From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 10:08 AM Subject: Re: Delinquent posters on TRB There are many Bahai fundamentalists who should then be attacked and harassed as well, especially Susan Maneck who's references to my views as "garbage" and "litter" find currency with such individuals.... Frederick Glaysher FG@hotmail.com Ron House wrote in message news:372E8133.D7B8506@usq.edu.au... > Kidnykid wrote: > > > > >For AOL users, write to: > > > abuse@aol.net > > > > AOL users can also send an offending post in its entirety to TOSUsenet, > > provided that said offending post is from a purported AOL users. > > What is the complete email address of TOSUsenet? > > -- > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > > You can only be right if you have the courage to be wrong. ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 10:12 AM Subject: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters It appears fundamentalist Bahais are launching a new campaign to malign and harass people who don't share their narrow views by attacking them with their ISPs. -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ---------- From: FG[SMTP:fglayshe@oeonline.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 10:34 AM To: abuse@hotmail.com Subject: Bahai Censorship on Usenet & my hotmail account I am concerned that I am not able to access my hotmail account this morning and that it might be related to a concerted attack lauched on Usenet by Bahai fundamentalists on talk.religion.bahai against me and several other people. The Bahai Faith has more than a decade long history of very serious infringement on the rights of members and non-members. I invite you to visit my website under "Assorted Controversial Documents" to view the evidence. As I use my hotmail account for my business and livelihood, I would like it turned back on and will restrict solely to my business related activites in the future using another address for discussion with my fellow Bahais. Thank you. FG@hotmail.com Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ---------- From: abuse@hotmail.com[SMTP:abuse@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 1:07 AM To: fglayshe@oeonline.com Subject: Bahai Censorship on Usenet & my hotmail account Thanks for e-mailing MSN Hotmail Policy Enforcement (Abuse). The Hotmail Terms of Service (TOS) forbids e-mail abuse, and we strictly enforce the TOS. --------------------------------------------------------------------- MEASURES TO PREVENT SPAM These are our counter-measures against unsolicited bulk e-mail, also known as "spam": 1. We limit the number of individual recipients allowed for each e- mail message, making MSN Hotmail ineffective for sending "spam." 2. We don't allow numeric characters at the beginning of an e-mail address. Any Hotmail Login Name beginning with a numeric character is a forgery. 3. We include the field "X-Originating-IP: [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]" in the header of each e-mail message that is delivered via our system. If an e-mail message doesn't contain this field in its full headers, it didn’t come from Hotmail. 4. We maintain a full login IP history for each Hotmail account. 5. We block our relay hosts so "spammers" can't use them. 6. We have been successful in taking legal action against senders of unsolicited bulk e-mail who forge Hotmail addresses. Note: We recommend not replying to "Remove me from this list" addresses, as this only confirms that your e-mail address is active and directs more unwanted e-mail to your account. And be wary of clicking a URL embedded in an unsolicited message, as this may reveal your MSN Hotmail address to that Web site. Keep us with the fight against spam, check out https://www.cauce.org. --------------------------------------------------------------------- REPORTING UNWANTED, ABUSIVE, OR FRAUDULENT E-MAIL If you're writing to report unwanted, abusive, or fraudulent e-mail, please note that you must include the complete, unedited content of the e-mail message in question, along with the full, unedited message headers. E-mail programs often display short headers. To find out how to display the full headers, please consult your e-mail program's help system. If you are reporting abuse from a source other than e-mail, such as ICQ, chat, or Usenet, you must include the following information in your message: 1. The media involved (chat, ICQ, Usenet, etc.). 2. The MSN Hotmail account involved. 3. The content of the offensive or unsolicited message. 4. Any user information you have. We will reply to your message as soon as possible. ---------- From: acct_closed@hotmail.com[SMTP:acct_closed@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 1:07 AM To: fglayshe@oeonline.com Subject: Bahai Censorship on Usenet & my hotmail account The Hotmail account you reported has been closed. Additionally, 99% of these accounts use forged header addresses in spam, meaning they are not sent through or by Hotmail. We employ tough spam counter- measures. We hope this message answers your questions about our policies, but, if any questions remain, you can send them to the e-mail address listed at the end of this message. Please note that you will not receive a reply if you respond directly to this message. We don't maintain or manage any mailing lists. We provide free e-mail accounts from which our users send and receive e-mail. To ensure user privacy, we don't monitor the content of messages as they come and go. The MSN Hotmail Terms Of Service (TOS) forbids e-mail abuse including spam, and we strictly enforce our TOS. --------------------------------------------------------------------- MSN Hotmail anti-spam measures: 1) We severely limit the number of individual recipients allowed per each e-mail, making Hotmail ineffective for spam. 2) We don’t allow a numeric character at the beginning of an e-mail address. Any address using a numeric character there is a forgery. 3) We include "X-Originating-IP: [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]" in the header section of each e-mail we deliver; if e-mail doesn't contain this line in the full header, it didn't come from Hotmail. 4) We maintain a full login IP history on each Hotmail account. 5) We block our relay hosts from improper use. 6) We have announced legal action against spammers who forge Hotmail addresses into their spam, which is not sent by or through our service. We discourage replying to spam to try to "remove" addresses. This usually only confirms your e- mail address as active, and results in extra spam going your way. You may find some of the links below useful in your spam-fighting efforts. Please contact us if we can be of further help. Fwd Hotmail spam to: abuse@hotmail.com (full msg AND headers) Hotmail TOS: https://www.hotmail.com/cgi-bin/tos.cgi Hotmail UCE policy: https://www.hotmail.com/nospam.html GoodGuys: https://www-fofa.concordia.ca/spam/complaints.shtml Responsible sites: https://spam.abuse.net/goodsites/ UCE closures posted: news.admin.net-abuse.e-mail FTC ScamSpam: https://www.junke-mail.org/scamspam/ Spam-L FAQ: https://www.ot.com/~dmuth/spam-l ---------- From: FG[SMTP:fglayshe@oeonline.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 12:23 PM To: abuse@hotmail.com Subject: False accusation of SPAM I have apparently been falsely accused of spamming from my account FG@hotmail.com I use that account for my real estate business and have widely advertised it and require it for earning my livelihood. Fundamentalist members of the Bahai Faith have long been opposed to freedom of speech and information and censored me and others on the Internet. I can only assume they are behind this attempt to harass me and get my account closed since a few of them have recently threatened to do so on talk.religion.bahai on Usenet. I ask you, indeed, plead with you, to investigate whatever the allegation may be and restore my account. My website contains extensive evidence of censorship in the Bahai Faith and has been the reason many attacks have been launched against me. I have been on hotmail for more than two and a half years and do not believe I have done anything to merit this treatment, especially without even the courtesy of being informed of what the charge, if any, is. FG@hotmail.com Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ---------- From: abuse@hotmail.com[SMTP:abuse@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 2:56 AM To: fglayshe@oeonline.com Subject: False accusation of SPAM Thanks for e-mailing MSN Hotmail Policy Enforcement (Abuse). The Hotmail Terms of Service (TOS) forbids e-mail abuse, and we strictly enforce the TOS. --------------------------------------------------------------------- MEASURES TO PREVENT SPAM These are our counter-measures against unsolicited bulk e-mail, also known as "spam": 1. We limit the number of individual recipients allowed for each e- mail message, making MSN Hotmail ineffective for sending "spam." 2. We don't allow numeric characters at the beginning of an e-mail address. Any Hotmail Login Name beginning with a numeric character is a forgery. 3. We include the field "X-Originating-IP: [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]" in the header of each e-mail message that is delivered via our system. If an e-mail message doesn't contain this field in its full headers, it didn’t come from Hotmail. 4. We maintain a full login IP history for each Hotmail account. 5. We block our relay hosts so "spammers" can't use them. 6. We have been successful in taking legal action against senders of unsolicited bulk e-mail who forge Hotmail addresses. Note: We recommend not replying to "Remove me from this list" addresses, as this only confirms that your e-mail address is active and directs more unwanted e-mail to your account. And be wary of clicking a URL embedded in an unsolicited message, as this may reveal your MSN Hotmail address to that Web site. Keep us with the fight against spam, check out https://www.cauce.org. --------------------------------------------------------------------- REPORTING UNWANTED, ABUSIVE, OR FRAUDULENT E-MAIL If you're writing to report unwanted, abusive, or fraudulent e-mail, please note that you must include the complete, unedited content of the e-mail message in question, along with the full, unedited message headers. E-mail programs often display short headers. To find out how to display the full headers, please consult your e-mail program's help system. If you are reporting abuse from a source other than e-mail, such as ICQ, chat, or Usenet, you must include the following information in your message: 1. The media involved (chat, ICQ, Usenet, etc.). 2. The MSN Hotmail account involved. 3. The content of the offensive or unsolicited message. 4. Any user information you have. We will reply to your message as soon as possible. ---------- From: acct_closed@hotmail.com[SMTP:acct_closed@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 2:56 AM To: fglayshe@oeonline.com Subject: False accusation of SPAM The Hotmail account you reported has been closed. Additionally, 99% of these accounts use forged header addresses in spam, meaning they are not sent through or by Hotmail. We employ tough spam counter- measures. We hope this message answers your questions about our policies, but, if any questions remain, you can send them to the e-mail address listed at the end of this message. Please note that you will not receive a reply if you respond directly to this message. We don't maintain or manage any mailing lists. We provide free e-mail accounts from which our users send and receive e-mail. To ensure user privacy, we don't monitor the content of messages as they come and go. The MSN Hotmail Terms Of Service (TOS) forbids e-mail abuse including spam, and we strictly enforce our TOS. --------------------------------------------------------------------- MSN Hotmail anti-spam measures: 1) We severely limit the number of individual recipients allowed per each e-mail, making Hotmail ineffective for spam. 2) We don’t allow a numeric character at the beginning of an e-mail address. Any address using a numeric character there is a forgery. 3) We include "X-Originating-IP: [xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx]" in the header section of each e-mail we deliver; if e-mail doesn't contain this line in the full header, it didn't come from Hotmail. 4) We maintain a full login IP history on each Hotmail account. 5) We block our relay hosts from improper use. 6) We have announced legal action against spammers who forge Hotmail addresses into their spam, which is not sent by or through our service. We discourage replying to spam to try to "remove" addresses. This usually only confirms your e- mail address as active, and results in extra spam going your way. You may find some of the links below useful in your spam-fighting efforts. Please contact us if we can be of further help. Fwd Hotmail spam to: abuse@hotmail.com (full msg AND headers) Hotmail TOS: https://www.hotmail.com/cgi-bin/tos.cgi Hotmail UCE policy: https://www.hotmail.com/nospam.html GoodGuys: https://www-fofa.concordia.ca/spam/complaints.shtml Responsible sites: https://spam.abuse.net/goodsites/ UCE closures posted: news.admin.net-abuse.e-mail FTC ScamSpam: https://www.junke-mail.org/scamspam/ Spam-L FAQ: https://www.ot.com/~dmuth/spam-l ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 12:33 PM To: HANI72#aol.com; CRust60001#aol.com; AAli929596#aol.com; ccrawfeild@aol.com; Mr Mahdi; Nadle; Ruletherod; Macho786#aol.com; Member1700#aol.com; PParvin#aol.com; RayHanania@aol.com; RobertNik#aol.com; Shaksway@aol.com; Barthaman; abuse@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters No, I certainly don't support the attacks of the Bahai troll Gyr Falcon. Quite the reverse. But someone has accused me of something and attacked me and my hotmail account with hotmail.com. I believe this is merely the latest attempt by Bahais to drive me into the ground.... It won't work.... I ask all people with any conscience whatsover to write abuse@hotmail.com and ask them to restore my account FG@hotmail.com -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Rachel Woodlock wrote in message news:372f1ce7.23767765@news.freeserve.net... > Errr...I thought the calls for people to report abusive behaviour was > in reference to the "FGaysher" type posts - do you want those types of > posts to continue then I take it Fred?? > > Rachel > > On Tue, 4 May 1999 10:12:14 -0400, "Frederick Glaysher" > wrote: > > >It appears fundamentalist Bahais are launching a new > >campaign to malign and harass people who don't share > >their narrow views by attacking them with their ISPs. > > > >-- > >Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, > >alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups > > > oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo > email: r.woodlock¤bigfoot.com > My Dunya: https://www.bigfoot.com/~r.woodlock > subscribe to Islamic/Baha'i Dialogue: > https://www.onelist.com/subscribe/ibdialogue > ICQ: 32209275 > "A man of quality isn't threatened > by a woman of equality" > oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 12:33 PM Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters No, I certainly don't support the attacks of the Bahai troll Gyr Falcon. Quite the reverse. But someone has accused me of something and attacked me and my hotmail account with hotmail.com. I believe this is merely the latest attempt by Bahais to drive me into the ground.... It won't work.... I ask all people with any conscience whatsover to write abuse@hotmail.com and ask them to restore my account FG@hotmail.com -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Rachel Woodlock wrote in message news:372f1ce7.23767765@news.freeserve.net... > Errr...I thought the calls for people to report abusive behaviour was > in reference to the "FGaysher" type posts - do you want those types of > posts to continue then I take it Fred?? > > Rachel > > On Tue, 4 May 1999 10:12:14 -0400, "Frederick Glaysher" > wrote: > > >It appears fundamentalist Bahais are launching a new > >campaign to malign and harass people who don't share > >their narrow views by attacking them with their ISPs. > > > >-- > >Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, > >alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups > > > oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo > email: r.woodlock¤bigfoot.com > My Dunya: https://www.bigfoot.com/~r.woodlock > subscribe to Islamic/Baha'i Dialogue: > https://www.onelist.com/subscribe/ibdialogue > ICQ: 32209275 > "A man of quality isn't threatened > by a woman of equality" > oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 12:35 PM Subject: Re: Delinquent posters on TRB Perhaps there should be a campaign to write Maneck's ISP and get her account removed; or Saman Ahmadi's, or Roger Reini, or Brian F. Walker, or..... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:372F0147.719D28EF@earthlink.net... > > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > There are many Bahai fundamentalists who should then > > be attacked and harassed as well, especially Susan Maneck > > who's references to my views as "garbage" and "litter" find > > currency with such individuals.... > > > > Frederick Glaysher > > FG@hotmail.com > > > > I think Susan is being too kind. > > -saman > > ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 12:39 PM Subject: Annonymous Remailers https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Cole.htm Those alarmed by the recent wave of attacks by Bahai fundamentalists might want to read or read Juan Cole's recommendations for using Annonymous Remailers to protect themselves from the intolerant. -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ---------- From: Yahoo Mail[SMTP:abuse@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 8:53 PM To: PalmPilotGear H.Q. Subject: Re: gyrfalcon01@yahoo.com is impersonating me (KMM2676390C0KM) 1079995 Thank you very much for reporting this incident to Yahoo!. Mass distribution of unsolicited email messages, or spamming, violates Yahoo!'s Terms of Service. We have taken a number of measures to discourage spamming, such as limiting the number of messages that can be sent from a single account in one day. In this particular case, we request that you provide a copy of the unwanted email message, including all headers, so that we can identify the account used to send the message and take appropriate action. Please forward copies of any unwanted email messages that appear to derive from a Yahoo! Mail account directly to abuse@yahoo.com. Thank you for your assistance. Regards, ~Yahoo! Postmaster Original message follows: ------------------------- The person using the gyrfalcon01@yahoo.com account is harassing me and impersonating me on Usenet on alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai. Here's a message he has posted pretending to be me. I'd appreciate it if you'd close his account. I did not write anything below that he has passed off as mine. Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups From: Gyr Falcon Subject: Hate mail from Fred Date: Wednesday, April 14, 1999 12:28 PM I received the following: Read Message Help - Next Back to Inbox Message - Download From: "Frederick Glaysher" Add to Address Book To: "Gyr Falcon" Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 21:30:43 -0500 Subject: Leave me alone Reply-to: FG@hotmail.com Gyr Falcon, what an idiotic name. I know you are some fundamentalist hiding behind that fake name. Leave me the hell alone you little worm or I will have you thrown off the Internet. You people are disgusting. Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit https://www.msn.com Message - Download - Next Back to Inbox Terms of Service Copyright © 1994-1999 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved. ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 8:21 PM Subject: Re: Delinquent posters on TRB Chris, Should I interpret your words to mean you support the Bahai scholar Susan Maneck's use of "garbage" and "litter" regarding my opinions? -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Chris Manvell wrote in message news:YecK0HAEGyL3EweV@breacais.demon.co.uk... > Dear friends, > > For goodness sake, can we not let all this appalling correspondence > drop? The "bahai" group were set up for discussion of the Baha'i Faith, > not for /ad hominem/ attacks, whether factual or not. If you don't like > what certain people are posting, lay over and don't respond. Kill file > them if necessary. Take a leaf out of the teachings of Baha'u'llah and > look only at the good characteristics of the people posting. Every one > of us has good in us and just maybe if we look to that good we could > make this world just a little bit better. > > With love to you ALL, > > Chris > -- > Chris Manvell Tel.:+44(0)1471-822 317 > Breacais Iosal, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Fax.:+44(0)870-056 8081 > Personal Web site: > Association of Baha'i Studies (English speaking Europe): > and > Sgriobtiurean Creidimh nam Baha-i (with English Translations) > ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 8:23 PM Subject: Re: Delinquent posters on TRB The double standards that Bahais regularly use to suppress views they do not wish while protecting fundamentalists within the fold will be evident here to objective observers..... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups wrote in message news:7gna5t$i8e$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com... > One notes, however, that Susan made her comments and then *moved* *on*, while > you compiled an attack on Susan Maneck as a permanent part of your now > infamous "Spam-O-The-Week". > > Would you like other people to keep bringing up your "Hitlerite" comments > (among other gems) from past posts of yore? (and no, this is not a threat to > start doing so...) > > Jeff > > In article <925826979.761.31@news.remarQ.com>, > "Frederick Glaysher" wrote: > > There are many Bahai fundamentalists who should then > > be attacked and harassed as well, especially Susan Maneck > > who's references to my views as "garbage" and "litter" find > > currency with such individuals.... > > > > Frederick Glaysher > > FG@hotmail.com > > > > Ron House wrote in message > > news:372E8133.D7B8506@usq.edu.au... > > > Kidnykid wrote: > > > > > > > > >For AOL users, write to: > > > > > abuse@aol.net > > > > > > > > AOL users can also send an offending post in its entirety to TOSUsenet, > > > > provided that said offending post is from a purported AOL users. > > > > > > What is the complete email address of TOSUsenet? > > > > > > -- > > > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > > > > > > You can only be right if you have the courage to be wrong. > > > > > > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 8:27 PM Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters Thanks, Mr. Mahdi. I appreciate your honesty. It's a virtue rarely encountered in the Bahai AOL forums or here on Usenet with the fundamentalists Bahais. I thank you too for emailing abuse@hotmail.com and attempting to help them understand that the Bahais are manipulating their TOS rules there too having mastered such deception on AOL. -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Mr Mahdi wrote in message news:19990504134839.05941.00002263@ng02.aol.com... > Fred, the ultra extremist bahais have tried again and again to silence people > with independent thought. You and I are victims of such bigotry and abuse. I > respect your decision to not to return to AOL for now, but if you do like I did > twice, it will be a slap in the face to the bahai bigots at AOL. I know that > the attempt by bahais to drive you to the ground is not working, bahais are so > diligent in their online terroristic activites. I have written to hotmail.com > to report abuse, and I hope that hotmail can notify their ISP so they can be > expelled from their ISP. I would like to suggest that you try to advertise > your website to various newsgroups and organizations so they can see the > fanatical censorship for themselves. Many people are in ignorance to the > fundamentalist bahais here that try to silence independent thought and speech. > I hope that people can speak out not only on the Internet but at rallies and > conferences around the world on this very important issue. Fred, dont give up > hope, truth sooner or later will prevail in an enviroment that is dominated by > falsehood. > Mahdi ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 1999 8:30 PM Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters The troll in question was obviously a Bahai who operated with the complicity of other Bahais, not to mention their applause--Maneck among them.... The fundamentalists reveal quite well how low they are willing to go to attack and silence me and others.... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups wrote in message news:7gnbhd$jn8$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com... > Huh?!?! > > This, after someone got the "fred_gaysher" account removed utilizing this > *exact* *same* resource. And, it was reported by a Baha'i... must've been one > of those secret double-agent Baha'is, whose sole purpose is to sow dissension > and discord.... "All people of reason can see the evidence...." > > Your 'spooky' accusation reads even more outrageously when recalling your > well-publicized (by you) history with AOL, and its eventual outcome. > > jeff > > In article <925827178.536.45@news.remarQ.com>, > "Frederick Glaysher" wrote: > > It appears fundamentalist Bahais are launching a new > > campaign to malign and harass people who don't share > > their narrow views by attacking them with their ISPs. > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, > > alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups > > > > > > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 7:01 AM Subject: Re: Bahais haven't begun new campaign to harass dissenters You support Maneck's referring to my views as "garbage" and "litter"? You support the fanatics bombarding my email account with up to 1000 junk messages a day during March (on TWO occasions)? You support the Bahai troll who has maligned me for weeks to the glee of Maneck and other fundamentalists? You support the deceit by Bahais that has now resulted in my hotmail account being closed under false pretenses? You support the lies and deception of Mark Foster on AOL? I have to say publicly, Ron, that I don't believe you genuinely supported the creation of talk.religion.bahai last fall, and your call now for revising the Charter to hamstring the newsgroup, I'm sure, does not convince me otherwise.... