmrj$kuhfi$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de...
> The non-bahai observer happening along here might want to consider
> Professor Juan Cole on Susan Maneck:
>
> I wish Susan Maneck well. We became friends in the early 1980s
and I
> supported her, speaking well of her in the Middle East and South Asia
> fields where she was attempting to make a career. I have never
harmed her
> in any way, and have until now practiced a sin-covering eye in her
regard.
> However, she has behaved toward me in an academic setting with
dishonesty
> and deceit in such a way as deprives her of the right to debate me
> publicly. She spied on me and lied about it. She betrayed
confidences in
> such a way as to cause her academic colleagues to demand and get her
> resignation from a position she had held.
> https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Cole20.htm
>
> --
> FG
> The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
> https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship
>
>
> "BIGS - Bahai in *Perfectly* Good Standing" <patrick_henry@liberty.com>
> wrote in message news:9vkso1$g6peh$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de...
> > Susan Maneck has a very long and complicated history of
censorship and
> > coercion on behalf of her fundamentalist interpretations of the
bahai
> > writings. Please see Professor Juan Cole's extensive comments
below on
her
> > along with Paul Dodenhoff. Many other insights into her behavior
may be
> > found around this website written by many other people.
> >
> > For what Bahais call "hikmat" or wisdom or
dissimulation, see Susan
> Maneck's
> > :"Wisdom and Dissimulation: The Use and Meaning of Hikmat
in the Baha'i
> > Writings and History."
> >
> > https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck1.htm
> >
> > --
> > FG
> > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
> > https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship
> >
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: Maneck's hikmat and deceptive slandering
Date: Monday, February 04, 2002 8:09 AM
The non-bahai observer happening along here might want to consider
Professor Juan Cole on Susan Maneck:
I wish Susan Maneck well. We became friends in the early 1980s
and I
supported her, speaking well of her in the Middle East and South Asia
fields where she was attempting to make a career. I have never
harmed her
in any way, and have until now practiced a sin-covering eye in her regard.
However, she has behaved toward me in an academic setting with dishonesty
and deceit in such a way as deprives her of the right to debate me
publicly. She spied on me and lied about it. She betrayed
confidences in
such a way as to cause her academic colleagues to demand and get her
resignation from a position she had held.
https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Cole20.htm
--
FG
The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship
"BIGS - Bahai in *Perfectly* Good Standing" <patrick_henry@liberty.com>
wrote in message news:9vkso1$g6peh$1@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de...
> Susan Maneck has a very long and complicated history of censorship
and
> coercion on behalf of her fundamentalist interpretations of the bahai
> writings. Please see Professor Juan Cole's extensive comments below
on her
> along with Paul Dodenhoff. Many other insights into her behavior may
be
> found around this website written by many other people.
>
> For what Bahais call "hikmat" or wisdom or dissimulation,
see Susan
Maneck's
> :"Wisdom and Dissimulation: The Use and Meaning of Hikmat in the
Baha'i
> Writings and History."
>
> https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Maneck1.htm
>
> --
> FG
> The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
> https://members.fortunecity.com/bahaicensorship
From: "Bahai Faith" <BI*P*GS@liberty.com>
Subject: Further samples of Maneck's abuse of her AOL
"position" LDRS LFST Shahid
Date: Monday, February 04, 2002 8:07 AM
Further samples of Maneck's abuse of her AOL "position"
Subj: Board Posting at Keyword: Baha'i
Date: 12/23/2001 3:30:51 AM Eastern Standard Time
From: LDRS LFST Shahid
To: Glaysh112001
CC: LDRS LFST Mgr, LDRS LFST Jerry
Dear Member,
Regarding your messages posted at: Baha'i Message Boards
To avoid further disruption to the message board, your posts have been
removed. Please review Keyword: Message Board Product Guidelines and
Keyword: Spirituality Message Board Standards for more information
on what
is appropriate in our community.
Depending on the severity of the disruption, a report may have been
submitted to AOL's Community Action Team for further review.
Thanks for taking the time to read this letter. Please note, I cannot
respond to replies. Please address any questions or comments to LDRS LFST
Mgr.
Regards,
LDRS LFST Shahid
Volunteer Message Board Host
AOL Lifestyles
Subject: Re: How to Report Maneck to AOL
Date: 12/19/2001 7:56 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011219085618.01592.00000009@mb-ch.aol.com>
Keyword Notify AOL, Message Boards, Ask the Staff goes around Maneck
as
well.
I urge everyone to realize it's difficult to get AOL's attention but
it can
be done!!! Persist!
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: How to Report Maneck to AOL
Date: 12/10/2001 6:45 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011210074556.11242.00002825@mb-fi.aol.com>
Those tired of Maneck posting her URL should see the relevant thread
at
Question to Community Leaders. Or call and complain at 800-827-6364.
Also Keyword Notify AOL, Message Boards, and then Ask the Staff, works
well
too. It goes over Maneck's head, as I was told on the phone.
Incidentally, when you email the TOSGeneral it goes directly to Maneck,
nobody else, which is again why you have to go around her now if you're
tired of her manipulating TOS rules and employing her double standards on
many fronts.
As a bahai for over 25 years, I'm very tired of her dishonest
manipulation
of AOL and wish AOL would replace her with an honest person who fairly
allows all views to be heard.
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: When is it o.k. not to forgive some one.according to the
writings?
Date: 12/13/2001 6:04 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011213070458.26004.00000008@mb-md.aol.com>
>warmest, Susan
>
>https://www.susanmaneck.com
>
Spam....
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: How to Report Maneck to AOL
Date: 12/13/2001 6:06 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011213070646.26004.00000011@mb-md.aol.com>
>Gee, that's news to me.
>
>
>warmest, Susan
>
>https://www.susanmaneck.com
>
That's what I was told by AOL.
Still spamming your URL.....
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Sharing Knowledge
Date: 12/15/2001 7:02 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011215080235.12941.00000208@mb-cu.aol.com>
>warmest, Susan
>
>https://www.susanmaneck.com
>
NOT fair....
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: How to Report Maneck to AOL
Date: 12/19/2001 7:56 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011219085618.01592.00000009@mb-ch.aol.com>
Keyword Notify AOL, Message Boards, Ask the Staff goes around Maneck
as
well.
I urge everyone to realize it's difficult to get AOL's attention but
it can
be done!!! Persist!
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: How to Report Maneck to AOL
Date: 12/19/2001 3:07 PM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011219160728.06255.00000146@mb-mq.aol.com>
We can also snail mail AOL with a complaint about Maneck's
fundamentalist
double standard or whatever. Here's the address:
AOL Customer Service
PO Box 10810
Herdon, VA 20170
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Sticks and stones...a few lizard tails...some
gizzards...and
dinner is ready!
Date: 12/10/2001 7:12 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011210081226.11242.00002830@mb-fi.aol.com>
>Gee, where can I get that clock?
>warmest, Susan
>
>https://www.susanmaneck.com
>
Please stop spamming your URL to AOL.
Those tired of Maneck's double standard in this regard should see my
note at
Announcements.
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Sticks and stones...
Date: 12/10/2001 7:13 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011210081359.11242.00002831@mb-fi.aol.com>
>And even then, they must be doing this knowingly. As you know from
your
>participation on TRB, there are at least
>three individuals lately that were engaging in the kind of activity I
>mentioned. But they were not declared Covenant breakers, rather they
were
>removed from the rolls. Why? Because the Universal House of Justice
>determined they did not really meet the criteria of membership and
hence
were
>not wholly obligated to the provisions of the Covenant.
>warmest, Susan
>
>https://www.susanmaneck.com
Now here's a sample of the way in which Maneck SLANDERS people on
AOL....
Note too her double standard URL.....
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Why brainwashed Baha'is don't trust Prof. Juan Cole
anymore
Date: 12/11/2001 6:46 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011211074644.12731.00001739@mb-cu.aol.com>
>The truth.
>warmest, Susan
>
>https://www.susanmaneck.com
>
The truth is you are violating TOS rules regularly by posting your
fundamentalist website URL while TOSing liberal-minded bahais like myself
who attempt to present the other side of various issues.
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Ahh---the Pain - the Pain
Date: 12/14/2001 11:30 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011214123002.29393.00000366@mb-ch.aol.com>
>https://www.susanmaneck.com
>
Double standard.
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: My URL
Date: 12/14/2001 11:35 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011214123526.29393.00000367@mb-ch.aol.com>
Anyone else tired of Shahid/Maneck's double standard?
The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
https://fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/
Call AOL and complain or use Keyword Notify AOL,
Message Boards, Ask the Staff.
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: My URL
Date: 12/15/2001 6:42 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011215074232.12941.00000199@mb-cu.aol.com>
>He does it so his post will be removed and then he can complain
that he is
>being censored -- denied his freedom of speech. He will also
claim the
>Baha'is are doing it to him -- he will not admit that he violated AOL
TOS.
>
False. It's obvious to any honest person that Maneck is SPAMMING the
message
boards with her URL while TOSing me and others.
She is in violation of the TOS rules which anyone may corroborate by
calling
800-827-6364 or Notify AOL, Message Boards, Ask the Stafff.
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: My URL
Date: 12/15/2001 6:43 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011215074331.12941.00000200@mb-cu.aol.com>
>https://www.susanmaneck.com
There's nothing cute about shameless violation of the TOS rules.
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Sticks and stones...
Date: 12/15/2001 7:01 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011215080123.12941.00000207@mb-cu.aol.com>
>ttention from her. ;-}
>warmest, Susan
>
>https://www.susanmaneck.com
>
TOS violation # 3,452....
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Sticks and stones...
Date: 12/15/2001 7:01 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011215080123.12941.00000207@mb-cu.aol.com>
>ttention from her. ;-}
>warmest, Susan
>
>https://www.susanmaneck.com
>
TOS violation # 3,452....
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Posting URLs
Date: 12/20/2001 7:12 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011220081221.01511.00000315@mb-ch.aol.com>
>I would like to ask if it is considered spam if a hyperlink for a
url is
part
>of a signature line?
>
Not if it's her URL. Otherwise, it's definitely spam....
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Posting URLs
Date: 12/20/2001 7:14 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011220081456.01511.00000316@mb-ch.aol.com>
You're not citing AOL's policy on URLs. Attempting to justify spamming
your
own?
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Posting URLs
Date: 12/21/2001 7:07 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011221080725.20183.00000391@mb-ba.aol.com>
>"We encourage members to provide hyperlinks in their posts
where
applicable,
>but please keep in mind that those websites must not violate AOL's
Community
>Guidelines.
Post a link to that quotation. THAT is not what more than one
AOL
representative told me on the phone. Further, your fundamentalist
interpretation of what is "appropriate" is not the same as AOL's
but reveals
your manipulation of the TOS rules in service of your fanatical views.
You've been violating the TOS rules with impunity for years....
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Posting URLs
Date: 12/21/2001 7:07 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011221080725.20183.00000391@mb-ba.aol.com>
>"We encourage members to provide hyperlinks in their posts
where
applicable,
>but please keep in mind that those websites must not violate AOL's
Community
>Guidelines.
Post a link to that quotation. THAT is not what more than one
AOL
representative told me on the phone. Further, your fundamentalist
interpretation of what is "appropriate" is not the same as AOL's
but reveals
your manipulation of the TOS rules in service of your fanatical views.
You've been violating the TOS rules with impunity for years....
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: Proselytizing
Date: 12/13/2001 6:01 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011213070118.26004.00000007@mb-md.aol.com>
>that here.
>warmest, Susan
>
>https://www.susanmaneck.com
>
Right. Still double-standard spamming your URL, I see....
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: URLs
Date: 12/16/2001 9:22 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011216102219.12878.00000468@mb-cu.aol.com>
Deleting my message doesn't conceal the fact that you continue to
suppress
URLs of a liberal disposition versus your fanatical opinions....
The "community leader" knows very well she is violating the
TOS rules to her
advantage while suppressing URLs to any more liberal-minded bahai sites
such
as mine. All I ask for is fairness from AOL and she is not capable of
providing it and has not now for years. I'm tired of it and ask that she
be
treated accordingly or removed and replaced with someone who can be fair.
I've used Notify AOL, Message Boards, Ask the Staff many times to no
avail.
The community leader in question, Shahid/Susan Maneck knows she can rely
on
AOL not caring enough about an obscure religion board to do anything
about
it. Please prove her wrong....
Thank you for your help.
FG
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: ATTN - AOL - Result of Censorship by Maneck
Date: 12/17/2001 6:16 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011217071635.05612.00000905@mb-fo.aol.com>
For insight into what is the result of the incessant censorship
imposed on
the bahai message boards by Shahid/Maneck, see below:
---
>It may be Maneck and the fundamentalist bahais
>have a mole, in a sense, inside AOL who is protecting her/them, all
the
>more reason to go around her....
That is one of the reasons why I have yet to call AOL and report to
them
what goes on in the bahai message boards. I see calling them an exercise
in
futility and unfortunately that made me skeptical into thinking calling
will
do any change.
It is also unfortunate that AOL does not have a system where members
of AOL
can vote for people whom they want to see moderate their message boards and
other forums. You, me, and many people for the past several years have
been
harrassed by the coward bahai extremists. Recently, one of my
messages was
removed by the fanatic Maneck using the anonymous handle "Shahid."
"Shahid," aka Maneck refuses to use her real name when moderating posts, something
that the busta Mark Foster wouldn't even do (he as you know made it clear he
was
the moderator).
May you Fred or someone else here can find a way to convince AOL to
have a
third party or a fair-minded person on AOL to investigate the matter and
see
the double-standard and outright hypocrisy of the bahai extremist
domination
of bahai forums on AOL. Because with taking this course, complaining to
AOL will
become something done in vain, unfortunately.
Mahdi Muhammad
---
Please do something to STOP the continual suppression of discussion
here on
AOL by Susan Maneck.
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: ATTN - AOL - Result of Censorship by Maneck
Date: 12/19/2001 7:47 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011219084739.01592.00000004@mb-ch.aol.com>
3rd message from Mahdi on what Maneck is doing on AOL:
>Forgive me for sound a bit pessimistic, but the I went through
"Forgive me for sounding a bit pessimistic, but the experience I
went
through..." (I got a bad habit of not proofreading my posts!)
At any rate, I would like to add that I know that the fanatical
behavior of
the "forum leaders" on AOL bahai message boards has led to not only
people
leaving, but having suspended and cancelled accounts over messages that do not
contain profanity, slander, threats, spamming and so on. I have talked to
people in
chat rooms on AOL about members have their accounts terminated over posts
that do not contain the above-mentioned things. Many of them thought I
was lying
or at least exaggerating because they thought it was too crazy to be true.
Thanks to the bahai extremist domination on AOL bahai message boards,
even
the unbelievable has become a reality!
Mahdi Muhammad
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: ATTN - AOL - Result of Censorship by Maneck
Date: 12/19/2001 7:47 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011219084700.01592.00000003@mb-ch.aol.com>
Another message reposted regarding Maneck's abuse of AOL:
>BASICALLY, hikmat as interpreted by Maneck means she may lie and
deceive
all >she wants in "service" of the faith..... It's her modus
operandi....
Yes, her fanatical interpretation of "hikmat" has made her
into a wolf in
sheep's clothing. I that believe as a result, her and Mark
Foster's
bullying on the bahai message boards has led to people to leave the message boards
in
utter disgust of the double-standards and "good-ole' boy" system
they got
going on there where certain people have carte blanche while others (like me and
you) do not.
You Fred have documented on your site instances of outright
double-standards
employed by Foster and Maneck. I would like to ask you kindly to
post in a
new message to newsgroups and elsewhere the quotes of AOL members as well as
others who complained and documented the double-standard and hypocrisy of Foster
and Maneck and their extremist supporters.
Forgive me for sound a bit pessimistic, but the I went through on the
AOL
bahai message boards have made me feel hopeless into thinking that fighting for
rights on AOL will do any good. Maybe if we constantly remind AOL
staff by
either calling them or sending them emails about what goes on, then
perhaps
there will be a chance that justice will prevail.
Hopefully something will be done and AOL will be heedful of our
complaints
and warnings.
Mahdi Muhammad
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: ATTN - AOL - Result of Censorship by Maneck
Date: 12/19/2001 2:57 PM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011219155747.06255.00000143@mb-mq.aol.com>
Maneck and you are the ones spewing out hatred, slander, and
distortions.
Both honest people among my fellow Bahais and non-Bahais of discernment
increasingly realize that fact.
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: ATTN - AOL - Result of Censorship by Maneck
Date: 12/20/2001 7:02 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011220080242.01511.00000311@mb-ch.aol.com>
More smear and misrepresentations do not constitute addressing the
issues of
YOUR spamming your URL here on AOL and elsewhere for that matter....
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
Subject: Re: ATTN - AOL - Result of Censorship by Maneck
Date: 12/20/2001 7:10 AM Central Standard Time
From: Glaysh112001
Message-id: <20011220081007.01511.00000314@mb-ch.aol.com>
>Mark Foster
Foster was almost as bad of a "leader" here as Maneck. AOL
representatives
should look at my website under AOL Censorship for extensive documentation
of that fact....
FG
Website: Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
"BrentMReed" <brentmreed@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20011227181358.03595.00001501@mb-cg.aol.com...
> Miss Maneck, I have sent you nothing directly to any of your
emails. The
only > contact you have had with me is indirect - through my posts to the
AOL
Message > Board.
>
> And yes, you me a message under your AOL screen name LFST HostShahid.
And
you > were very angry because I had reported you for censorship. As
it turned
out > though, you probably received the complaint that I sent to AOL
. The
> "malicious incurable virus" arrived with your name as
sender immediately
after > that. If I sent you an email directly, please produce it.
>
|