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Ron House wrote in message news:372F8B0A.7F980981@usq.edu.au... > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > It appears fundamentalist Bahais are launching a new > > campaign to malign and harass people who don't share > > their narrow views by attacking them with their ISPs. > > No, that's me starting a new campaign to report violators of the charter > of this newsgroup. Don't blame fundies for this one, it's all me. I am > sick of the mindless repetition of posts attacking individuals such as > Susan Maneck, posts rehashing endlessly arguments on AOL, and posts from > anonymous individuals attacking others. I have complained about you, > Fred, as well as about those who have parodied and maligned you > anonymously. > > And I'm going to keep on going until you and the rest of them can write > civil articles ABOUT THE BAHA'I FAITH. > > -- > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > > You can only be right if you have the courage to be wrong. ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 7:03 AM Subject: Re: Delinquent posters on TRB The question is do you support the harassing and attacking of me by Bahai fanatics for well over two years now? The record may be found on my website.... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Brian F. Walker wrote in message news:372F96B9.F207E0BE@netvigator.com... > Dear Fred, > > do you imply in this recent message of yours, that you support the > harassment and attack upon certain individuals? That it is OK to do this > to certain (on the approved list) persons?? > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > > There are many Bahai fundamentalists who should then > > be attacked and harassed as well, especially Susan Maneck > > who's references to my views as "garbage" and "litter" find > > currency with such individuals.... > > Best regards, > > Brian > > -- > > _________________________________________________________ > Brian F. Walker > bfwkendo@netvigator.com ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 7:05 AM Subject: Re: Delinquent posters on TRB No rules should be added to the Charter, which is essentially meaningless anyway in an unmoderated newsgroup once it's created.... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Ron House wrote in message news:372F8C81.5342DC5D@usq.edu.au... > Brian F. Walker wrote: > > > > Greetings Ron and Kohli (and, I suspect, most of this forum) > > > > After returning from a looonnng holiday, and seeing the posts awaiting > > me on these groups, I would like to add my wholehearted agreement to > > your suggestion. I have downloaded and informed myself about some of the > > spam software, and tracking of perpetrators. Before any of this, though, > > I am reviewing my own attitudes, and will tone down my own acerbic > > comments ... > > > What alterations to the charter are you thinking about?? > > I was wondering if we should add a black-and-white statement that > attacks on private individuals, whether or not those individuals are > Baha'is, is contrary to the charter, and perhaps a rule for how often > reposts should be permitted (21 days?). > > -- > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > > You can only be right if you have the courage to be wrong. ---------- From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 7:09 AM Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters I have not and do not spam to talk.religion.bahai nor alt.religion.bahai nor talk.religion.misc. I have posted regularly messages that create a record of the history of Bahai censorship and suppression of free speech both on and off the Internet. It's that record that Bahai fundamentalists have and do oppose in the incessant frenzy to silence.... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:373d818f.497597653@news.newsguy.com... > On Tue, 04 May 1999 19:33:19 GMT, planetjeff@my-dejanews.com wrote: > > > Fred - you lost your hotmail account? This is the first I've heard of this! > > How are you mailing out then, from a remailer? Your address still shows up > > the same. > > He simply didn't change his user profile in Outlook before posting this > article. The posting is through an account he has either directly with > remarQ, or via a local provider who outsources news to remarQ. > > > > While I find your constant spam-fests annoying (among other things), I don't > > think sending them to Usenet should warrant losing an account. > > If some of Fred's postings exceed the threshholds for cancellable spam > (and I haven't calculated the BI, but I believe they may have so done), > he could certainly lose his account. People lose accounts for spamming > Usenet newsgroups on a fairly regular basis. > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (at home) > Confused about newsgroups? Visit ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 7:45 AM Subject: Re: Annonymous Remailers I took a look at Cole's messages. He's probably right from what I can tell just coming in here on all this revolution. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Frederick Glaysher wrote in message news:925836020.891.4@news.remarQ.com... > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Cole.htm > > Those alarmed by the recent wave of attacks by > Bahai fundamentalists might want to read or read > Juan Cole's recommendations for using Annonymous > Remailers to protect themselves from the intolerant. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, > alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups > > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 6:51 AM Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters Kathy, It's my understanding that most ISPs will drop Usenet messages after about 10 to 12 days, while some will delete them even under a week. That being the case, it is necessary to repost in order that new people coming along will have the benefit of a historical record that many others would like to suppress. I don't know of a way around that.... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:373f2d2a.541535175@news.newsguy.com... > On Wed, 5 May 1999 07:09:17 -0400, "Frederick Glaysher" > wrote: > > > I have not and do not spam to talk.religion.bahai nor > > alt.religion.bahai nor talk.religion.misc. I have posted > > regularly messages that create a record of the history of > > Bahai censorship and suppression of free speech both > > on and off the Internet. > > You may wish to regularly post those message a little less frequently. > Say, once every two weeks or once every week and a half. How 'spammish' > a post is is based on a simple mathematical formula; I believe the > frequency of your postings may be violating that formula. > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (at home) > Confused about newsgroups? Visit ---------- From: FG[SMTP:fglayshe@oeonline.com] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 6:57 AM To: abuse@tripod.com Subject: Fw: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters I would like to know if Tripod has a policy prohibiting websites that's sole purpose is to attack an individual person. For more than a month now on talk.religion.bahai, the person hiding behind this annonymous address has been slandering and attacking me and has lately created a website on on Tripod, which I have never looked at. Incidentally, there has been a long, more than two year battle between liberal and fundamentalist members of the Bahai Faith to create talk.religion.bahai and which is documented on my own Tripod website. Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ----- Original Message ----- From: Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 11:34 AM Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters > In article <7gp8ub$n2r$1@remarQ.com>, > "Frederick Glaysher" wrote: > > > I have not and do not spam to talk.religion.bahai nor > > alt.religion.bahai nor talk.religion.misc. > > How refreshing! Fred, you sly devil you, you do have sense of humor after all. > As long as we are having a gigglefest, I'll respond with a URL: > > > > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 7:06 AM Subject: Re: Letter from the UHJ about infallibility Any institution that perverts Baha'u'llah's clear and unequivocal admiration for free speech and conscience the way the UHJ has and does is not infallible.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Ron House wrote in message news:3731356D.35EFA5BA@usq.edu.au... > frankschlatter@my-dejanews.com wrote: > > > In article <372FD577.57D282EE@usq.edu.au>, > > Ron House wrote: > > > Below is a letter from a friend and me to the UHJ, together with their > > > reply. > > > Ron, back in 1982 were you and your friend seeking an interpretation from the > > Haifa UHJ regarding 'Abdu'l-Baha's infallibility? Or were you simply seeking > > to have the UHJ resolve a difficult problem for you? > > Our questions were: > > (1) Does Baha'u'llah explicitly state and define the > infallibility of Abdu'l-Baha anywhere in His writings? > > (2) What is the authority of the writings and authenticated > utterances of Abdu'l-Baha concerning subjects not directly > related to the Baha'i Faith, or to religion in General? > > (3) Can certain statements of Abdu'l-Baha, not directly related > to the Baha'i Faith, be taken as true only relative to the time > and place in which they were made, or are they a more universal > expression of truth? > > Question (1) was a request for information. They have all the writings, > I don't, and I trust them to have indexed them sufficiently well to be > able to answer the question. From their reply, I take it the answer is > no. > > > I ask these questions because nobody associated with the UHJ is empowered to > > provide an interpretation, and, without a Guardian as the institution's sacred > > head, the kind of problem you posed may not be amenable to resolution. > > I can see how questions (2) and (3) might be interpreted as requests for > interpretation, but we did not see it that way, as we knew quite well > that the UHJ cannot interpret. More important than our questions are > their answers. My opinion is that they did not interpret anything; their > replies were paraphrases of writings by the central figures, which is > not interpretation. > > > The Will and Testament of 'Abdu'l-Baha does state: "By this House [the > > Universal House of Justice] all the difficult problems are to be resolved and > > the guardian of the Cause of God is its sacred head and the distinguished > > member for life of that body." But the "difficult problems," I would submit, > > do not include those requiring the Guardian's interpretative power. > > Certainly. But wishful thinking won't create a guardian. If even one > clause of 'Abdu'l-Baha's will is not fulfilled, there cannot be a > guardian. OTOH, wishful thinking will create a UHJ: if all who wish for > one organise an election in accord with the Testament, the resulting > body IS the Universal House of Justice. This follows from the difference > between inherited and elective authority. This is why, whatever > plausibility arguments one may advance for the reverse view, like a good > magic trick, there has to be a catch somewhere. > > -- > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > > You can only be right if you have the courage to be wrong. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 7:19 AM Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters I have may have misread much of the thread I was responding to (I had skipped most of it). Nevertheless, it does change the fact that during the last few months Bahais have flooded my hotmail account twice with more than a 1000 messages a day, repeatedly attacked me through trolls, targetted me on AOL and succeeded in fabricating a case against me that AOL personnel were too busy to care enough about to fully investigate or understand the complexity of, and now through apparently similarly concerted efforts of denouncing me to the hotmail TOS staff have closed an email account that quite literally was a source of income and livelihood for both my family and I.... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:372f32fa.0@vlinsvr... > Frederick Glaysher (FG@hotmail.com) wrote: > : It appears fundamentalist Bahais are launching a new > : campaign to malign and harass people who don't share > : their narrow views by attacking them with their ISPs. > > > Huh? The person who proposed contacting ISPs was Ron House, > hardly a fundamentalist. And the person who inspired him to > propose this was attacking *you*, Fred. > > Paranoia will destroy ya. > > ---------- From: FG[SMTP:fglayshe@oeonline.com] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 7:30 AM To: talisman Subject: Fw: Resignation FYI ----- Original Message ----- From: Ron stephens Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 11:37 PM Subject: Re: Resignation > Dear Dr. Maneck > > I have not visited any of these newsgroups in about a year, since I > joined the List, I think. Now, I come here and, try as I might, It's > hard not to be affected by what I read tonight. Do you have any > knowledge about what happened with the dismissal of Mr. Nelson? I also > made the mistake of reading some of what Juan Cole has written about > this incident, and unfortunately clicked on the some things he now says > about you too. While nothing could shake my faith in you in any way, it > does make me wonder what is going on at high levels. Why doesn't the > National Assembly tell us what really happened? This air of total > secrecy is alarming to me. > > I know Juan must be very very bitter about all that has happened, > and it colors everything he says now. Still, I find that what he says > specifically about the need to reform our electoral process to be very > convincing. More importantly, I feel that secrecy and the powerful force > that fear instills in people could pretty much kill any chances for > reforms of any kind ever in the administration of the faith. Don't high > level administrators of the faith owe it to us, and to Baha'u'llah, to > uphold the highest standards and try to fix things when they get even a > little out off kilter? > > Listening to Juan's diatribes about spies on email lists and such > cause me to recall that Dr Iskander made a post recetnly tpo the Bahai > Studies List that strongly implied that my recent very immoderate posts > on the Baha'i Studies List (which I admit were a little extreme) would > definitely provoke a response from unknown (to me) listeners. What is an > ABM for protection? Are all ABM's for "protection" or just certain ones. > Is this sort of like an inquisition? > > I think I'll stay away from these newsgroups . I'm gone for two > weeks anyway after this friday. I know you are busy but a short reply to > this note before then would be nice. I'm not really all that upset > about anything too much..but you got to admit sometimes that this much > smoke sure *seems* to indicate a fire, at least a small one. Wasn't Dr > Iskander comments a not so subtle threat to me? And wouldn't you say > than Juan Cole is not down on Glayesher's level (no one is) but although > bitter Juan probably makes a few good points? And how can a National > Asembly memeber be guilty of gross misconduct? Do you really thnk that > he letter Juan posted is false? > ---------- From: FG[SMTP:fglayshe@oeonline.com] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 7:30 AM To: talisman Subject: Fw: Resignation FYI ----- Original Message ----- From: Smaneck Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 1:02 AM Subject: Re: Resignation > Dear Ron, > > Did you mean to post this to the entire list or did you intend to contact me > privately? Since it was posted I will try and respond as best I can. > > You wrote: > > >Do you have any > >knowledge about what happened with the dismissal of Mr. Nelson? > > Not any special inside information, which is why I have avoided commenting on > this issue. I presume that Steve Scholl's assertion that it had to do with > Judge Nelson placing Huquq funds in an account under his own name is probably > accurate. Whether there is anything more to the story, I don't know. Steve is > married in to the Nelson family and privy to that sort of information. I doubt > if Judge Nelson intended to use any of that money for his own purposes, still a > lawyer should know better. This is was the excuse the IRS used to go after Rev. > Moon. I should add that the practice is common enough that the National Council > of Churches found it necessary to defend Rev. Moon. > > The other comments made by Dr. Cole and Mr. Scholl are sheer speculations and > fantastic delusions. There is no evidence of any east/west split on the NSA. > Robert Henderson is from the LA area and Firuz Kazemzadeh lives there now. Nor > is there any real evidence that there was an attempt to manipulate the > elections. Note that both Dorothy Nelson and Robert Henderson recieved an > overwhelmingly majority of the votes, meaning most delegates voted for the both > of them. Hardly a partisan split! > > Could the NSA have handled this better? Not knowing all the facts it is hard to > say. I know that had they allowed Judge Nelson to resign quietly for > ill-health, the same people who are now vigorously protesting the way in which > he was publicly humiliated would be screaming that there was a cover-up. So it > is a matter of "damned-if-you-do and damned-if-you-don't." > > >Why doesn't the > >National Assembly tell us what really happened? This air of total > >secrecy is alarming to me. > > . Why don't you ask them? Maybe it isn't so secret. Keep in mind that this only > happened a short time ago. Also keep in mind that there are just as many people > who are upset that the NSA was not *more* quiet about this. > > >Don't high > >level administrators of the faith owe it to us, and to Baha'u'llah, to > >uphold the highest standards and try to fix things when they get even a > >little out off kilter? > > Isn't that what they just attempted to do? I strongly recommend you read the > May 19, 1994 letter from the Universal House of Justice for their "take" on the > standards our NSA ought to uphold. You can find it at the following URL site: > https://bahai-library.org/published.uhj/may.19.letter.html > > >More importantly, I feel that secrecy and the powerful force > >that fear instills in people could pretty much kill any chances for > >reforms of any kind ever in the administration of the faith. > > It is certainly true that where information is lacking imagination will run > wild and there is plenty of evidence of that! There is a tension Ron, between > the need to have an informed electorate, on the one hand, and the necessity of > insuring that those elected are not subject to political partisan pressures. > IMO we have stressed the latter so much as to make the former next to > impossible. But I'm not sure the best way to fix that without violating that > other principle. > > >Dr Iskander made a post recetnly tpo the Bahai > >Studies List that strongly implied that my recent very immoderate posts > >on the Baha'i Studies List (which I admit were a little extreme) would > >definitely provoke a response from unknown (to me) listeners. > > I don't think he was talking about anyone spying on you, Ron, nor do I think he > was issuing a threat. I think he was referring to the fact that it might spark > one of those rather ugly, unproductive and accusatory cycles of debate, > challenging your loyalty to the Covenant. > > >What is an > >ABM for protection? Are all ABM's for "protection" or just certain ones. > >Is this sort of like an inquisition? > > You met with your Auxiliary Board Member for Protection, not long ago. Was it > sort of like an inquisition? > > There are two types of Auxiliary Board Members, those for protection and those > for propagation. You might think of the ABMs for Propagation as focusing on > teaching the Faith while those for Protection concentrate on consolidating our > communities and developing our love for the Covenant. They are sometimes called > in when problems arise and people have used this as an excuse to paint them as > inquisitors, etc. (and frankly some ABMs seem to miunderstand their role in > this regard.) They are *not* there to police the thoughts of the believers. > There are times however when someone might bring a post written by a believer > to the attention of the members of the Institutions and you should keep in mind > that anything you post on a list is in the public domain. I think it is safe to > presume that the Institutions are well aware of your confusion on a number of > issues, but you should not feel threatened by this.. Nobody is out to get you. > But if they can help, they would like to. > > To be perfectly honest, in your own case I was sorely tempted to forward one of > your posts recently to your ABM Gene Andrews. This was when you posted > something about your "last will and testament." I was afraid you were suicidal > and wanted Gene to check up on you and make sure you were okay. Fortunately, I > figured out that that wasn't the case. Would that have been spying if I had > done this? I don't know, but if it was your life that was at stake, I wouldn't > care. > > >Do you really thnk that > >he letter Juan posted is false? > > No, the letter is not fake. What is said about it, is another matter. Juan is > not going to forge documents, although he may delete key passages in ways which > are deliberately misleading such as the letter from Counselor Birkland. But I > have every reason to believe that what was posted here represents the full > text. Just ignore the commentary. > > with love, Susan > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 8:21 AM Subject: Re: FGaysher unmasked He's been posting from dave-world.net all along as I pointed out a couple of weeks ago.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:3747685c.622236578@news.newsguy.com... > On 6 May 1999 03:54:23 GMT, mrmahdi@aol.com (Mr Mahdi) wrote: > > > I think your sick lies are making you the main suspect. You knew that I lived > > in San Antonio. So you invented a lie saying that the message came from San > > Antonio although no headers so that they did. > > Why do you think no headers point to San Antonio? The most recent post > from fgaysher came from an NNTP-Posting-Host in a netblock assigned to > Alamo Community College. Try . It's a very > useful tool. > > For example, gyrfalcon, to whom you just responded, is posting from > m044.bloomington.dave-world.net (Bloomington, IL). > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (at home) > Confused about newsgroups? Visit ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 8:28 AM Subject: Re: Baha'i Apologetics for skeptics The fact that soc.religion.bahai has permitted you to post your URL while continuing to suppress all mention of both talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai ought to inspire more than a little skepticism in anyone with any intelligence whatsoever.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Ron stephens wrote in message news:372F9463.37066563@ibm.net... > "Why I am a Baha'i, a Postmodern Journey to Faith at the Dawn of a New > Millennium." at https://www.geocities.com/~aaaware/chronicles3.html is a > new, concise story of how faith was found by an agnostic, skeptical, > doubting, nihilistic cynic. Short, readable prose. For doubters. > > > ---------- From: abuse@hotmail.com[SMTP:abuse@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, May 06, 1999 5:34 PM To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: RE: CST883265ID - Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass= dissenters Dear fglaysher, Thanks for your message to MSN Hotmail. We recommend that you forward a copy of the unsolicited e-mail message to the postmaster at the domain listed in the message header. For example, if the message came from user@aol.com, forward the complete message to postmaster@aol.com Please be sure to include the full, unedited content of the e-mail in question, along with the full, unedited message headers. If you include all of this necessary information, the authorities at that domain can investigate the complaint and terminate the user's account, if they find it to be in violation of their Acceptable Use Policy. We also suggest that you use the Filters and/or the Block Sender options to prevent future mailings from this sender. Hotmail offers the option of blocking a sender or filtering messages, giving you more control over the type of e-mail you receive. You can use the Block Sender option to block unwanted e-mail from specific senders. By adding an e-mail address to the Block Sender List, any e-mail sent from that address is automatically filtered to your Trash Can. By using filters, you can direct incoming messages to specific folders. This is especially useful when a sender of unsolicited bulk e-mail (aka spam) changes his or her address slightly, but the message content remains the same. To block a sender by using the Options Page: 1. Click "Options" on the Hotmail Navigation Bar on the left of the page. You're taken to the Options page. 2. Click "Filters." You're taken to the Filters page. 3. In the Block Senders List, type the exact e-mail address that you want to block. 4. If you want to add more than one address, separate each address by a comma and a space. 5. Click "OK." -or- Click "Cancel" to return to the Options page without saving any changes. To remove an address from the blocked list, select the address and delete from the Block Senders List. Then click OK. If you're reading a message and you want to block the person who sent it, click "Block Sender," located next to the address. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To create a filter: 1. Click "Options" on the Hotmail Navigation Bar on the left of the page. You're taken to the Options page. 2. Click "Filters." You're taken to the Filters page. 3. Scroll down to Incoming Mail Filters. You'll see several table rows containing the filter number and criteria. 4. In the Filter 1 row, from the first menu, choose "Subject," "From Name," or "From Addr." "Subject" filters the message based on its subject. "From Name" filters the message based on the sender's name. "From Addr" filters the message based on the sender's e-mail address. 5. From the second menu, choose "contains," "does not contain," "contains word," "starts with," or "ends with." a. "contains" searches for a specified word, partial word, or partial sentence Example: If you typed "Fred" the filter would find all instances of "Fred," "Fredrick," "Freddie," etc. b. "does not contain" is the opposite of "contains" Example: If you typed "Fred" the filter would find all instances of anything other than "Fred"; "Scarlett," "Rhett," etc. c. "contains word" searches for the EXACT word. No partial words are included. Example: If you typed "Fred" the filter would find all instances of "Fred" not including "Frederick," "Freddie," etc. d. "starts with" searches for a sentence or word that begins with the specified word or partial word. Example: If you typed "FredTech@hot" the filter would search for all messages that contain: "FredTech@hot," such as FredTech@hotmail.com," "FredTech@hots.com," "FredTech@hotday.com," etc. e. "ends with" searches for a sentence or word that ends with the specified word or partial word. Example: If you typed in "@aol.com" the filter would search for all messages that contain "@aol.com" such as "vleigh_gwtw@aol.com," "gablec_gwtw@aol.com," etc. f. equals searches for the exact phrase Example: If you type "Fred Flintstone" the filter would find all instances of Fred Flintstone, but not "Flintstone, Fred" or "Fred S. Flintstone," etc. 6. In the text field, type the word(s) you want to search for. 7. From the "Then Deliver To" menu, choose the name of the folder to which you want the filtered mail delivered. 8. Click the Enabled check box next to each filter you wish to begin using. 9. To apply and save your filters, click "Apply Filters Now." -or- Click "Cancel" to return to the Options page without saving any changes. Hotmail has comprehensive online help available to you. For more information on Hotmail features, functions, and issues, please click the Help Center link on the Hotmail Navigation Bar on the left of the page. If this information doesn't completely answer your question, please write to support_x@hotmail.com and describe your question in detail so we can send you more specific information. Note: Though Hotmail has recently become part of the MSN family of properties, reports dealing with mail from MSN (@msn.com) still need to be sent to abuse@msn.com. MSN Hotmail Support --- Original Message --- From: FG@hotmail.com To: abuse@hotmail.com Sent: 5/4/99 10:39:09 AM Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters   No, I certainly don't support the attacks of the Bahai troll Gyr Falcon. Quite the reverse. But someone has accused me of something and attacked me and my hotmail account with hotmail.com. I believe this is merely the latest attempt by Bahais to drive me into the ground.... It won't work.... I ask all people with any conscience whatsover to write abuse@hotmail.com and ask them to restore my account FG@hotmail.com -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Rachel Woodlock wrote in message news:372f1ce7.23767765@news.freeserve.net... > Errr...I thought the calls for people to report abusive behaviour was > in reference to the "FGaysher" type posts - do you want those types of > posts to continue then I take it Fred?? > > Rachel > > On Tue, 4 May 1999 10:12:14 -0400, "Frederick Glaysher" > wrote: > > >It appears fundamentalist Bahais are launching a new > >campaign to malign and harass people who don't share > >their narrow views by attacking them with their ISPs. > > > >-- > >Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, > >alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups > > > oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo > email: r.woodlock bigfoot.com > My Dunya: https://www.bigfoot.com/~r.woodlock > subscribe to Islamic/Baha'i Dialogue: > https://www.onelist.com/subscribe/ibdialogue > ICQ: 32209275 > "A man of quality isn't threatened > by a woman of equality" > oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo.oOo ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 07, 1999 5:25 AM Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:374e1f3c.669059632@news.newsguy.com... > On Thu, 6 May 1999 06:51:48 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > wrote: > > I realize you're making a symbolic point, but portraying yourself under > another name as an effort to avoid killfiles is not a good choice. I'd > have read your message anyway. You're making an assumption above. > > > Kathy, > > > > It's my understanding that most ISPs will drop Usenet > > messages after about 10 to 12 days, while some will > > delete them even under a week. That being the > > case, it is necessary to repost in order that new people > > coming along will have the benefit of a historical record > > that many others would like to suppress. I don't know > > of a way around that.... > > The spam calculation is made over a forty-five day sliding window. As I > think you know, Newsguy is now retaining 21 days of postings to text > groups like these. Supernews/remarQ is likely also moving to similarly > long retention. Every two weeks is plenty; anyone new will go no more > than a couple of days without having your reposts available for viewing. There are ISPs that still drop within 7 days. Those few days are enough for the fundamentalists to prevent others surfing from receiving the full picture. > > Note that FAQs to early Usenet groups used to be posted no more > frequently than once per month. I don't care what other newsgroups do. They do not have to contend with the ferocity and deceit of Bahai opposition to free speech. > > To further reduce any aggravation to longer-term members of the groups > (resulting in fewer complaints to your news providers), I'd suggest the > following: They may knock themselves out. There are thousands of ISPs. I get a free disk in the mail almost every week. > > - Always (and I mean always) use the same title for a repost. > - Cut down the number of articles you repost; if you have six, > post only three. Meet the folks here halfway; leave the most > inflammatory postings only on your website. Please remember that a > personal attack is off-topic, based on the charter *you* wrote. There is a canon of Bahai censorship. It is growing as it continues.... I have not attacked anyone personally, nor have I referred to anyone's views as "garbage" or "litter" in an attempt to assassinate their character. No fundamentalist has ever attempted to meet those concerned about Bahai censorship halfway. I appreciate your goodwill efforts. You've come a long way from your early naivete about the Bahai Faith. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (at home) > Confused about newsgroups? Visit ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 07, 1999 6:30 AM Subject: Re: Fred "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Brian F. Walker wrote in message news:3732BE22.A8854788@netvigator.com... > Dear Friends, > > I have just seen that Fred, after a pause for thought, has recommenced > his spam. As a result I have requested that newsabuse@remarQ.com take > action to remove the cause. They have assured me that there is > zero-tolerance for spam. I wonder whether Fred does in fact qualify for > the definition of spammer ... we shall see. > > Best regards, > > Brian > > -- > > _________________________________________________________ > Brian F. Walker > bfwkendo@netvigator.com ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 07, 1999 6:38 AM Subject: Re: Censorship - Bahai Bullying & Fundamentalism "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm Brian F. Walker wrote in message news:3732BAC5.B6926B4D@netvigator.com... > Oh no, not again .... > > Patrick Henry wrote: (alias Fred Glaysher) > > > > > > > > I have never claimed to be perfect. At times I have > > apologized to Bahais, Muslims, and other non-Bahais > > when I felt, or was convinced, that I was wrong or had > > spoken unfairly. I find the constant technique to portray > > me as a megalomanic or paranoid quite offensive. > > Fred, you are not known in this NG as a person capable of adult > discourse, nor are your apologies well documented. I too would find the > attacks on mental capacity or sanity offensive, but at the same time I > would look closely at what has provoked such characterisation. Any > fairminded person reading your mail with an open mind would come to the > conclusion that you had an "odd" persona, and that a diagnosis of some > mental dysfunction could be made. > > > > > > > As a Bahai for more than 23 years, I myself have always > > found especially repulsive the manner in which Bahai > > fundamentalists attempt to manipulate the institutions and > > leaders of government, the United Nations, and public > > opinion, while pretending to values they deride in private > > or at Bahai-only meetings. > > Fred, my boy, this above paragraph is a good example of what I have just > written. Read it again - if you do re-read your own spam - and tell me > why anyone with even a slight acquaintance of Baha'is would believe one > word of this? Would you give me one, just one example (backed up with > evidence, I am sad to say Fred - not just your usual baseless > allegations demonstrating paranoia) of a divergence of public and > private opinion with regard to _any_ Baha'i principle?? > > > "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the > > conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that > > liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of > > morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets > > of the contingent world." > > Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. > > You produce the above quotation: can you show me in what way your > liberty (and you have plenty of that, as you constantly and irritatingly > demonstrate) has resulted in a widening of ideas? (You seem VERY closed > in your thinking) Amendment of morals! Hah!! Fred, please - at least try > to behave according to the rules of the NG - that would be a moral > improvement. Improvement of conduct ... ditto. > > > The UHJ is also in the end responsible for inciting Bahai fanatics > > and fundamentalists to attack other Bahais and non-Bahais > > merely for their views expressed on and off line in free forums > > of public discussion. > > Please produce even one shred of proof for theis horrendous allegation. > And if you cannot, then I suggest a public apology. (Which you bring to > mind as being one of your features, you fair-minded thing you ...) > > > > > > Brian > > -- > > _________________________________________________________ > Brian F. Walker > bfwkendo@netvigator.com ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 07, 1999 6:44 AM Subject: Re: Literalism. Was: 'Abdu'l-Baha on how we should see others wrote in message news:7gu462$j0b$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Thanks, Ron. The problem is, of course, that the UHJ is only a legislative > body and does not have the authority to interpret scripture authoritatively. > Yet virtually all Baha'is want it to take over this function from the > Guardian (to whom it solely belonged), and some of its members apparently > would like to, as well. When a legislative body blunders into interpretive > territory, it makes mistakes (sometimes absurd mistakes), and it encourages > the less well educated in the community to make similar sorts of mistakes. I too believe this is the root of the problem. > > I don't think this is an insuperable problem. As the Baha'is become better > educated and deepened, and as the UHJ matures as an institution and finds its > footing, a better balance will be struck. In the meantime, someone has to > keep pointing out that Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha were *not* > fundamentalists and did not want to create yet another religion of those > leanings. There's no EVIDENCE that anyone up there understands how serious and LASTING of a problem this is for the Bahai Faith. In my view, everything suggests otherwise. I am very pessimistic in this regard. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com > > cheers Juan > > In article <3732547F.267DBD93@usq.edu.au>, > Ron House wrote: > And yet the Universal House of Justice has in its constitution that > > it will accept the next Manifestation. I suspect the factor you mention > > here might have something to do with it. Baha'is have a theological > > picture of how God runs the universe, as do other religions, and they > > see the next Manifestation in terms of that picture. And yet the cosmic > > views of all other religions have never been upheld by the following > > Manifestation in their entirety. People have a way of being too > > literal-minded to see the real truth behind the tidy picture. > > Baha'u'llah said that people should accept the Sun of Truth "though the > > heavens of every religion be cleft asunder." Every religion, not every > > one except the Baha'i Faith. > > > > I think it is very important, Juan, to draw people's attention as you > > have to the inconsistency in most Baha'is' unconscious assumptions. > > > > -- > > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > > > > You can only be right if you have the courage to be wrong. > > > > -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity and the Millennium: The Genesis of the Baha'i Faith* at: > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 > > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 07, 1999 12:35 PM Subject: Re: "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon" Juan, Congratulations on another brilliant article. It's so rare and refreshing to read something about the Faith that's both honest and intelligent. I highly recommend all those concerned about the Bahai Faith to read it. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com wrote in message news:7gu4ka$k8h$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Some may be interested to know that I have put my 1998 article for the > *Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion*, "The Baha'i Faith in America > as Panopticon, 1963-1997" up on the Web at: > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > This article is a pioneering attempt to explore and understand the various > control mechanisms that operate in the American Baha'i community. I hope to > annotate it with copies of some of the evidence on which it is based, so > others can judge better how solid it is. Anyone with further evidence, or > corrections, should please email me. > > I know now, by the way, that I overestimated the numbers of assistants to the > auxiliary board, and would welcome the correct number. > > cheers Juan > > > -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity and the Millennium: The Genesis of the Baha'i Faith* at: > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 > > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 07, 1999 12:40 PM Subject: Re: Fred Kathy, Please read Juan Cole's Panopticon article over the weekend, if you can find the time, and then let's discuss these matters more next week. https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Don't know where you live, but it's a beautiful spring day here in the midwest. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:3759c528.711542152@news.newsguy.com... > On Fri, 7 May 1999 06:30:32 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > wrote: > > > "The Bahai Technique": > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm > > It's the content-free posting of your website reference that will really > kick your butt in the spam cancellation. You can post this no more than > 14 times in the next six weeks, or all such posts still on servers and > all similar subsequent posts will be cancelled. If you can't bring > yourself to followup with anything other than these two lines, you'd > best not followup at all. > > The simple fact of having been spam cancelled will do more to lose you > this account than Brian's complaint. Think about it. > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (at home) > Confused about newsgroups? Visit ---------- From: Newsmaster[SMTP:newsmaster@email.msn.com] Sent: Monday, May 10, 1999 3:37 PM To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: talk.religion.bahai I do apologize about someone not getting back to you on this issue, you newsgroup has been added Thanks -----Original Message----- From: FG To: Newsmaster@email.msn.com Date: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 5:13 AM Subject: Re: talk.religion.bahai >Leaving MSN.com for lack of service.... > >Please note my new email below: > >f_glaysher@hotmai.com > > > >-----Original Message----- >From: FG >To: Newsmaster@email.msn.com >Date: Friday, April 30, 1999 10:14 AM >Subject: Re: talk.religion.bahai > > >>Apparently MSN.com is going to lose me as a customer on >>May 5, 1999 since it can't provide any service within a >>reasonable period of time. This is my THIRD request to add >>talk.religion.bahai, approved by a Usenet-wide vote in >>January, to the available newsgroups. >> >>Frederick Glaysher >>FG@hotmail.com >> >> >>-----Original Message----- >>From: Newsmaster@email.msn.com >>To: Frederick Glaysher >>Date: Thursday, April 15, 1999 10:39 AM >>Subject: Re: >> >> >>>Dear Mr. Glaysher, >>> >>>Thank you for your inquiry. You have the correct contact for requesting >the >>>addition of a new newsgroup. I will submit your request for review. It may >>>take into next week as we are involved with some newsgroup work that will >>>delay adding new newsgroups, but your request is in the loop now. >>> >>>Sincerely, >>>Newsmaster >>> >>>-----Original Message----- >>>From: FG >>>To: newsmaster@msn.com >>>Cc: FG@hotmail.com >>>Date: Thursday, April 15, 1999 4:11 AM >>> >>> >>>>Dear Newsmaster: >>>> >>>>About two weeks ago I took out a trial membership >>>>with MSN.com. There's a newsgroup I'd really like >>>>to be able to access that's not available on MSN. >>>> >>>>There are three newsgroups on the Bahai Faith: >>>> >>>>alt.religion.bahai (a typical alt group) >>>>soc.religion.bahai (moderated, even censored) >>>>talk.religion.bahai (unmoderated but better than alt) >>>> >>>>MSN offers the first two but not the last one: >>>>talk.religion.bahai, which covers different topics >>>>from the first two. Talk.religion.bahai was created >>>>in January 1999 after a Usenet-wide vote but does >>>>not seem to have been automatically picked up by >>>>MSN. >>>> >>>>I know all three of the Bahai newsgroups are available >>>>on AOL and would hate to have to go back to AOL.... >>>> >>>>Could you, or whoever the person would be, >>>>consider adding talk.religion.bahai too? I'd >>>>appreciate it. >>>> >>>>Frederick Glaysher >>>>FG@hotmail.com >>>>FG@msn.com >>>> >>>>PS. I've written twice now to other people at >>>>MSN and they have referred me to you for help. >>>> >>>>_______________________________________________________________ >>>>Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit https://www.msn.com >>>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> > > ---------- From: Abuse Mail[SMTP:abuse@tripod.com] Sent: Monday, May 10, 1999 7:36 PM To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: Fw: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters Wew would need to see evidence of abuse on the Tripod page before being able to act against the account. At 06:57 AM 5/6/99 -0400, you wrote: >I would like to know if Tripod has a policy >prohibiting websites that's sole purpose is to attack >an individual person. For more than a month now >on talk.religion.bahai, the person hiding behind this >annonymous address has been slandering and >attacking me and has lately created a website on >on Tripod, which I have never looked at. > >Incidentally, there has been a long, more than two >year battle between liberal and fundamentalist >members of the Bahai Faith to create talk.religion.bahai >and which is documented on my own Tripod website. > >Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, >alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups > > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: >Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc >Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 11:34 AM >Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters > > >> In article <7gp8ub$n2r$1@remarQ.com>, >> "Frederick Glaysher" wrote: >> >> > I have not and do not spam to talk.religion.bahai nor >> > alt.religion.bahai nor talk.religion.misc. >> >> How refreshing! Fred, you sly devil you, you do have sense of humor after >all. >> As long as we are having a gigglefest, I'll respond with a URL: >> >> >> >> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- >> https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own > Thank you for your time. Abuse Manager Tripod Inc. ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 1999 6:40 AM To: Abuse Mail Subject: Re: Fw: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters The evidence is at this "fredbot" link: https://members.tripod.com/~fredbot/ Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ----- Original Message ----- From: Abuse Mail To: Frederick Glaysher Sent: Monday, May 10, 1999 7:36 PM Subject: Re: Fw: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters > Wew would need to see evidence of abuse on the Tripod page before being > able to act against the account. > > At 06:57 AM 5/6/99 -0400, you wrote: > >I would like to know if Tripod has a policy > >prohibiting websites that's sole purpose is to attack > >an individual person. For more than a month now > >on talk.religion.bahai, the person hiding behind this > >annonymous address has been slandering and > >attacking me and has lately created a website on > >on Tripod, which I have never looked at. > > > >Incidentally, there has been a long, more than two > >year battle between liberal and fundamentalist > >members of the Bahai Faith to create talk.religion.bahai > >and which is documented on my own Tripod website. > > > >Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, > >alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups > > > > > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: > >Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc > >Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 1999 11:34 AM > >Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters > > > > > >> In article <7gp8ub$n2r$1@remarQ.com>, > >> "Frederick Glaysher" wrote: > >> > >> > I have not and do not spam to talk.religion.bahai nor > >> > alt.religion.bahai nor talk.religion.misc. > >> > >> How refreshing! Fred, you sly devil you, you do have sense of humor after > >all. > >> As long as we are having a gigglefest, I'll respond with a URL: > >> > >> > >> > >> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==---------- > >> https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own > > > Thank you for your time. > > Abuse Manager > Tripod Inc. > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 1999 6:56 AM Subject: MSN.Com adds talk.religion.bahai MSN.com has just added talk.religion.bahai to its available newsgroups. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 1999 7:06 AM Subject: Re: "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon" "Panopticon": a very fine and apt metaphor.... Cole's paper is definitely the best summation of the state of the Bahai "community" that I know of. Newcomers to these matters should find it highly informative and helpful in organizing the tumultuous material that continues to accumulate under the UHJ's fundamentalist bastardization of Baha'u'llah's Teachings: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:18 PM Subject: Re: "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon" Given the overwhelming documentation that now exists, used to good effect by Cole, I'm none too optimistic myself: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com wrote in message news:7hbces$jol$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > The Writings indicate that this panoptican-effect will even be more > prominent in the future when the would-be-thieves would rather cut off > their own hands than be branded by a thief because of the pressure that > will be applied from society members. I believe by recognizing the ills > of such behaviour NOW it will not be necessary to take this panoptican > effect to such a level in the future. I think it is essential that we > guard against this horrific evil as we do not have to take this > 'watching one another' to such extremes....Star* > > > In article <926094985.078.62@news.remarQ.com>, > "Patrick Henry" wrote: > > Juan, > > > > Congratulations on another brilliant article. It's so rare > > and refreshing to read something about the Faith that's > > both honest and intelligent. > > > > I highly recommend all those concerned about the > > Bahai Faith to read it. > > > > -- > > Patrick Henry > > "Give me liberty, or give me death." > > Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com > > > > wrote in message > > news:7gu4ka$k8h$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > Some may be interested to know that I have put my 1998 article for > the > > > *Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion*, "The Baha'i Faith in > > America > > > as Panopticon, 1963-1997" up on the Web at: > > > > > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > > > > > This article is a pioneering attempt to explore and understand the > various > > > control mechanisms that operate in the American Baha'i community. > I hope > > to > > > annotate it with copies of some of the evidence on which it is > based, so > > > others can judge better how solid it is. Anyone with further > evidence, or > > > corrections, should please email me. > > > > > > I know now, by the way, that I overestimated the numbers of > assistants to > > the > > > auxiliary board, and would welcome the correct number. > > > > > > cheers Juan > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan > > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > > > Buy *Modernity and the Millennium: The Genesis of the Baha'i Faith* > at: > > > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721- > 8058448 > > > > > > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network > ==---------- > > > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your > Own > > > > > > -- > "Look within and you will find Me standing there Mighty, Powerful, and > Selfsubsisting".......Baha'u'llah, Arabic HW #13 > > > --== Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ ==-- > ---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.--- ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:22 PM Subject: Re: quotations re soc.religion.bahai censorship Reads like damage control to me. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Boatright Family wrote in message news:1104_926476081@rickboat... > Paul, tell you what. Submit it to me. I don't recall it, I know that it > is policy NEVER EVER to reject posts without reasons, and if > you send it to me, I will personally research it. > > Rick > > ======= Quoted text follows > > Boatright Family (boatright@cjnetworks.com) wrote: > : > : At this time, posts get rejected for several reasons. > : > : 1) not about the beliefs and teachings of the Baha'i Faith > : 2) arguementative, not polite, insulting, obnoxious, rude. -- you > : may say anything you like about the other persons position, but > : you may say nothing about them. the moderators INSIST on > : polite discourse > : 3) the alternate authority arguement above > : 4) signal to noise repetative multiple answer to the same > : quesiton. > : > : I know of no other reasons for rejection in the past year. > > Perhaps then you could explain why a post of mine about > `Abdu'l > Baha's prophecies which met none of the above objectionable > criteria was rejected without so much as an acknowledgment, > and > why when I asked for an explanation Michele Smith said I would > have it but none materialized. > > The story is on Fred's website. Bill Hyman, on the basis of his > offensive behavior in the past directed at me personally, is the > most likely moderator to have discarded the post. > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 12:26 PM Subject: Re: Bahais begin new campaign to harass dissenters My, how frustrated and desperate you must feel. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Boatright Family wrote in message news:1103_926474981@rickboat... > Simple Fred, make a reference to your voluminous > documentation on your website, point to Dejanews URL's > whatever, but posting the SAME MESSAGE day after day, > multiple times per day does NOT "make the historical record > available" it makes you look like an > > Rick > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 1:07 PM Subject: Re: BAHOOTIE SUX Let me suggest you email an account of your experience to Juan Cole. He mentioned once he has burgeoning files of similar incidents. I'm sure he'll keep the details confidential if you ask him. It's in everyone's best interest for at least one honest person to know what is taking place beyond Bahai closed doors. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com HMCMESOON wrote in message news:19990508221259.16403.00001007@ng-cj1.aol.com... > Spent thousands on the venture in Carmel. > Been shunned and harassed by my "community", 'cause they didn't get enough FREE > services from my company, I guess. Since my company as well as my self been > criminally harassed via phone for almost 2 years, the cops are involved, my > live and the live of my business partners have been threatened and the LSA > could give a crap. > I love Bahaullah, but I have to express that in my own habitit, as my life and > the lives of those around me have been threatened by my participation in > "bahooti" events. > My LSA dosen't give a shit about these harrassing phone calls! > They have mailed me letters expressing their concern, to which I have FAXED > replys, to no avail. > ANY ASSISTANCE IS APPRECIATED! I think I'm done with the "community" aspect of > this Faith. Guess Bahaullah and I have to work it our ourselves! ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 1999 1:11 PM Subject: Re: 'Abdu'l-Baha on how we should see others wrote in message news:7h296b$3oo$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > I have witnessed the top Baha'i authorities chase educated people out of the > faith for 20 years (there didn't seem to be so much of this in the 1970s). I > have seen the coercive and manipulative psychological techniques of > "counselors" and "ABMs" applied in case after case, with the abused and > frightened victim pouring his or her heart out to me afterwards. It is not a > pretty thing to feel persecuted by your own religion merely for your private > religious beliefs Juan, It may very well be that prior to the 70s the same thing was indeed taking place; you were merely unaware of it. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 13, 1999 6:34 AM Subject: Re: "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon" Cole makes an interesting observation in his Panopticon paper: "Baha'i leaders employ a number of important control mechanisms to shape the speech and behavior of Baha'is. These include removal of voting rights, shunning, demands for conformity, accusations of "weakness in the covenant," informing and surveillance, and various forms of censorship." All of these mechanisms should be evident to anyone watching what has and is taking place in online Bahai forums. For the full text: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com wrote in message news:7hbces$jol$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > The Writings indicate that this panoptican-effect will even be more > prominent in the future when the would-be-thieves would rather cut off > their own hands than be branded by a thief because of the pressure that > will be applied from society members. I believe by recognizing the ills > of such behaviour NOW it will not be necessary to take this panoptican > effect to such a level in the future. I think it is essential that we > guard against this horrific evil as we do not have to take this > 'watching one another' to such extremes....Star* > > > In article <926094985.078.62@news.remarQ.com>, > "Patrick Henry" wrote: > > Juan, > > > > Congratulations on another brilliant article. It's so rare > > and refreshing to read something about the Faith that's > > both honest and intelligent. > > > > I highly recommend all those concerned about the > > Bahai Faith to read it. > > > > -- > > Patrick Henry > > "Give me liberty, or give me death." > > Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com > > > > wrote in message > > news:7gu4ka$k8h$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > Some may be interested to know that I have put my 1998 article for > the > > > *Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion*, "The Baha'i Faith in > > America > > > as Panopticon, 1963-1997" up on the Web at: > > > > > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > > > > > This article is a pioneering attempt to explore and understand the > various > > > control mechanisms that operate in the American Baha'i community. > I hope > > to > > > annotate it with copies of some of the evidence on which it is > based, so > > > others can judge better how solid it is. Anyone with further > evidence, or > > > corrections, should please email me. > > > > > > I know now, by the way, that I overestimated the numbers of > assistants to > > the > > > auxiliary board, and would welcome the correct number. > > > > > > cheers Juan > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan > > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > > > Buy *Modernity and the Millennium: The Genesis of the Baha'i Faith* > at: > > > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721- > 8058448 > > > > > > -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network > ==---------- > > > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your > Own > > > > > > -- > "Look within and you will find Me standing there Mighty, Powerful, and > Selfsubsisting".......Baha'u'llah, Arabic HW #13 > > > --== Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ ==-- > ---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.--- ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 13, 1999 6:48 AM Subject: Bahai Dialogue Magazine The issues for the Bahai magazine Dialogue, which the Bahai administration banned in 1988, are available on line at https://h-net2.msu.edu/~bahai/docs/vol2/dialog.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 14, 1999 6:30 AM Subject: Re: Bahai Dialogue Magazine In effect, Dialogue was indeed banned by the NSA. Cole's citing of Scholl demonstrates that beyond question. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com wrote in message news:7hekui$7cj$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > "Patrick Henry" wrote: > > The issues for the Bahai magazine Dialogue, which the > > Bahai administration banned in 1988..." > > The story I have read on-line and explained by Juan Cole is that The > editors submitted the next issue of the publication for official > review. That particular issue contained the article, "A Modest > Proposal", also available on-line (and makes for interesting reading) > which made some suggestions and raised some very valid points on > reforming different aspects of 'administration', election of delegates, > teaching, and more. The editors of Dialog were told by sevreal members > of the NSA (who were the reviewers) that there is no way an article > like this could be published. > > The editors, heartbroken, ceased publication. So it would would be > true to say their article was definitively rejected. It was not true > that the entire publicaiton was banned. Tony Lee of LA, the chief > editor (and head? of Talisman) would be the horses mouth if anybody > wanted to persue it further. > > John (Numero919@aol.com) > > > > --== Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ ==-- > ---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.--- ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 14, 1999 6:36 AM Subject: Re: Resignation Permit me to mention again there was also an incident in St. Louis approximately around 1992 in which the Bahai community treasurer stole $10,000 from the fund and then disappeared. There have definitely been other such incidents. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com wrote in message news:7hfm0f$24j$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > Dear Jeff: > > I really appreciate your openness and frankness and obvious probity. It > is a breath of fresh air! > > But what I don't understand is that when "members of the Institutions" > embezzle $91,000, then all of a sudden they are "just human," and > "mistakes were made," and the "manual wasn't implemented." > > But when anyone suggests in the abstract that maybe the "members of the > Institutions" should be subjected to a little more scrutiny, a little > more accountability, then all of a sudden they are "divinely guided," > "not accountable to the electorate," "representatives of a New World > Order," "working for a better way of doing things," etc. > > I've never even been able to get most Baha'is even to consider that the > various crackdowns, on *dialogue* magazine, MacEoin, the Baha'i > Encyclopedia, and talisman@indiana.edu might have been abuses of power > on the part of members of Baha'i institutions far more egregious than > pilfering a little money. > > The fact is, that if a member of the Phoenix Baha'i community, even > today, asked to see the LSA's books, he might as well put in an > application to have his administrative rights removed. If you foster an > attitude in people that their "Institutions" are perfect, infallible, > unchallengeable, etc., then you also--without meaning to--create a > situation in which members of those Institutions face enormous > temptations to take advantage of believers. > > Just a little recognition that members of the Institutions are fallible > humans (and yes, this applies to counselors and the UHJ as well), and > the fostering of a truly egalitarian and consultative spirit, would go a > long way toward alleviating these problems. > > It was said some time ago. It is still true. And it is more true in > the Baha'i system than anywhere else. Power corrupts. Absolute power > corrupts absolutely. > > > cheers Juan > > In article <7hct66$sgg$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, > planetjeff@my-dejanews.com wrote: > > Chris, until such time as manuals are magically turned into living, > > breathing humans, the implementation of the contents of manuals, > however > > perfect in form, will be imperfectly carried out by us mere humans. > > > > > -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan, jrcole@umich.edu > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity and the Millennium: The Genesis of the Baha'i Faith* at: > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 > > > --== Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ ==-- > ---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.--- ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 14, 1999 6:55 AM Subject: Re: service and its prerequisites wrote in message news:7hfnfl$318$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > > I think you have to make a distinction, which I know a lot of Baha'is > feel it difficult to make, between questioning the legitimacy and > integrity of the Universal House of Justice and questioning any > particular action that any particular House of Justice has taken. > > There are lots of people who know a fair amount about the Baha'i faith > and who simply reject it altogether, including rejecting both > Baha'u'llah (as a fraud or misguided, etc.) and rejecting the Universal > House of Justice along with him. I should think that is the most > extreme "questioning" of the authority of the UHJ. > > Then there are people who accept Baha'u'llah but who reject the > legitimacy of the Universal House of Justice. The mainstream Baha'is > call these alternative Baha'is "covenant breakers." This is also a > pretty extreme calling into question the legitimacy and authority of the > UHJ. > > Then there are mainstream Baha'is who accept the legitimacy of the > Universal House of Justice but who differ about some of the policies it > adopts at any one time. Most Baha'is at least privately have some > questions about some such policies, so this is not unusual. > > Then there are knee-jerk loyalists who think it wrong ever to question > any least pronouncement, policy or action of the UHJ. Shoghi Effendi > referred to such individuals as the "extreme orthodox," and condemned > them. But they are very powerful in the current community. Many of > them are essentially cultists. > > It isn't logical to ban questioning of policies. After all, the > composition of the UHJ changes over time, and so do its policies. > Baha'u'llah instructed the UHJ to make constant inquiries into the views > and needs of the community. If it stood above the community so > exaltedly as the "extreme orthodox" imagine, it would not need to do so. > > Some policies change for the bad, and then we have to let the UHJ > know this. I can't remember the UHJ saying "boo!" to Baha'i academics > in the 1960s and early 1970s, whereas in the 1990s it has deliberately > tried to force a number of them out of the faith (and largely succeeded > in this). There is a difference between the 2nd House of Justice, > 1968-1973, which had liberals like David Ruhe and Hugh Chance on it, and > the archconservative 7th & 8th Houses of Justice, of 1993-1998 and 1998- > , on which deeply conservative individuals, many of whom are former > Inquisitors as Counselors for Protection, predominate. > > Now, Shoghi Effendi said quite plainly that without a *living* Guardian, > the UHJ would not have the means of precisely defining its legitimate > sphere of action. That is, a guardianless House of Justice would > occasionally blunder into an area not under its jurisdiction, and would > have no living Guardian to rein it in. Shoghi Effendi was also explicit > that occasionally the Guardian and the rest of the UHJ would differ on > policy, and that the Guardian was not to arbitrarily over-rule the UHJ > except when it strayed from Legislation into Interpretation. > > Members of the current, 8th UHJ are convinced that the Baha'i faith is a > dogmatic religion, and that the UHJ has the authority to determine the > dogma, which it may then impose on individual Baha'is. If these > believers decline to be imposed upon, the UHJ may order the individuals > silenced, sanctioned, or shunned. > > But Baha'u'llah was quite clear that the religion he was creating was > *not* a religion of dogmas! Nor was he creating a vehicle for the > silencing, sanctioning or shunning of members of the human race. He > explicitly forbade the UHJ in Ishraq 8 from interfering in `ibadat or > matters purely pertaining to scripture, and worship and private belief. > He said they should concern themselves with matters of leadership or > legalities (siyasat). The Guardian explained further that the > scope of the UHJ was solely legislation. > > Thus, according to the explicit Baha'i texts, the UHJ is not to interfer > in matters of worship, is not to intervene against a believer merely for > conscientious speech, and is to stick to making laws. I am not aware > that the UHJ has in fact made any laws at all, though that was supposed > to be their function. > > Instead, they have done things like chase academics such as Dr. Linda > Walbridge, a major anthropologist, out of the Baha'i faith for a few > harmless emails; they have expelled Michael McKenny for his thoughtful > and conscientious emails; they have attempted to dictate to Baha'i > academics concerning academic methodology (even though none of the > members of the UHJ has the slightest idea what that might be). They > are clearly blundering around in the print world and in cyberspace like > a bull in a china shop, making a mess of things and harming the > reputation and fortunes of the Baha'i faith. And it is because they > refuse to recognize that they are a mutilated body in need of the > guidance of a living Guardian, which will be forever denied them. When > we all accept that, we will be adults standing on our own two feet, > exercising our portion of Universal Reason, just as Baha'u'llah > predicted and desired. I've thought this too for several years and my experiences in Bahai cyberspace have only confirmed my conviction that the UHJ has transgressed its appointed bounds and entered the regions reserved in the writings for the Guardian. Far from continuing to fill the interpretive vaccum, the UHJ needs to learn some humility from the many blunders it's made during the last decade or so. > > The policies of the UHJ have prevented literally hundreds of > intelligent, capable, devoted Baha'i writers from arising to serve the > faith with their pens. They have interfered with Baha'i artists and > musicians in ways that discourage *them* from serving the faith. > *Dialogue* magazine was a major service to the Cause, in the > destruction of which the 4th UHJ played a major and sinister role. For the uninitiated, let me emphasize that Cole is not exaggerating here when he says "literally hundreds of intelligent, capable, devoted Bahai writers." The laughable reality is the UHJ has done this while tirelessly invoking the mantra of needing more "people of capacity," defined as drones and lackies, another contradiction.... > > Well, the papacy has done a lot of stupid and sometimes criminal things > over the centuries, too, but Catholicism survives and there are a lot of > Catholics who forgive the past and try to work on the present and > future. That the UHJ, a young institution less than 40 years old, > shouldn't have found its footing yet, isn't really surprising. And, of > course, the rigidity and narrow-mindedness of a lot of Baha'is tends to > cause the more liberal-minded and capable ones to leave on a rolling > basis, so you have a real problem of the recruitment pool for these > institutions being rather limited, with often poor-quality candidates, > some of whom are little more than secret cultists. > > So the point of my messages is never to "undermine" the Institution of > the Universal House of Justice. It was ordained by Baha'u'llah, and > when it *legislates* it should be obeyed. My purpose is to consult > about rather severe problems in the deepening and evolvement of the > community. There should be a place in the Baha'i faith for college > teachers who actually say something interesting about the religion, > rather than remaining silent or at risk of being forced out. How can > you have a vibrant intellectual life that way? I once wrote the UHJ > making this point, and they said they *agreed* with me. But then they > went on to do enormous, though reparable damage, to this very process. > > My argument is that *consultation* is the basis of the Baha'i > institutions in Baha'u'llah's teachings, not blind obedience (taqlid). > Baha'u'llah *promotes* consultation, but condemns blind obedience. > Baha'u'llah goes so far as to say that the very *basis* for the > authority of the houses of justice is that they are consultative bodies. > > So, when a house of justice goes off arrogantly and half-cocked without > consulting with the community, and especially with the most relevant or > informed or affected portions of the community, it is undermining its > own authority in the terms Baha'u'llah sets out. It is this > *consultation* with the community that is the only hope of helping > replace the guidance of a living Guardian. The Consensus (ijma`) of the > living, contemporary Baha'i community must be recognized as a source of > law and policy, and only in this way can the UHJ begin keeping its own > activities within the legal bounds of its legitimate sphere of > authority. Cyberspace has come along at precisely the right moment to > allow such global consultation on the pressing issues facing the > community. > > Of course, older Baha'is used to a more authoritarian style of > administration will resist such freewheeling consultation, and attempt > to preserve a top-down, dictatorial approach to authority. They will > attempt to shut down open public discussion, depriving themselves, in > the process, of the very views Baha'u'llah instructed them to seek out. > But such flailing and thrashing about, complete with bluster and > threats, the chasing out of capable, devoted believers, and other tragic > mistakes, is a passing phase. The genie is out of the bottle, and the > Baha'i faith will be a much better place as a result. > > cheers Juan > > > > -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan, jrcole@umich.edu > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity and the Millennium: The Genesis of the Baha'i Faith* at: > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-403 > > -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan, jrcole@umich.edu > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity and the Millennium: The Genesis of the Baha'i Faith* at: > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 I've said it many times: the UHJ/administration is really to blame for the mess the Bahai Faith is in. At the very least, if they interested in salvaging it as a religion that attempts to approximate the vision of its Founders, they ought to abolish "review" and their other terrorist tactics, a very unlikely event.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 14, 1999 6:58 AM Subject: Re: Fred, Juan, and the rest are PUNKS "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com ScoobiDeux wrote in message news:19990514002722.26194.00000437@ng-fz1.aol.com... > people, people. can you possibly have civil conversation and not call each > other names? ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, May 14, 1999 7:10 AM To: Juan Cole Subject: Forthcoming CDrom - "Bahai Wars" Juan, I'm considering publishing a CD rom with all of the various controversial documents and archives on it. I'd like to include all of your talisman archives and anything else you wouldn't mind my downloading from your site. Obviously, it's not going to be a best seller but ought to help preserve what has transpired to this point and make it all the harder to ignore it. I'm a little worried that the literalists in concert or alone will take legal action against me but feel I shouldn't give in to such fears. Fred ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 14, 1999 8:01 AM Subject: Re: "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon" Cole mentions the isolation of Bahais a number of times in his paper: "Another way in which many Baha'is are isolated from non-Baha'i social supports is their disparagement of the institutions and values of mainstream American society. Many Baha'is exalt their own community, values and procedures, and denigrate those of what they call the "Old World Order." I believe this is a clearly calculated policy on the part of the Bahai administration to alienate and isolate Bahais from the prevailing social context, giving them all the more control over individual Bahais. I've seen this work too with a number of Bahai pioneers who are totally dependent on the Bahai network for support, sometimes even financially. The Bahai "frontier" often serves the purpose the American one did in that it drains off personalities that would perhaps be problematical otherwise if not dispersed into obscure regiions of the globe. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Patrick Henry wrote in message news:926420808.172.90@news.remarQ.com... > "Panopticon": a very fine and apt metaphor.... > > Cole's paper is definitely the best summation of the state > of the Bahai "community" that I know of. Newcomers to > these matters should find it highly informative and helpful > in organizing the tumultuous material that continues to > accumulate under the UHJ's fundamentalist bastardization > of Baha'u'llah's Teachings: > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > -- > Patrick Henry > "Give me liberty, or give me death." > Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 6:32 AM Subject: Attacks - Bahai Incessant Bahai attacks upon my freedom of speech and liberty have made it necessary for me to adopt a persona for my own protection and well being. Other measures have been taken. During the last three months, Bahais have twice flooded my hotmail account with up to 1000 messages per day resulting in considerable inconvenience and expenditure of time and effort to block, and ultimately close, the offending accounts; they have, by using Bahai trolls, especially Gyr Falcon, slandered, maligned, and caricatured me in a further effort to discredit me and portray me on talk.religion.bahai and elsewhere as a disturbed and errant individual; through concerted false charges and allegations against me, they have now succeeded in deceiving Hotmail into closing my email account, which I depended on for a considerable part of my income and livelihood. For documentation of many similar incidents of Bahai oppression during the last decade, see Frederick Glaysher's website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 6:33 AM Subject: soc.religion.bahai Robert J. Pease, December 5, 1998: "I support your efforts to expose SRB as a fundamentalist group." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb84.htm Kent Johnson: "It turns my stomach that they call themselves a Baha'i Group while doing these things so obviously partisan and consciously unjust." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb61.htm Ron House: "I think the following is a clear case of malicious rejection of an article by the worst of the moderators of soc.religion.bahai." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb53.htm Timothy Mulligan: "(Sigh) Fred, I'm beginning to think you're right about those SRB moderators." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb59.htm RobertNik: "these guys are pompous arseholes IMHO." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb54.htm Bruce Burrill: "What are Baha'i afraid of?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb60.htm Zuteflute: "Frankly I could not see anything in the letter I wrote which would prompt someone to ask whether or not I am a Baha'i." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb50.htm YU ZIR: "But as an outsider, I can perhaps see the point Fred Glaysher is making, and which point none of SRB's defenders seem to address." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb46.htm Matthew Cromer: "The current moderators regulate the contents--posting articles which they agree with...." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb47.htm Kavosh Soltani, December 9, 1998: "So many Bahais on these forums have shown to be ready to forget logic and reason, ignore clear evidence and Word of God, and come up with exactly the same line of tired and inaccurate excuses and arguments to justify their position, that it can not be a simple coincidence." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb77.htm Shakti3, December 4, 1998: "Sorry to hear that you've been surpressed on srb. Your comments were alway very "right on." Altho it does not surprise me one bit, seeing the way these newsgroups operate." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Ex7.htm Harold Shinsato: "It seems like there is an oppression over the Baha'i Faith." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb33.htm Steve Tomljenovic, December 3, 1998: "The moderators are a bit overzealous at times. Since all the controversy started, it has gotten worse." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb79.htm Laeterna: "To say I was flabberghasted at this type of "moderating" was putting it mildly indeed." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored2.htm Guy Macon" "Please explain which portion of the charter the following post violates." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored1.htm Robin Peters: "I think you're to be commended for your persistence in the face of consistent censorship." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb43.htm jgoldberg: "I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. " https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb57.htm Ruletherod, November 17, 1998: "Too much damage has already been done in the name and to the name of Baha'u'llah by right-wing administrative bullies, linear-thinking apologists, and doctrinaire-fundamentalists. You can't just blame it all on the critics." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb76.htm Many other similar messages may be found on my web site under soc.religion.bahai censorship. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 6:35 AM Subject: UHJ Bahai Betrayal From: FG To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; bahai-faith @ makelist.com Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM July 24,1998 Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." The tragic loss of Bahai lives in Iran and the subsequent exploitation of their deaths by Bahai spokesmen, often in the American media, always courting the President and other members of the government, has become a predictable pattern rendered intolerable in the context of continuing and pervasive Bahai censorship and denial of human and civil rights in the United States and elsewhere. Such incidents as I queried you about in my unanswered email of March 31, 1997, available on my Web site, regarding the crushing of the magazine Dialogue, the resignations of a number of scholars from the Bahai Encyclopedia, the attacks on the listserv known as Talisman I at Indiana University, the harassing and blacklisting of many individuals, Bahai and non-Bahai, suggest profoundly deep-seated problems within the Bahai community and administration. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/To-UHJ1.htm To these incidents must now be added the apparent conspiracy for more than a year and a half of the Bahai Computer and Communications Committee (BCCA), under the chairmanship of Mark Towfiq, to defeat twice now, along with the collusion of other Bahais, the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith which would be known as talk.religion.bahai. You may find extensive documentation for all of these violations of the basic human rights of many Bahais and non-Bahais on my Web site, "The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm Because the third interest poll for talk.religion.bahai on Usenet is approaching, after August 28th, I ask you again to investigate the BCCA and its depriving me of access last November from all private Bahai-only mailing lists at a crucial moment just when the tide of discussion was going very much in favor of the newsgroup, noted by many observers. I also ask whether you supported or were involved in that decision? The relevant files can be found on my Web site under Bahai-Discuss Archives. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm Similarly, I would like to know whether your institution or the BCCA has approved of or advocated the recent ban of my email signature file by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai, as well as their complete ban for more than a year and a half now on all discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai. The prevailing atmosphere of suppression of free speech and religious conscience that now characterizes the Bahai Faith cannot but call into question the honesty of many members of the Bahai administration and perhaps the institutions themselves. I ask once more whether censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith and what passages of the Bahai Writings support it, what are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship? Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 6:35 AM Subject: Censorship Bahai on AOL In August of 1998 I took out an account on AOL. It quickly became apparent that my fellow Bahais were using AOL in such a way as to further withhold knowledge and information from AOL's more than 14 million members. It appeared to me that there were four main issues. Alt.religion.bahai, which had been created in April of 1997 and which had had more than 20,000 messages posted to it, was not even offered in the list of AOL newsgroups. AOL personnel with which I spoke over the phone were very puzzled why it wasn't and even implied that some action would have had to have been taken to keep it from automatically being picked up and added to their newsgroups. It took more than a month of strenuous effort to get AOL to add alt.religion.bahai. On the AOL Bahai Forums it became apparent that Bahais were manipulating and controlling information by NOT making it available, by essentially preserving the frozen, non-functioning state of affairs or the status quo: 1. The Libraries were not accepting new uploads for others then to download and read. 2. The list of Newsgroups on the Main Menu for Bahai offered only soc.religion.bahai with no mention of alt.religion.bahai, or talk.religion.bahai once it was created in January of 1999. Coupled with soc.religion.bahai's suppression of all mention of alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai, this prevents people from even hearing of their existence. 3. The available links for Web Sites on the Main Menu for Bahai did not offered my website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience, though it has to be one of the most visited sites on the Bahai Faith with more than 7,000 hits since May 1998. As the months went by, my repeated attempts to improve these deficiencies met with greater and greater opposition from the Bahai fundamentalists on AOL. Similiarly, my requests, beginning in August of 1998, that the Forum Leader, Mark Foster, who no one had seen for months, resign, for derilection of duty, were increasingly opposed while various excuses were offered for his absence. Not until talk.religion.bahai was passed five months later in January 1999 did he suddenly reappear only to begin immediately reporting absolutely EVERY message I posted to AOL as a TOS. It quickly became clear to me that he was back in order to target and build a case against me to have me suspended from AOL. My account was then temporarily suspended on three different occasions and finally terminated March 6, 1999. Of the four issues, only two have partially been remedied. 1. Alt.religion.bahai and now talk.religion.bahai are available under AOL's Keyword Newsgroups, Expert Add. 2. The Libraries are accepting some uploads, though Foster banned the 15+ megabytes I uploaded in late February of my entire archive of discussion for talk.religion.bahai and which is at least available on my website. It's obvious Foster is finding pretexts for suppressing further uploads. While Foster has claimed since mid-January that alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai would be added to the Main Menu under Newsgroups, he continued to make excuses for it not happening. As of March 9, 1999 they were not yet listed under Newsgroups along with soc.religion.bahai. All of these factors, coupled with Mark Foster's abuse of his position as Forum Leader and his harassing and targetting of dissenting voices, not only mine, leaves no doubt that he and other Bahais, including some among the Bahai Administration, are involved in censoring discourse on AOL. For an instance of "back-channel" email coercion on AOL see https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm For an instance of Foster's double standard handling fundamentalist Bahais see Susan Maneck's accusations on AOL against me of "slander" and references to my views as "garbage": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm The immediate pretext for terminating my account, according to the AOL official with whom I spoke on the phone, was that I had pointed out in a newly created Folder called Censorship that I and other AOL members had requested a Folder entitled Bahai Censorship and thereby undermined the authority of the Forum Leader.... In closing let me add that AOL personnel are extremely uninformed about the Bahai Faith, especially its practice of censorship, and its ability to exploit the TOS system.... Half a megabyte of messages documenting Bahai censorship on AOL may be found at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 6:37 AM Subject: FAQ talk.religion.bahai alt.religion.bahai ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Alt.Religion.Bahai, Talk.Religion.Bahai This FAQ will be reposted approximately every two weeks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- People with only web access might want to use www.dejanews.com www.reference.com or www.newsguy.com They all offer reading and posting capabilities for people who can't directly access alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai and filter out spam. Alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai are available on America Online (AOL) Keyword, Newsgroups, then search for alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai If your ISP does not offer talk.religion.bahai, follow this news.groupie advice: "If your ISP doesn't have the group shortly, I suggest that you ask the newsmaster there to add it (Try news@isp.net, or newsmaster@isp.net) Ask politely. Include the msg ID of the results posting, and of the newgroup msg." Dave Cornejo's RESULT posting: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=431106082&CONTEXT=918305125.781648012&hi tnum=0 David Lawrence's newgroup msg creating talk.religion.bahai: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=434026333&CONTEXT=918304600.713490686&hi tnum=3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: Not all people agree on the interpretations given below. Question #1 "Why create arb or t.r.b.?" ANSWER #1: Because many people believe they experienced or are continuing to experience censorship when attempting to post to soc.religion.bahai. See the quotations from Abdu'l-Baha: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #2: Because the Bahai writings support free speech and religious conscience. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #3: [fill in the blank according to your own opinion.] Question #2: "Why do the srb moderators oppose trb?" ANSWER: Perhaps they'll supply an answer to place here. (Two years later their NO votes are their only answer.) Question #3: "Are Bahais opposed to freedom of speech and conscience?" ANSWER: Despite glowing words of love and support for other people's opinions, despite the Universal House of Justice stating at least publicly it is not opposed to an unmoderated forum, the record of actual behavior by Bahais and on soc.religion.bahai and the experience of many Bahais and people who have left the Bahai Faith give serious reason for concern. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chronology of major events: talk.religion.bahai ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- January 17, 1997: The 1st proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted to news.announce.newgroups. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRFD.htm Early March 1997: Mark Towfiq, chairman of the BCCA, the Bahai Computer and Communication Association, posts to three Bahai-only mailing lists a call for Bahais to vote NO against talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Towfiq.htm March 1997: soc.religion.bahai bans all discussion of talk.religion.bahai from its newsgroup. This ban is still in effect more than a year and a half later. March 31, 1997: The 1st proposal was defeated 157 YES to 691 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRESULT.htm April 3, 1997: Jonathan Grobe, a non-Bahai, creates alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/arb.htm October 14, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message stating it has no objection to unmoderated newsgroups: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ1.htm November 1997: At a time when discussion was highly favorable in support of talk.religion.bahai, the BCCA deprives Frederick Glaysher of access to the private Bahai-only mailing list bahai-discuss and all of its other lists, inflaming Bahai passions against trb. See bahai-discuss archived files and correspondence between Frederick Glaysher and the BCCA committee: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm December 19, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message that suggests it does not understand the nature of Usenet interest polling: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ2.htm January 12, 1998: The 2nd proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRFD.htm February 22, 1998: The 2nd proposal was defeated 109 YES to 65 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRESULT.htm May 25, 1998: srb bans all messages from Frederick Glaysher that contain his signature file: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb23.htm September 9,1998: America Online (AOL) places a Bahai-inspired TOS against Frederick Glaysher; AOL removes the TOS after considering both sides of the issue, i.e., Bahai messages attacking and threatening him and the experience of others: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm September 14, 1998: soc.religion.bahai extends its ban on Frederick Glaysher's signature file to include all signature files and URLs from all posters, allowing only email addresses and the name of the poster: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srbban.htm October 14, 1998: Soc.religion.bahai moderator Bill Hyman backbites and casts aspersions on proponent Ron House and attempts to undermine the new support for the "neutral" RFD: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb67.htm December 3, 1998: The Call For Votes (CFV) was posted to news.announce.newgroups and news.groups for the 3rd interest poll for talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRFD.htm December 7, 1998: Bahai scholar Susan Maneck begins her NO vote campaign on AOL and alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm January 10, 1999: Talk.religion.bahai passes 218: 63. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRESULT.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- For past discussion of censorship on soc.religion.bahai and other issues, including censorship within the Bahai community, see the website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/FAQ.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 6:38 AM Subject: Techniques of Bahais During the last several years or more a number of observers have noted the common methods many Bahais use to avoid various issues or discredit people who hold opinions other than their own: Frederick Glaysher, May 12, 1992: "The Baha'i Faith has become very oppressive and manipulative of the individual. That to me is merely a statement of fact, as I have experienced it, for nearly sixteen years now [over 22]. The usual stratagem in dealing with anyone who would express his conscience in good faith is to pretend the Cause is above any kind of criticism whatsoever while intimating that anyone who would speak honestly must have something wrong with him, i.e., his spiritual life isn't what it should be, he doesn't understand the nature of unity, or he's accused of trying to obtain power for himself, which at times seems merely a calculated way of discrediting the person, and so on. Another common strategy used to acquire control over the individual is to humor the person by letting him pour himself out, etc., and then self-righteously giving him the Truth." Ron House, November 14, 1997: "I know what you mean. I've found over the years that there is a technique used by traditional Baha'is and others to squash dissension: harry the dissenter so much he says something intemperate, then point out how 'loving' and 'compassionate' they are and how nasty the dissenter is. The trouble is that this technique works, so I've been making a conscious effort not to fall for it. Also, when they get the dissenter discouraged and miserable enough, he invariably makes a slip-up sooner or later that they can REALLY let loose the venom over. IMHO, they did this to you when you misread Sharon's intentions. At any other time, they would overlook faults, as Baha'u'llah says, but when they're in this mode they go for the jugular. Very sad." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/House2.htm Frederick Glaysher, June 1998: "Some of the most striking methods demonstrated repeatedly by many Bahais during the last year and a half of discussion about an unmoderated newsgroup is their refusal to listen and respond to the criticisms of those who are in favor of talk.religion.bahai, ignoring their concerns, never responding analytically to their messages and reasoning and logic and evidence, attacking them through character assassination and ad hominem, ganging up on individuals, and "circling the wagons" around every action of the srb moderators or others who are opposed to talk.religion.bahai." "More than twenty different people on my web site have posted messages explaining their experience with srb censorship yet many srb Bahais NEVER address their concerns. Ignoring such charges will not make them go away. NO ONE has to "try" to link the trb interest poll with censorship on srb; the moderators themselves have done that by suppressing droves of people for years. There are many people who believe such suppression is part and parcel of the Bahai community as it exists today. A YES vote need not necessarily support such a belief. There are other reasons Bahais might vote YES." Fran Baker, May 1998: "Just have to say that in my experience this is a common technique of manipulative people in general; it is especially effective with thoughtful people who are willing to see both sides of things, i.e., their own fault. I consider this brow-beating technique to be a form of abuse. The only way to deal with it is to call them on it every time and to refuse to let yourself be beat up, i.e., not to do your part of the "tango." This can be very hard to do, but it works.You can break this pattern in a personal relationship. I don't know whether it's possible when a group acts this way. Very scary." Dr. Juan Cole, June 12, 1998: "Let me ask you why in the world you think that I would risk my professional reputation by publicly stating falsehoods? ...The very technique of the more glaze-eyed among these people is to unbearably bully a Baha'i whom they don't like, use unjustified threats of declaring him or her a CB to silence the individual, and if the person will not be silenced, then to depend upon the gullibility of the Baha'is in refusing to listen to any victim's story because, of course, the Baha'i institutions are infallible and divinely guided and could never do anything wrong. It is a perfect racket." "Of course, this technique of making liberals go away has been enormously successful, and ex-Baha'i liberals have no credibility with the remaining Baha'is nor do most of them have any energy to continue to make a case, either to the Baha'is or the outside world, for the incredible abuses that go on inside this organization ostensibly committed to tolerance!" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Cole10.htm K. Paul Johnson, September 15, 1998: "If that principle [people are innocent until proven guilty] were followed by Baha'i administration and individuals in their condemnations of their fellow believers, I would have very little to complain about regarding Baha'i affairs. But character assassination by innuendo is the preferred way of dealing with anything remotely resembling dissidence. Seems like that's exactly what you're doing to Juan Cole in your message. Saying I don't want to know what you've "got" on him, thus attacking me but insinuating you have some awful proof of unspecified guilt on his part. If that's not character assassination by innuendo, what is?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson18.htm Gibro28W, October 12, 1998: "In summary, the biggest problem, as I see it, is that most Baha'is don't take criticism seriously--they tune it out as "negative" or "harmful to spiritual growth." This selfish attitude is very stupid. First of all, Baha'is entice people to join them. When they do, they indoctrinate them until they think like the group. But as soon as a red flare of doubt goes up in the convert's mind, they're cordoned off by the group and reminded of their "spiritual" obligations in the name of Baha'u'llah or the "Covenant." If left unresolved and doubt gives vent to prolonged criticism, the convert is sent packing or is kicked out. What we have here is a broken family that had failed to truly listen to the needs of its members in the first place." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb73.htm Barthaman on September 14, 1998: "Baha'i dissenters, more or less, are wounded souls abandoned by their fathers,so-to-speak. They have been cast out and dismissed or shunned without having had a fair hearing. Consider their pain when the rest of their "family" dismisses them too. Can you know what it's like to be accused of heresy and shunned following a sincere intellectual conflict (inspired by doubt)-- after you've sacrificed years in devoted service to your religion? Can you comprehend their sense of betrayal and injustice? This is why disillusioned believers leave their religions each year--while some still hang around, banging on the door now and then, demanding a refund for their lost youth. In time they will have to move on, however, writing the Baha'i Faith off as another lesson in fraud. Mock these people all you want--but for the grace of God, the next dissenter could be you. Don't be too confident, my friend." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb66.htm Juan Cole wrote, February 23, 1999: "There is nothing to be puzzled by. Right wing Baha'is only like to hear the sound of their own voices (which are the only voices they will admit to being "Baha'i" at all)." "Obviously, the world is so constructed that they cannot in fact only hear their own voices. They are forced to hear other voices that differ from theirs. This most disturbs them when the voices come from enrolled Baha'is or when the voices speak of the Baha'i faith." "The way they sometimes deal with the enrolled Baha'is is to summon them to a heresy inquiry and threaten them with being shunned if they do not fall silent." "With non-Baha'is or with ex-Baha'is, they deal with their speech about the faith by backbiting, slandering and libelling the speaker. You will note that since I've been on this list I have been accused of long-term heresy, of "claiming authority," of out and out lying (though that was retracted, twice), of misrepresentation, of 'playing fast and loose with the facts,' and even of being 'delusional.' I have been accused of all these falsehoods by *Baha'is*, by prominent Baha'is. I have been backbitten by them." "This shows that all the talk about the danger a sharp tongue can do, all the talk about the need for harmony, for returning poison with honey, for a sin-covering eye, is just *talk* among right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute." "Paul Johnson has seen all these things, as well, for the past five years. He can explain it to you." Cf. K. Paul Johnson's general reflections on coercive techniques https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson21.htm And LaAeterna's method of silencing opponents https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb65.htm Comments on the related techniques of Susan Maneck: Juan Cole, February 13, 1999: "It is a very, very, very weird religion. And if anyone is reading Susan Maneck's absolutely bone-chilling screeds on the desirability of Heresy Trials and carefulness in Shunning, they are seeing what it is like at the core of the religion." "I really am sorry for them and her, since they seem sort of filled with hate and quite paranoid, yet say they are preaching love, unity and tolerance. Susan will say, 'may your abdomen be split by lightning and your guts fall out you filthy heretic whom I wish I could just have shunned and buried', and then she'll sign herself "warmest" and slander a university by adding it to her sig line. As if what she is about has anything at all to do with *universities*!" Frederick Glaysher, February 15, 1999: "Ms. Maneck's approach appears to me to be always to shunt the discussion off or back to who said what where when why how and so on.... The farther back in time the better, since the person's memory, being human, is bound to be unable to keep up or to have stocked the evidence needed on his or her hard drive or find it on dejanews.com. And it then allows her to claim pretty much anything she wants to while seeming to have discredited her opponent. Further, she relies on the tactics of demagoguery knowing they usually prevail and will be supported by other fundamentalist Bahais. By shrieking "slander" and referring to others' opinions as "garbage," she is able to create an emotional atmosphere that essentially negates whatever the topic or content might be and that allows her to appear to win what is often a narrowly legalistic point or interpretation." "All of this is done, of course, in conjunction with her employing the more common Bahai techniques of intimidation and psychological demonization and terrorism." Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 6:40 AM Subject: Bahai Bullying Fundamentalists I'm alarmed at the recent Bahai attempts at character assassination, ridicule, and generally portraying me and others as disturbed individuals. I have never claimed to be perfect. At times I have apologized to Bahais, Muslims, and other non-Bahais when I felt, or was convinced, that I was wrong or had spoken unfairly. I find the constant technique to portray me as a megalomanic or paranoid quite offensive. Similarly, the tactic of accusing me of spam for posting my opinions is calculated to discredit the validity of my and others' concerns regarding censorship in Bahai forums and has also been used on AOL. Such accusations reveal the frustration that Bahai fundamentalists apparently feel over my having found ways of enduring and resisting the onslaught of their concerted attacks, while preserving a historical record on a markedly ephermeral medium for innocent Bahais and non-Bahais.... Fair-minded Bahai and non-Bahai observers may judge for themselves whether my and others' allegations of censorship are valid by reading the record preserved under "Assorted Controversial Documents" on my website at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm As further corroboration that I am not the only person concerned with the intolerance and censorship that has overtaken the Bahai Faith, I recommend Professor Juan Cole's new book Modernity & the Millennium: The Genesis of the Bahai Faith in the Nineteenth-Century Middle East, available through Columbia University Press or Amazon.com at https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 In his conclusion, which would never have passed the system of Bahai "review" that the UHJ imposes on all publications brought out under its tight control, Professor Cole, of the Department of History at The University of Michigan, quite accurately identifies the distortions that have been wreaked upon Baha'u'llah's Teachings: "Some contemporary leaders of the Baha'i Faith have given answers increasingly similar to those of fundamentalists, stressing scriptural literalism, patriachy, theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values. While the values of the nineteenth- century Baha'i movement, which was far more tolerant, continue to exist as a minority view, by the late 1990s a different set of emphases prevailed." (196) He himself and many others, as evidence under the "Assorted Controversial Documents," have suffered at the hands of the fundamentalists who have taken control of the religion: "The rise of academic Baha'i scholarship has caused tension in the community, whose present-day leadership tends to be fundamentalist and antiliberal in orientation, and this has led to pressure on a number of prominent academics to resign or dissociate themselves from the movement." (201) These same forces of fundamentalist orthodoxy are evident on AOL, talk.religion.bahai, and alt.religion.bahai for impartial viewers to witness. They will be evident to all perceptive observers of whatever forum Bahais may be trying to control and influence. As a Bahai for more than 23 years, I myself have always found especially repulsive the manner in which Bahai fundamentalists attempt to manipulate the institutions and leaders of government, the United Nations, and public opinion, while pretending to values they deride in private or at Bahai-only meetings. Ultimately, it is the Bahai Universal House of Justice that is responsible for the perversion and corruption of such clear and elevating teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. The UHJ is also in the end responsible for inciting Bahai fanatics and fundamentalists to attack other Bahais and non-Bahais merely for their views expressed on and off line in free forums of public discussion. I recommend all newcomers to these matters read "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm On Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, May 17, 1999 6:42 AM Subject: Stealing Bahai Chairman Dismissal of Judge James F. Nelson, Chair of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, in April, 1999. April 6, 1999 Delegates to the 1999 Baha'i National ConventionBeloved Friends, We deeply regret the necessity of informing you that James F. Nelson has been guilty of gross negligence in the performance of his duties as a member of the National Spiritual Assembly and that, although he has expressed his profound regret for the related occurrences, and has effected full restitution of the damage done, he has felt impelled, by his awareness of the high responsibility of the post in which he has been serving, to tender his resignation from the membership of the National Spiritual Assembly, and the National Spiritual Assembly has accepted this resignation. At this painful moment the National Spiritual Assembly offers James Nelson its loving support and prayers. NATIONAL SPIRITUAL ASSEMBLY OF THE BAHA'IS OF THE UNITED STATES [signed] Robert C. HendersonSecretary-General cc: Continental Counselors serving tthe United States ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- CommentaryDate: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 09:14:15 -0700From: Steven Scholl Subject: NelsonTo: talisman@umich.edu Here is all I know about the situation. Jim Nelson was helping an elderly Baha'i in Pasadena with her finances. I believe he had some power to sign checks from her account for paying bills, etc. She told Jim that she wanted her payment to the huquq [the 19% tax on some income to be paid to the Universal House of Justice in Haifa, Israel according to Baha'i law] to be set up as an endowment rather than being a lump sum payment. On her death, Jim placed the huquq funds from her accounts into a new account under his name. This led to protests from the estate's executor and prompted the NSA to go on the war path with claims of wrongdoing. I do not know if the executor of the estate is a Baha'i or not. Since the huquq funds would be directed to Haifa, one can imagine why [National Spiritual Assembly secretary-general Robert C.] Henderson would be upset by Jim's action. Henderson has been accused in the past of mismanagement of funds, of hijacking contributions earmarked to the World Centre into a special NSA account, skimming off the interest and then at the end of the year sending the principle along to Haifa. But this is purely personal speculation on my part. This is the only thing I have heard in terms of "wrongdoing" on Nelson's part, whereas Henderson's letter to the delegates refers to "related occurrences" in the plural. As for restitution, I understand that the money never went anywhere and, in the end, the funds were handled according to the wishes of the deceased Baha'i in the way Jim was planning to set up in the first place. So, what does this all indicate? My take is that for years there has been rivalries and factions on the NSA, especially between the West Coast Gang led by the Nelsons (with Bill Davis and Juana Conrad) vs. the Henderson/Kazemzadeh block. I have heard that in their rebuke to Nelson the NSA refered to his "careless" behavior, while in the letter to the delegates they refer to "gross negligence in the performance of duties." My view is that if the NSA was sincere in their concern for Nelson and his spiritual growth, they would have simply accepted his resignation and informed the delegates that after years of service, Judge Nelson has resigned for health or personal reasons. The letter to the delegates seems to me to be a blatant campaign maneuver. It seems aimed at (1) publicly humiliating Jim Nelson and (2) helping guide the delegates in their voting for a candidate from the Henderson/Kazemzadeh Good Old Boys Network rather than from the now suspect Nelson Network. As someone who has dealt with Henderson and Kazemzadeh in the past and had them use lies and slander in their attacks on my beliefs and behavior, this latest outburst is not at all surprising and fits their modus operandi perfectly. That is to say, the timing and the pure sleeziness of this blatant political manuvering fits with their history of self-promotion combined with vicious personal attacks against those who might threaten their grip of power over the American Baha'i community. Having been absent from these Baha'i cultural wars now for several years, I do find it fascinating that since many of us old "heretics" have either left the faith, lost rights, or gone into the grand occultation of self-imposed exile and inactivity, the leadership, at a loss for enemies, seems intent on feeding on each other. Needless to say, it will be interesting how the delegates respond to this news, whether they will back Henderson and Kazemzadeh by voting in one of their cronies or protest this action by voting in a West coast candidate. Steve -----------------------------------------------------Date: 4-14-99 To: talisman@umich.eduFrom: Juan ColeSubject: Re: NSA elections Actually, early twentieth century Baha'is under `Abdu'l-Baha had perfectly democratic elections, and were instructed to do it that way by `Abdu'l-Baha. During WW I when there was conflict over whether to support the war effort or adopt a pacifist stance, hawks like Mason Remey organized a campaign for the NSA in 1917 in which they captured it and reversed the previous pacifist policy! Older Baha'is spoke of the times when Republican and Democratic Baha'is wouldn't speak with one another. The problem with the current situation is not merely that the voting records of the NSA members are completely unknown. It is that the activities and policies of the NSA as a whole are almost completely unknown! What exactly do these people do? What policies have they made? What effect have the policies had? Have they been good for the growth of the community, numerically and spiritually? Without knowing the answer to this question, how can the delegates even begin to vote intelligently? Though, as we have seen, the very rules of the elections leave them with little potentialimpact. We know that there were about 48,000 adult Baha'is with good addresses in the US in 1978. There are now about 60,000. In the meantime 12,000 Iranians immigrated. This means that there has been no growth in over twenty years. *None*. Of course, hundreds if not a few thousands of people have come in during the past two decades, but enormous numbers of them have gone right back out. Would any CEO who had not increased his earnings a single penny over twenty years be reappointed by the board? The exclusivistic policies of Mr. Henderson, who is frankly mean-spirited, have contributed enormously to this Great Stagnation. He was the one who cracked down on Dialogue magazine in such a nasty way. He bullied Baha'i travel agents in 1991, for the Lord knows what reward from the corrupt Corporate Travel Consultants. He agitated behind the scenes for a crackdown on talisman@indiana.edu. He has chased travel teachers out of the country, seeing them as an electoral threat should they become successful. I have no idea about the propriety of Jim Nelson's book-keeping practices, but surely for Henderson to publicly smear him after Jim served on the NSA 1971-1999, in circumstances where Nelson cannot even publicly defend himself, is the height of sleaze. Henderson has arranged for himself to live rent free free in a 9-bedroom mansion (having the Bourgeois studio knocked down to build it, against UHJ instructions) with free Baha'i maids and gardeners, and his main business seems to be bullying Baha'is into silence behind the scenes. And I fully acknowledge that he is probably acting rationally given the way the Baha'i system is structured. So, I think all these things are related: the fact that the Baha'i faith in the US has been going nowhere fast for decades; the fact that the electoral system seems to elect the ambitious and greedy (and paranoid) to the top offices; the fact that even initially upright people are made perpetual incumbents, exposing them to the temptations of absolute power held for decades and corrupting them; the fact that the electoral system provides an incentive for the incumbents to slap down and chase out potential competitors; the fact that it would not be in the incumbents' interest for the faith to expand, become more open, attract a lot of new voters who might rock the boat. Term limits would go a long way toward solving all these problems. In fact, why not have staggered elections for 4-year terms? You could elect 5 members in 2000 and 4 in 2002. People who don't serve as long as Nelson did might not become tempted to act high-handedly. They wouldn't face reelection and so would have no reason to fear being unseated by active young folks. Counselor Fred Schechter, one of the people who falsely accused me, once told a friend of mine that anyone who becomes active in the faith will be attacked (by the faith's officials, it is implied). We hadn't at the time realized that Schechter intended to *act* on this observation! This is a dysfunctional system, folks. There are ways in which it destroyed Dan Jordan (forcing him to live a lie and to resort to secret trysts), Allen Ward, and now Jim Nelson--not to mention the spiritual harm it has wreaked on the Baby Boom intellectuals who were enticed in with promises of tolerance and justice (!!!). When Glenford Mitchell had become a huge pain in the ass as NSA secretary and was finally elected off it to the UHJ, everyone breathed a big sigh of relief. And when Henderson came in, the word was that he was a good guy, and we were all relieved. And then in a few short years he demonstrated that he was an even bigger pain in the ass than Mitchell had been. Even dumping Henderson wouldn't solve the problem. The *system* creates the Hendersons and the Nelsons. If anyone cared about the fortunes of the faith as opposed to the size of their marble offices, they would fix the system. cheers Juan ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Return to DocumentsTo Baha'i StudiesTo Talisman wrote in message news:7focup$gi9$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com... > Documents and discussions regarding the recent dismissal of the chairmanof > the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the US for 'financial > improprieties' may be found at:> > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/bhnsa.htm>> cheers Juan>>> -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity and the Millennium: The Genesis of the Baha'i Faith* at: > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448> ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 1999 7:37 AM Subject: Re: soc.religion.bahai I don't believe I have quoted your comments out of context. It was certainly not my intention. Whatever the case, I have deleted them for you. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Kent Johnson wrote in message news:7hric6$4td$1@autumn.news.rcn.net... > I especially find it ironic that you take one of my quotes out of context > and use it to further your own purposes while accusing the Universal House > of Justice of furthering their own narrow aims on the lives of executed > Baha'is. > > As a Baha'i I am encouraged by the actions of the House. I have often > wondered if I had the courage to accept martyrdom as do the courageous > Baha'is of Iran. I do know for certain that if I did die such a death I > would hope that the Universal House of Justice and the Baha'i world in > general should gain by my sacrifice. > > Warmest regards, --Kent > > > Patrick Henry wrote in message > news:7horav$rcp$1@news.laserlink.net... > > Robert J. Pease, December 5, 1998: > > "I support your efforts to expose SRB as a fundamentalist group." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb84.htm > > > > Kent Johnson: > > "It turns my stomach that they call themselves a Baha'i Group > > while doing these things so obviously partisan and consciously > > unjust." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb61.htm > > > > Ron House: > > "I think the following is a clear case of malicious > > rejection of an article by the worst of the moderators of > > soc.religion.bahai." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb53.htm > > > > Timothy Mulligan: > > "(Sigh) Fred, I'm beginning to think you're right about those > > SRB moderators." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb59.htm > > > > RobertNik: > > "these guys are pompous arseholes IMHO." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb54.htm > > > > Bruce Burrill: > > "What are Baha'i afraid of?" > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb60.htm > > > > Zuteflute: > > "Frankly I could not see anything in the letter I wrote which > > would prompt someone to ask whether or not I am a Baha'i." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb50.htm > > > > YU ZIR: > > "But as an outsider, I can perhaps see the point Fred Glaysher > > is making, and which point none of SRB's defenders seem to > > address." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb46.htm > > > > Matthew Cromer: > > "The current moderators regulate the contents--posting articles > > which they agree with...." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb47.htm > > > > Kavosh Soltani, December 9, 1998: > > "So many Bahais on these forums > > have shown to be ready to forget logic and reason, ignore > > clear evidence and Word of God, and come up with exactly the > > same line of tired and inaccurate excuses and arguments to > > justify their position, that it can not be a simple coincidence." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb77.htm > > > > Shakti3, December 4, 1998: > > "Sorry to hear that you've been surpressed on srb. Your comments > > were alway very "right on." Altho it does not surprise me one bit, > > seeing the way these newsgroups operate." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Ex7.htm > > > > Harold Shinsato: > > "It seems like there is an oppression over the Baha'i Faith." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb33.htm > > > > Steve Tomljenovic, December 3, 1998: > > "The moderators are a bit overzealous at times. Since all the > > controversy started, it has gotten worse." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb79.htm > > > > Laeterna: > > "To say I was flabberghasted at this type of "moderating" was > > putting it mildly indeed." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored2.htm > > > > Guy Macon" > > "Please explain which portion of the charter the following > > post violates." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored1.htm > > > > Robin Peters: > > "I think you're to be commended for your persistence in the > > face of consistent censorship." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb43.htm > > > > jgoldberg: > > "I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and > > mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. " > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb57.htm > > > > Ruletherod, November 17, 1998: > > "Too much damage has already been done in the name and to > > the name of Baha'u'llah by right-wing administrative bullies, > > linear-thinking apologists, and doctrinaire-fundamentalists. You > > can't just blame it all on the critics." > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb76.htm > > > > > > Many other similar messages may be found on my web site under > > soc.religion.bahai censorship. > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb.htm > > > > See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom > > of Conscience: > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 8:09 AM Subject: Re: Revised: Bahai Bullying Fundamentalists "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Richard Boyle wrote in message news:37418B42.10A99440@penetics.com... > More FredBot spam. Can't the programmer come up with anything other than > this turgid litany of lies, innuendoes, half-truths, propaganda, paranoid > ravings and downright falsehoods? > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > I'm alarmed at the recent Bahai attempts at character > > assassination, ridicule, and generally portraying me > > and others as disturbed individuals. > > > > I have never claimed to be perfect. At times I have > > apologized to Bahais, Muslims, and other non-Bahais > > when I felt, or was convinced, that I was wrong or had > > spoken unfairly. I find the constant technique to portray > > me as a megalomanic or paranoid quite offensive. > > > > Similarly, the tactic of accusing me of spam for posting > > my opinions is calculated to discredit the validity of my and > > others' concerns regarding censorship in Bahai forums and > > has also been used on AOL. Such accusations reveal the > > frustration that Bahai fundamentalists apparently feel over > > my having found ways of enduring and resisting the onslaught of > > their concerted attacks, while preserving a historical record on > > a markedly ephermeral medium for innocent Bahais and > > non-Bahais.... > > > > Fair-minded Bahai and non-Bahai observers may > > judge for themselves whether my and others' allegations of > > censorship are valid by reading the record preserved under > > "Assorted Controversial Documents" on my website at > > > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > > > As further corroboration that I am not the only person > > concerned with the intolerance and censorship that has > > overtaken the Bahai Faith, I recommend Professor Juan Cole's > > new book Modernity & the Millennium: The Genesis of the > > Bahai Faith in the Nineteenth-Century Middle East, available > > through Columbia University Press or Amazon.com at > > > > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 > > > > In his conclusion, which would never have passed the > > system of Bahai "review" that the UHJ imposes on all > > publications brought out under its tight control, Professor Cole, > > of the Department of History at The University of Michigan, > > quite accurately identifies the distortions that have been > > wreaked upon Baha'u'llah's Teachings: > > > > "Some contemporary leaders of the Baha'i Faith have given > > answers increasingly similar to those of fundamentalists, > > stressing scriptural literalism, patriachy, theocracy, > > censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key > > democratic values. While the values of the nineteenth- > > century Baha'i movement, which was far more tolerant, > > continue to exist as a minority view, by the late 1990s a > > different set of emphases prevailed." (196) > > > > He himself and many others, as evidence under the > > "Assorted Controversial Documents," have suffered at the > > hands of the fundamentalists who have taken control of the > > religion: > > > > "The rise of academic Baha'i scholarship has caused > > tension in the community, whose present-day leadership > > tends to be fundamentalist and antiliberal in orientation, > > and this has led to pressure on a number of prominent > > academics to resign or dissociate themselves from the > > movement." (201) > > > > These same forces of fundamentalist orthodoxy are > > evident on AOL, talk.religion.bahai, and alt.religion.bahai > > for impartial viewers to witness. They will be evident > > to all perceptive observers of whatever forum Bahais may > > be trying to control and influence. > > > > As a Bahai for more than 23 years, I myself have always > > found especially repulsive the manner in which Bahai > > fundamentalists attempt to manipulate the institutions and > > leaders of government, the United Nations, and public > > opinion, while pretending to values they deride in private > > or at Bahai-only meetings. > > > > Ultimately, it is the Bahai Universal House of Justice that > > is responsible for the perversion and corruption of such clear > > and elevating teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha as > > the following: > > > > "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the > > conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that > > liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of > > morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets > > of the contingent world." > > Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. > > > > The UHJ is also in the end responsible for inciting Bahai fanatics > > and fundamentalists to attack other Bahais and non-Bahais > > merely for their views expressed on and off line in free forums > > of public discussion. > > > > I recommend all newcomers to these matters read > > "The Bahai Technique": > > > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm > > > > On Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom > > of Conscience: > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > > > Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, > > discusses related issues in his journal article "The > > Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": > > > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 8:15 AM Subject: Re: Revised: UHJ Bahai Betrayal Kathy, You haven't respond yet to Juan Cole's Panopticon article: Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Can you share with us your opinion? -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 1999 1:52 PM Subject: Re: Stealing Bahai Chairman "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Rick Schaut wrote in message news:7huoss$2qd7@news1.newsguy.com... > > Michael McKenny wrote in message > news:7hu58m$lro@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > > > > "James F. Nelson has been guilty of gross negligence in the performance of > > his duties... > > Robert C. Henderson" > > OK. Read that sentence again. Now read the subject line of this thread. > When you've done that, please explain to me why you would take Dr. Henderson > to task for stating the truth in a letter addressed to delegates of the > National Convention (i.e. people who have not only the need to know but the > _right_ to know this) and _not_ take Mr. Glaysher to task for his > embellishment of the facts? > > > Regards, > Rick Schaut > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 6:55 AM Subject: Re: Bahai Bullying Fundamentalists "Wreaked" is the perfectly acceptable past tense form of "wreak." "Wrought" is a different word. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:3742d9c1.0@vlinsvr... > > : Patrick Henry wrote in message > > : > wreaked upon Baha'u'llah's Teachings: > : > > > prompting me to query: > > Where the hell is this word coming from? In the past month or > two I've seen "wreaked" used as the past participle of "wreak" not > once or twice but at least a dozen times-- a nonword I had > *never, ever* heard before in my life. The past participle > of "wreak" is WROUGHT. > > What hath God wreaked with this awful new nonword suddenly > becoming ubiquitous? ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 7:31 AM Subject: Re: Revised: Bahai Bullying Fundamentalists K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:3742e599.0@vlinsvr... > Richard Boyle (richard@penetics.com) wrote: > : More FredBot spam. Can't the programmer come up with anything other than > : this turgid litany of lies, innuendoes, half-truths, propaganda, paranoid > : ravings and downright falsehoods? > > Dehumanizing one's opponent so absolutely and relentlessly is the > sign of a complete refusal to deal with his issues. If you > accuse someone of lies, downright falsehoods (what's the diff?), > paranoid ravings, etc., your accusation carries no weight when > delivered without an iota of argument or evidence. First, thank you, Paul, for everything you say in this message, including your reprimands. The approach of "dehumanizing," as you put it, is very much part of the procedure some of my fellow Bahais have been using against me and others for a very long time. It does constitute a "complete refusal" to deal with the issues. It has left me for easily at least a year, perhaps two, with no alternative but to create as permanent a record of events as can be done on Usenet. > > Fred's relentlessly aggressive tactics are disgusting. So are > yours. Both of you are making Baha'i look bad to anyone who > drops by: My hope is that I expose the truth, as the UHJ has wrought it (correct use of that word, by the way) for the last decade or so. If Bahai comes out looking bad, the blame lies with the UHJ, and its marshalling its forces as it has. I don't consider my tactics relentlessly aggressive nor disgusting; tenacious is the word that I would use. Fortunately, I'm a relative young man still and have decades yet to defend Baha'u'llah's Teachings from the nine bastardizers on Mt. Carmel. > : > : Patrick Henry wrote: > : > : > I'm alarmed at the recent Bahai attempts at character > : > assassination, ridicule, and generally portraying me > : > and others as disturbed individuals. > > This would appear to be somewhere between the 10th and 20th time > you have posted this. What purpose is served? There's no > discussion here; nothing but relentless aggression on your part, > mirroring that you receive. There has never been any, repeat ANY, discussion during the last TWO YEARS AND A HALF by my fellow Bahais of the overwhelming EVIDENCE of Bahai censorship and oppression; again, more than a DECADE of evidence.... > : > > snip > : > spoken unfairly. I find the constant technique to portray > : > me as a megalomanic or paranoid quite offensive. > > Then stop being such a godawful control freak in this ng. > Yesterday there were 13 new posts, 11 from you. Not a single one > of the posts from you said anything new or constructive. You are > destroying what you worked so hard to create-- an open forum for > discussion of all POVs on Baha'i issues. How? By drowning the > entire ng in endless reposts. False. The Revised versions all contained a helpful new link to the most comprehensive and insightful essay to date on the tyranny that the Nine have wreaked upon Baha'u'llah's mild Teachings. Posting essential information for those lied to by my the UHJ and my fellow Bahais, usually only every 10 to 15 days, is not drowning this newsgroup, though the fundamentalists would like it to be perceived as such, while they themselves continue to refuse to acknowledge the lies, deceit, and tyranny of the UHJ itself. Consider and reflect carefully: it is a RECORD that dearly wish to suppress and have shown themselves repeatedly willing to stop at nothing to do so.... > : > > : > Similarly, the tactic of accusing me of spam for posting > : > my opinions > > Zillions of times, over and over, drowning out everything and > everyone else I'm not drowning out anything. For most of the time talk.religion.bahai has been available, I've posted usually very few messages per day, with the exception of those days when I post the record of Bahai tyranny, a record that now shall indeed endure. More of that, though, later.... > > is calculated to discredit the validity of my and > : > others' concerns regarding censorship in Bahai forums and > > Not on my part. I hereby complain that your behavior is > ruinous to this newsgroup, and also state that the concerns about > censorship seem valid. Only your response to those concerns-- > endless reposting, paranoid attacks on anyone who tires of your > behavior (e.g. Ron House), refusal to engage in discussion in a > respectful manner-- are invalid. NOT THE CONCERNS themselves. I haven't made paranoid attacks on anyone. You're free to think what you wish. There is, incidentally, much you don't know about on some particulars. Not everything that transpired took place in public view on arb or trb. I'm quite willing to engage in discussion when others are, and if the topic interests me, which is no more than what you and others are practice as well. > Richard and Fred, you deserve each other. But I don't think the > rest of us (except those who love to play your dehumanizing, > discussion-stifling games) deserve either of you. Well, I agree with you that Richard, and such of my fellow Bahais who operate as he does, is playing a dehumanizing game. I maintain that I indeed have often, even usually, been the object of those games. The EVIDENCE indeed exists on my website and the deja archives. > > STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP!!! I dearly wish my fellow Bahais would, but I highly doubt it. Such an event would require the UHJ to cease instructing the rank and file fanatics to attack and dehumanize any Bahai or non-Bahai who doesn't swallow their fundamentalist distortion of Baha'u'llah's unquestionable liberal and democratic Teachings. Such an event would require my fellow Bahais actually to acknowledge the long record of censorship and suppression so fully confront by Juan Cole in his book Modernity and the Millenium and his recent article: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > Fruitlessly venting, > > Paul I respect you, Paul. Thanks again for saying all this. That I don't share your views on some matters here will not deter me from continuing to regard you highly. You're a man of integrity on a newsgroup that has very few of them. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 20, 1999 7:46 AM Subject: Re: Revised: Bahai Bullying Fundamentalists One footnote to all of this. It should be observed that my fellow Bahais relentlessly seek and excel at changing the subject from the ISSUES of Bahai censorship and tyranny to attacks and accusations on the VICTIMS of their techniques. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Patrick Henry wrote in message news:7i0rrq$pdo$1@news.laserlink.net... > K. Paul Johnson wrote in message > news:3742e599.0@vlinsvr... > > Richard Boyle (richard@penetics.com) wrote: > > : More FredBot spam. Can't the programmer come up with anything other > than > > : this turgid litany of lies, innuendoes, half-truths, propaganda, > paranoid > > : ravings and downright falsehoods? > > > > Dehumanizing one's opponent so absolutely and relentlessly is the > > sign of a complete refusal to deal with his issues. If you > > accuse someone of lies, downright falsehoods (what's the diff?), > > paranoid ravings, etc., your accusation carries no weight when > > delivered without an iota of argument or evidence. > > First, thank you, Paul, for everything you say in this message, > including your reprimands. The approach of "dehumanizing," > as you put it, is very much part of the procedure some of my > fellow Bahais have been using against me and others for a > very long time. It does constitute a "complete refusal" to deal > with the issues. It has left me for easily at least a year, perhaps > two, with no alternative but to create as permanent a record > of events as can be done on Usenet. > > > > > Fred's relentlessly aggressive tactics are disgusting. So are > > yours. Both of you are making Baha'i look bad to anyone who > > drops by: > > My hope is that I expose the truth, as the UHJ has wrought it > (correct use of that word, by the way) for the last decade or so. > If Bahai comes out looking bad, the blame lies with the UHJ, > and its marshalling its forces as it has. I don't consider my tactics > relentlessly aggressive nor disgusting; tenacious is the word that > I would use. Fortunately, I'm a relative young man still and have > decades yet to defend Baha'u'llah's Teachings from the nine > bastardizers on Mt. Carmel. > > > : > > : Patrick Henry wrote: > > : > > : > I'm alarmed at the recent Bahai attempts at character > > : > assassination, ridicule, and generally portraying me > > : > and others as disturbed individuals. > > > > This would appear to be somewhere between the 10th and 20th time > > you have posted this. What purpose is served? There's no > > discussion here; nothing but relentless aggression on your part, > > mirroring that you receive. > > There has never been any, repeat ANY, discussion > during the last TWO YEARS AND A HALF by my > fellow Bahais of the overwhelming EVIDENCE of Bahai > censorship and oppression; again, more than a DECADE of > evidence.... > > > : > > > snip > > : > spoken unfairly. I find the constant technique to portray > > : > me as a megalomanic or paranoid quite offensive. > > > > Then stop being such a godawful control freak in this ng. > > Yesterday there were 13 new posts, 11 from you. Not a single one > > of the posts from you said anything new or constructive. You are > > destroying what you worked so hard to create-- an open forum for > > discussion of all POVs on Baha'i issues. How? By drowning the > > entire ng in endless reposts. > > False. The Revised versions all contained a helpful > new link to the most comprehensive and insightful essay > to date on the tyranny that the Nine have wreaked upon > Baha'u'llah's mild Teachings. Posting essential information > for those lied to by my the UHJ and my fellow Bahais, usually > only every 10 to 15 days, is not drowning this newsgroup, > though the fundamentalists would like it to be perceived as > such, while they themselves continue to refuse to acknowledge > the lies, deceit, and tyranny of the UHJ itself. > > Consider and reflect carefully: it is a RECORD that > dearly wish to suppress and have shown themselves > repeatedly willing to stop at nothing to do so.... > > > : > > > : > Similarly, the tactic of accusing me of spam for posting > > : > my opinions > > > > Zillions of times, over and over, drowning out everything and > > everyone else > > I'm not drowning out anything. For most of the time > talk.religion.bahai has been available, I've posted > usually very few messages per day, with the exception > of those days when I post the record of Bahai tyranny, > a record that now shall indeed endure. More of that, > though, later.... > > > > > is calculated to discredit the validity of my and > > : > others' concerns regarding censorship in Bahai forums and > > > > Not on my part. I hereby complain that your behavior is > > ruinous to this newsgroup, and also state that the concerns about > > censorship seem valid. Only your response to those concerns-- > > endless reposting, paranoid attacks on anyone who tires of your > > behavior (e.g. Ron House), refusal to engage in discussion in a > > respectful manner-- are invalid. NOT THE CONCERNS themselves. > > I haven't made paranoid attacks on anyone. You're free > to think what you wish. There is, incidentally, much you > don't know about on some particulars. Not everything > that transpired took place in public view on arb or trb. > > I'm quite willing to engage in discussion when others are, > and if the topic interests me, which is no more than what > you and others are practice as well. > > > > Richard and Fred, you deserve each other. But I don't think the > > rest of us (except those who love to play your dehumanizing, > > discussion-stifling games) deserve either of you. > > Well, I agree with you that Richard, and such of my > fellow Bahais who operate as he does, is playing a > dehumanizing game. I maintain that I indeed have often, > even usually, been the object of those games. The EVIDENCE > indeed exists on my website and the deja archives. > > > > > STOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOPSTOP!!! > > I dearly wish my fellow Bahais would, but I highly > doubt it. Such an event would require the UHJ > to cease instructing the rank and file fanatics to > attack and dehumanize any Bahai or non-Bahai > who doesn't swallow their fundamentalist distortion > of Baha'u'llah's unquestionable liberal and democratic > Teachings. Such an event would require my fellow > Bahais actually to acknowledge the long record of > censorship and suppression so fully confront by Juan > Cole in his book Modernity and the Millenium and > his recent article: > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > > > > Fruitlessly venting, > > > > Paul > > I respect you, Paul. Thanks again for saying all this. > That I don't share your views on some matters here > will not deter me from continuing to regard you highly. > You're a man of integrity on a newsgroup that has very > few of them. > > -- > Patrick Henry > "Give me liberty or give me death." > Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 21, 1999 6:49 AM Subject: Re: The Cause will triumph! K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:374467a2.0@vlinsvr... > Brian F. Walker (bfwkendo@netvigator.com) wrote: > : Dear All, > : > : Three cheers for the triumph of light and truth! > > Well, we can all salute that. Problem is, some people think > light and truth are the privileged possession of adherents to > their oen belief system. Or their own narrow interpretation of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. > : > On this NG, we have > : begun to act, to reclaim this group from those who have chosen to oppose > : Baha'u'llah or His teachings. > > This is a kind of thinking that I hope some Baha'is, at any rate, > will oppose. Who is the "we" who have begun to act, who are > "those" who have "chosen" to oppose Baha'u'llah and his > teachings? You are taking a very territorial tone here, and in > plain fact no Baha'i faction can "reclaim" this group because it > was never "claimed" in the first place. This is a *public space* > and one in which it behooves Baha'is not to lump everyone who > doesn't accept their religion into a category of "enemy." (Or, at > least everyone who actually says what s/he doesn't accept and > why.) It really is the kind of insular, fanatical thinking the UHJ inculcates in the rank and file. I highly don't many Bahais oppose this mentality. Indeed, most, in my experience, believe fundamentalism IS the Bahai Faith and fail to recognize to what an extent it is truly a departure from his clear and evident text. You see, there really is no public space within the Bahai Faith. Every, absolutely every, forum is controlled and manipulated to produce the result Bahais of a narrow view believe it should. Again, this is why they opposed the creation of talk.religion.bahai in the first place and continue to seek ways to smear me and others who view things differently from them. Anyone who has followed along at all surely must realize by now that such Bahais view me and other honest people of conscience as enemies. It is because we are considered enemies that they justified to themselves the unethical tactics they have so often used in their manipulation of soc.religoin.bahai, bahai-discuss, AOL, alt and talk.religion.bahai, and so on. > Extrapolating from this NG to the world at > : large, I see that I must act now, pray and work harder, both as an > : individual and as a member of a community, to fulfil the goals set and > : turn this world into a garden of delight. Perhaps then Abdu'l-Baha will > : have a smiling face when I stand before Him? > : > : Seems to me that this is worth doing. Any one care to join in? > > Happy to join an effort to create a world in which people of > opposing viewpoints can discuss them in harmony and mutual > respect. But if it's an effort to "sanitize" the ng on behalf of > any belief system, to polarize "us" and "them," to "reclaim" the > ng on behalf of a partisan, sectarian agenda-- no way. > > PJ Paul, I feel you're quite right here in realizing that Bahais really aren't interested in creating a world in which other people's opinions would be respected. When differing views are respected, an effort is made to engage and understand them. I long ago became aware of Bahai indifference to any opinion other than the most fundamentalist, which is why I no longer waste my time attempting to discuss anything with them. I believe it's more productive to preserve the record of their deceit and tyranny so that others who are open minded may read it and decide for themselves. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, May 21, 1999 2:08 PM Subject: Re: Stealing Bahai Chairman K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:37458326.0@vlinsvr... Here's what I think I understand: it was > right and necessary for the Administrative Order spokesman to say > what he did, but wrong and unnecessary for critics of the AO to > try to figure out what is really going on behind the smokescreen > of vague character assassination. Character assassination is the way the Bahai AO always operates. Where else do you think the fundamentalists on soc.religion.bahai and here learn it? > > Is that it? > > PJ > > PS-- Needless to say I don't support Fred's characterization of > the matter, which is further character assassination. Nelson obviously got caught STEALING money from a dead widow's estate. How's that character assassination? Incidentally, anyone wishing to understand Henderson should read Robert Hayden's poem "Witch Doctor," which W. H. Auden thought highly of. It perfectly captures the dynamics of Henderson's personality as I witnessed his performance once at an annual convention in about 1990 or so. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 1999 7:14 AM Subject: Re: Questons And Answers - Bahai K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:374c3b33.0@vlinsvr... > Dear Robert, > > You manage to be 100% partisan, levying harsh blame at those who > have discussed the Henderson letter, and yet sound "nice"-- a > skill which some of your coreligionists might profitably learn > from you. But better yet would be some sense of balance, some > willingness to see that there is fault all around this issue. Many Bahais are very skillful at this type of backbiting and ignoring others' points of view, as well as their own faults. Little especially excels at such duplicity. > : > : The original letter gave precious few facts (assuming that it was not > : invented and was accurate). > > But it certainly conveyed a tone of the harshest condemnation, > using words that can only raise many questions about a) what > Judge Nelson did and how it related to his official duties and b) > Mr. Henderson's choice of how to communicate about this subject > and what that says about him and the NSA. > > The subsequent posts discussed the actions, > > which is of course what would be expected in such a situation > > : drew conclusions, > > some of which were obvious: 1) if "restitution" was made then there > must have been some abuse of trust involving finances 2) Mr. > Henderson had *some* motive for handling the matter in this way > rather than in a far less inflammatory manner. > > generated additional rumors, > > in the case of Mr. Scholl the proper phrase would probably be > "provided additional background and information"-- based I > presume on his family connection to the accused. > > distorted the alleged > : facts, and worse. > > What was done that was "worse" than all the above? > > Considering that one of the individuals in question > : is a retired Superior Court Judge and a practicing attorney, one has to > : admire the err, impetuousness (I looked it up, so don't tell me this is > : not a word) and zeal of some of the participants . > > True enough, although for a person in Nelson's position to draw > further attention to the issue by suing someone over a Usenet > posting would be pretty counterproductive. In fact, it would > probably draw national attention to the Faith in a way neither > you nor he would like-- but that might suit Fred just fine. > : > : A great deal was said, but today, we don't know any more about the > : subject(s) of this conversation than we knew before it started. Nada. > : Zip. Butkus. > > That depends on your definition of "know." That there are NSA > factions and infighting that would have motivated the harsh > language of Mr. Henderson is not, by the nature of things, easy > to prove. No one who is party to it will talk about it publicly. > Unfortunately, Juan Cole is often placed in the > position of stating things he cannot prove about Baha'i > administration and how it works. Why? Because his sources > are scared to say anything on the record, for fear of the > reprisals that might ensue. I believe that he has made an > attempt to explain the situation using the information available > to him, which is far more than can be said thus far of any official > Baha'i source. The culture of secrecy does tend to always give > Baha'is the out of saying "We don't really *know* so we shouldn't > discuss it." Which ignores the questions of "*Why* don't we > know? *What* don't we know? What *else* don't we know?" > : > : will remain in the net, perhaps longer than the authors, reminders of > : the absolute necessity for unity, to love our fellow man, and leave off > : judging him to Someone Else. > > Someone Else being Mr. Henderson? To me the big issue here is > the way "unity and love" have manifested in his handling of the > situation-- and the question of when and if any further > explanation will be provided. > > PJ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 1999 7:17 AM Subject: Re: Questons And Answers - Bahai What has your experience been that makes you doubt the Bahai administration would share such information? You might want to note that Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm macleod wrote in message news:927744644.7160.0.nnrp-06.c2de8324@news.demon.co.uk... > I too hope that the personal details of this particular incident are quickly > forgotten. > I also hope that the facts, as best as they can be determined, and given as > much anonymity as possible are given very wide publicity by the Bahai > administrative order themselves. I hope that if I ever again attend an > 'institute' or other meeting about the Administrative Order or the Bahai > electoral system, this incident is included in a statistical summary of the > results of the voting that we do every year. I hope also that I will be > provided with details as to turnover on Bahai bodies at various levels, > reasons for resignations, salaries paid etc. In fact I hope I will be given > the same kind of information about the administration of the Faith I belong > to as I would about any other organisation which is not ashamed of itself. I > hope this, but on experience to date I doubt it. > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 1999 7:38 AM Subject: Seekers Seek the Truth I've been contacted by a few people lately investigating the Bahai Faith and seeking information about it. It seems to me all truth loving souls should reflect carefully on the nature of the tactics now commonly used in the Bahai Faith. Professor Juan Cole's Panopticon paper especially surveys well what has been taking place behind the scenes during the last decade or so: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, May 29, 1999 8:06 AM Subject: Re: WARNING Regarding Bahai censorship on AOL, Mr. Mahdi is by and large quite right about Mark Foster and the tactics used on AOL. Please see my post Bahai Tyranny on AOL for further details. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Mr Mahdi wrote in message news:19990528011924.17697.00005829@ng-ba1.aol.com... > >I have, and I will again, complain to the service providers of any > >persons who post attacks on particular individuals to this newsgroup. If > >you want to discuss topics RELATED TO THE BAHA'I FAITH, fine. The > >behaviour of AOL is not a subject within this newsgroup's charter. > > This is crazy. In an "unmoderated" forum such as this, bahais still want to > censor people. This is beyond comprehension. I would like for you to go to > alt.religion.islam and see the vicious attacks on Islam, people, etc. Why > bahais are so into censorship proves how cult like they are. I am not document > AOL you idiot, I am documenting bahai censorship at AOL. > Mahdi ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, May 29, 1999 1:16 PM Subject: Re: You were warned before wrote in message news:7inkuo$jgf$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Greetings! > > In article <19990528011924.17697.00005829@ng-ba1.aol.com>, > mrmahdi@aol.com (Mr Mahdi) wrote: > > >I have, and I will again, complain to the service providers of any > > >persons who post attacks on particular individuals to this newsgroup. > If > > >you want to discuss topics RELATED TO THE BAHA'I FAITH, fine. The > > >behaviour of AOL is not a subject within this newsgroup's charter. > > I agree w/ Ron. I don't. Bahai censorship on AOL is relevant to this newsgroup. Mr. Mahdi has every right to bring it up. > > > This is crazy. > > The charter describes the purpose of the forum. If you wish to use the > group for other purposes you are abusing the net. That is netiquette, > not craziness. > > TRB Charter > The charter, culled from the vote result announcement: > > All topics or ideas relevant to the Baha'i faith -- its history, > teachings, theology, etc. -- would be appropriate areas for discussion. > > Talk.religion.bahai fills the need for a fully open and universally > accessible Internet forum about the Baha'i Faith. Postings may take any > point of view with regard to the Baha'i Faith. While this allows > criticism, it also fully opens the door for enquirers to see with their > own eyes and not through the eyes of their neighbors, asking questions > and reading replies from anyone who is interested in their question. > > Readers are asked to observe standard netiquette in their use of this > newsgroup. > > Readers are asked to observe Baha'i standards of conduct and not to > start or prolong flamewars in the group, but to focus instead on > articles and threads written in more moderate terms. > > The posting of articles not relevant to the Baha'i Faith is prohibited. > Large ASCII graphics, large binaries, pornography, spam, and any > postings of a purely personal or commercial nature are prohibited. To > facilitate viewing in news readers that are not HTML-capable, > HTML-formatted postings are strongly discouraged. > > Cross-posting to irrelevant groups is also discouraged, and readers are > encouraged to redirect follow-ups to reduce excessive cross-posting. > Readers may also post articles that have been rejected from > soc.religion.bahai, so long as they conform to this charter. > > > >In an "unmoderated" forum such as this, bahais still > want to > > censor people. > > Guess again. The purpose of the newsgroup is discussion of the Baha'i > faith. If you wish to complain to AOL about their screwy rules, go to > AOL. If you wish to vent about AOL, go to an AOL newsgroup. You may > take any POV you choose on the Baha'i faith, but it appears you started > numerous threads accusing someone of being a racist, etc. You are off > topic. Censorship has become the very essence of Bahai "community" life and is within the terms of the Charter for trb. Bahais manipulated and distorted the rules of AOL to suppress messages from me and Mahdi,as well as others. In an unmoderated newsgroup such as this, such facts are pertinent, not off-topic, though Bahai fundamentalists will say otherwise, finding flimsy pretexts for deriding Mahdi. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > > This is beyond comprehension. > > It may be beyond your recollection, but it is not beyond comprehension. > > >> From: kohli@mail.ameritel.net > >> Subject: Re: Juan Cole and the "Orientalists" > >> Date: 13 Mar 1999 00:00:00 GMT > >> Message-ID: <7cchd9$hgc$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> > >> Newsgroups: talk.religion.bahai > > >> The personal attacks on a religious forum might be more credible if > they > >> didn't seem contradictory, of course, they'd still be a bit off > topic. > > > I would like for you to > go to > > alt.religion.islam and see the vicious attacks on Islam, people, etc. > > If people want to ignore the charter on alt.religion.islam, that is > another issue. > > > Why > > bahais are so into censorship proves how cult like they are. > > I don't think it has been demonstrated that Baha'is are into censorship. > You were asked to avoid personal attacks. You have started threads off > with personal attacks on Juan Cole, Susan Maneck and Mark Foster. I > won't ask why you are into personal attacks on people. I can understand > a few words said in the heat of discussion - but you typically start > these 'discussions' w/ accusations of 'racist'. > > Speaking of censorhip, are you suggesting that the gaysher troll should > _not_ have been reported to its ISP? > > > I am not > document > > AOL you idiot, I am documenting bahai censorship at AOL. > > You haven't even documented that the Rasul Muhammad (PBUH) was insulted. > > Your allegation of racism on the internet remanins a non-starter: you > don't know if I look Indian or Irish, nor do I know if you are Irish or > Indian - this is English language text. Nobody knows what 'race' you > may be other than human. Islam is submission to God, not a race. > > Blessings! > - Pat > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, May 29, 1999 1:17 PM Subject: Re: You were warned before Non-Bahai observers might really want to note the manner in which fundamentalist Bahais attempt to silence opinions they don't care to hear, or have others hear.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm wrote in message news:7inkuo$jgf$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Greetings! > > In article <19990528011924.17697.00005829@ng-ba1.aol.com>, > mrmahdi@aol.com (Mr Mahdi) wrote: > > >I have, and I will again, complain to the service providers of any > > >persons who post attacks on particular individuals to this newsgroup. > If > > >you want to discuss topics RELATED TO THE BAHA'I FAITH, fine. The > > >behaviour of AOL is not a subject within this newsgroup's charter. > > I agree w/ Ron. > > > This is crazy. > > The charter describes the purpose of the forum. If you wish to use the > group for other purposes you are abusing the net. That is netiquette, > not craziness. > > TRB Charter > The charter, culled from the vote result announcement: > > All topics or ideas relevant to the Baha'i faith -- its history, > teachings, theology, etc. -- would be appropriate areas for discussion. > > Talk.religion.bahai fills the need for a fully open and universally > accessible Internet forum about the Baha'i Faith. Postings may take any > point of view with regard to the Baha'i Faith. While this allows > criticism, it also fully opens the door for enquirers to see with their > own eyes and not through the eyes of their neighbors, asking questions > and reading replies from anyone who is interested in their question. > > Readers are asked to observe standard netiquette in their use of this > newsgroup. > > Readers are asked to observe Baha'i standards of conduct and not to > start or prolong flamewars in the group, but to focus instead on > articles and threads written in more moderate terms. > > The posting of articles not relevant to the Baha'i Faith is prohibited. > Large ASCII graphics, large binaries, pornography, spam, and any > postings of a purely personal or commercial nature are prohibited. To > facilitate viewing in news readers that are not HTML-capable, > HTML-formatted postings are strongly discouraged. > > Cross-posting to irrelevant groups is also discouraged, and readers are > encouraged to redirect follow-ups to reduce excessive cross-posting. > Readers may also post articles that have been rejected from > soc.religion.bahai, so long as they conform to this charter. > > > >In an "unmoderated" forum such as this, bahais still > want to > > censor people. > > Guess again. The purpose of the newsgroup is discussion of the Baha'i > faith. If you wish to complain to AOL about their screwy rules, go to > AOL. If you wish to vent about AOL, go to an AOL newsgroup. You may > take any POV you choose on the Baha'i faith, but it appears you started > numerous threads accusing someone of being a racist, etc. You are off > topic. > > > This is beyond comprehension. > > It may be beyond your recollection, but it is not beyond comprehension. > > >> From: kohli@mail.ameritel.net > >> Subject: Re: Juan Cole and the "Orientalists" > >> Date: 13 Mar 1999 00:00:00 GMT > >> Message-ID: <7cchd9$hgc$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com> > >> Newsgroups: talk.religion.bahai > > >> The personal attacks on a religious forum might be more credible if > they > >> didn't seem contradictory, of course, they'd still be a bit off > topic. > > > I would like for you to > go to > > alt.religion.islam and see the vicious attacks on Islam, people, etc. > > If people want to ignore the charter on alt.religion.islam, that is > another issue. > > > Why > > bahais are so into censorship proves how cult like they are. > > I don't think it has been demonstrated that Baha'is are into censorship. > You were asked to avoid personal attacks. You have started threads off > with personal attacks on Juan Cole, Susan Maneck and Mark Foster. I > won't ask why you are into personal attacks on people. I can understand > a few words said in the heat of discussion - but you typically start > these 'discussions' w/ accusations of 'racist'. > > Speaking of censorhip, are you suggesting that the gaysher troll should > _not_ have been reported to its ISP? > > > I am not > document > > AOL you idiot, I am documenting bahai censorship at AOL. > > You haven't even documented that the Rasul Muhammad (PBUH) was insulted. > > Your allegation of racism on the internet remanins a non-starter: you > don't know if I look Indian or Irish, nor do I know if you are Irish or > Indian - this is English language text. Nobody knows what 'race' you > may be other than human. Islam is submission to God, not a race. > > Blessings! > - Pat > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, May 29, 1999 1:23 PM Subject: Re: Reconstruction of Human Society: I suppose you mean this collection of irrelevant quotations to be related in some way to Professor Cole's article but I note you fail to address even a single point that he actually makes in his essay. https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm A common Bahai technique.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Mesbah Javid <11111174@3web.net> wrote in message news:7il5t4$d8r$1@iceman.tac.net... A review of Dr. Juan Cole's article at: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm about American Baha'i community, and comparing its contents with those exalted mandates specified by the Universal House of Justice for its destiny, gives us a vision as to where the American Baha'i community stands at its road to spiritual progress: Reconstruction of Human Society: "The Baha'i work for the reconstruction of human society can thus be seen to comprise three streams: the most fundamental is the spreading of the Word of God, the winning of the allegiance of ever-greater numbers of men and women to the Cause of Baha'u'llah and the establishment of the Baha'i Administrative Order; concurrent with this is the contribution to human advancement and to the progress of the Baha'i community made by individual Baha'is in the pursuit of their daily work; and then there are the projects and institutions for human advancement launched and operated by Baha'i Spiritual Assemblies as their resources grow and the range of their activities expands. It is for the Universal House of Justice to direct the energies of the believers in these various channels and to make known what activities are timely and have priority..." [UHJ, 21 Aug. 1977] Darkest Phase of History and Mass Conversion: "The Universal House of Justice is aware of the magnitude of the problems that the Baha'i communities face, but as the response to the Message of Baha'u'llah increases and as the Baha'i community throughout the world shows its ability to overcome these problems, the attention of men and women of every stratum of society will increasingly be drawn to the Faith. The most urgent need now--so late is the hour--is for the Baha'is to spread the Message, while they are still able to do so, to the largest possible number of their fellow human beings, simultaneously expanding and consolidating the Baha'i community as quickly as they can with the resources at their disposal. As mankind passes through the darkest phase of its history, the Baha'i community will have to face not only entry by troops, which it is now experiencing, but, before too long, mass conversion." [UHJ, 21 Aug. 1977] Role of Baha'i Scholar: "Scholarship has a high station in the Baha'i teachings, and Baha'i scholars have a great responsibility. We believe that they would do well to concentrate upon the ascertainment of truth--of a fuller understanding of the subject of their scholarship, whatever its field--not upon exposing and attacking the error of others, whether they be of non-Baha'i or of their fellow believers. Inevitably the demonstration of truth exposes the falsity of error, but the emphasis and motive are important." [UHJ, 3 Jan. 1979] "In scientific investigation when searching after the facts of any matter a Baha'i must, of course, be entirely openminded, but in his interpretation of the facts and his evaluation of evidence we do not see by what logic he can ignore the truth of the Baha'i Revelation which he has already accepted; to do so would, we feel, be both hypocritical and unscholarly. "Undoubtedly the fact that Baha'i scholars of the history and teachings of the Faith believe in the Faith that they are studying will be a grave flaw in the eyes of many non-Baha'i academics, whose own dogmatic materialism passes without comment because it is fashionable; but this difficulty is one that Baha'i scholars share with their fellow believers in many fields of human endeavor. "If Baha'i scholars will try to avoid this snare of allowing a divorce between their faith and their reason, we are sure that they will also avoid many of the occasions for tension arising between themselves and their fellow believers." [UHJ, 3 Jan. 1979] The Most Wrong Scholar: "One danger is faced by only a few: those whose work requires them to read the writings of Covenant-breakers. They have to remember that they are by no means immune to the spiritual poison that such works distill, and that they must approach this aspect of their work with great caution, alert to the danger that it presents. The second danger, which may well be as insidious, is that of spiritual pride and arrogance. Baha'i scholars, especially those who are scholars in the teachings and history of the Faith itself, would be well advised to remember that scholars have often been most wrong when they have been most certain that they were right. The virtues of moderation, humility and humor in regard to one's own work and ideas are a potent protection against this danger." [UHJ, 3 Jan. 1979] Non-Baha'i vs. Baha'i Historian: "A Baha'i scholar conscious of this distinction will not make the mistake of regarding the sayings and beliefs of certain Baha'is at any one time as being the Baha'i Faith. The Baha'i Faith is the Revelation of Baha'u'llah: His Own Words as interpreted by Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian. It is a revelation of such staggering magnitude that no Baha'i at this early stage in Baha'i history can rightly claim to have more than a partial and imperfect understanding of it. Thus, Baha'i historians would see the overcoming of early misconceptions held by the Baha'i community, or by parts of the Baha'i community, not as "developments of the Baha'i Faith"--as a non-Baha'i historian might well regard them--but as growth of that community's understanding of the Baha'i Revelation." [UHJ, 3 Jan. 1979] Psychiatric Treatment and Reorientation of Some New Baha'is: "As you are well aware, many people come into the Faith needing psychiatric treatment, and it is often very difficult for them to find a psychiatrist who will not urge them to some course of behavior which is contrary to the teachings of the Faith. There are a number of Baha'i psychologists and psychiatrists who are endeavoring to develop their skills in the light of the Revelation of Baha'u'llah, and use can certainly be made of their services where available..." [UHJ to US NSA, 2 Dec. 1976] "In addition to specific problems of child education, you instance the difficulties of local communities which are faced with the task of reorienting and integrating into the Cause new believers who enter with all sorts of immoral and even criminal tendencies from their former life. This is indeed difficult, but this is the very stuff of the work of the Cause. The Baha'i Faith not only provides teachings in accordance with which the behavior of human beings can be reformed, but also makes available a spiritual power which reinforces the devoted efforts of every believer, whether veteran or neophyte." [UHJ to US NSA, 2 Dec. 1976] Spiritual Life of Local Baha'i Community: "Thus, what is most imperative for the promotion of the spiritual life of local Baha'i communities is the stimulation of the believers to increase their devotion to Baha'u'llah, their absolute reliance upon Him and upon His love, and their determination to apply His teachings in every aspect of their lives. This stimulation can be conveyed from heart to heart and mind to mind by devoted Baha'is without the need of formal training..." [UHJ to US NSA, 2 Dec. 1976] "Hope is welling up in my anxious, overburdened heart that the North American Bahá'í Community may yet emerge triumphant over the prevailing crisis, demonstrate its capacity to preserve its hard-won prizes and redeem its pledges through a further display of its qualities of unconquerable faith, unbreakable solidarity, dauntless valor and heroic self-sacrifice, and vindicate its right to primacy in the world community of the followers of Bahá'u'lláh. High water mark is still unattained notwithstanding the mounting tide of enthusiastic response displayed by an aroused community. Dangerous passage now forded in this eleventh-hour campaign. I am fervently praying that further intensification of effort, sustained, coordinated, consecrated and unanimously exerted, will sweep its members on crest of the wave to total victory. I feel assured that cumulative efforts of participants in emergency campaign launched by entire community will increasingly attract the promised inflowing grace of the holy Author of its destinies, will demonstrate afresh its worthiness of the paternal care of its divine Founder, will win added commendation from its sister communities of the Eastern Hemisphere, deepen the admiration and inspire the emulation of its daughter communities in Latin America and the European continent, and strengthen the attachment and reinforce the brotherly affection of its Guardian. " [Shoghi Effendi, 13 Feb. 1948] AMERICA PASSING THROUGH CRISIS "Moreover, the country of which it forms a part is passing through a crisis which, in its spiritual, moral, social and political aspects, is of extreme seriousness--a seriousness which to a superficial observer is liable to be dangerously underestimated. "The steady and alarming deterioration in the standard of morality as exemplified by the appalling increase of crime, by political corruption in ever widening and ever higher circles, by the loosening of the sacred ties of marriage, by the inordinate craving for pleasure and diversion, and by the marked and progressive slackening of parental control, is no doubt the most arresting and distressing aspect of the decline that has set in, and can be clearly perceived, in the fortunes of the entire nation." [Shoghi Effendi, 28 Jul. 1954] "The American nation, of which the community of the Most Great Name forms as yet a negligible and infinitesimal part, stands, indeed, from whichever angle one observes its immediate fortunes, in grave peril. The woes and tribulations which threaten it are partly avoidable, but mostly inevitable and God-sent, for by reason of them a government and people clinging tenaciously to the obsolescent doctrine of absolute sovereignty and upholding a political system, manifestly at variance with the needs of a world already contracted into a neighborhood and crying out for unity, will find itself purged of its anachronistic conceptions, and prepared to play a preponderating role, as foretold by `Abdu'l-Bahá, in the hoisting of the standard of the Lesser Peace, in the unification of mankind, and in the establishment of a world federal government on this planet. These same fiery tribulations will not only firmly weld the American nation to its sister nations in both hemispheres, but will through their cleansing effect, purge it thoroughly of the accumulated dross which ingrained racial prejudice, rampant materialism, widespread ungodliness and moral laxity have combined, in the course of successive generations, to produce, and which have prevented her thus far from assuming the role of world spiritual leadership forecast by `Abdu'l-Bahá's unerring pen--a role which she is bound to fulfill through travail and sorrow." [Shoghi Effendi, 28 Jul. 1954] AMERICAN BAHÁ'ÍS STAND AT CROSSROADS "The American Bahá'í Community, the leaven destined to leaven the whole, cannot hope, at this critical juncture in the fortunes of a struggling, perilously situated, spiritually moribund nation, to either escape the trials with which this nation is confronted, nor claim to be wholly immune from the evils that stain its character. "At so critical a period, at so challenging an hour, the members of a community, invested by `Abdu'l-Bahá with a primacy which can, through neglect and apathy, be allowed to lose its vital power and driving force, are immersed in a task, and are faced with responsibilities, which a World Spiritual Crusade, the third and greatest collective enterprise embarked upon in American Bahá'í history, has thrust upon them before the eyes of their admiring and expectant sister communities throughout the world. They now stand at the crossroads, unable to relax for a moment, or hesitate as to which road they should tread, or to allow any decline in the high standard they have, for no less than six decades, undeviatingly upheld. Nay, if this primacy is to be safeguarded and enhanced, a consecration, not only on the part of a chosen few, to every single objective of the Ten-Year Plan to which they are now pledged, and a pouring out of substance, not only by those of limited means, but by the richest and wealthiest, in a degree involving the truest sacrifice, for the purpose of insuring the attainment of the aims and purposes of the Plan in its present phase of development, are imperative and can brook no delay. "The mighty and laudable effort exerted, by a considerable number of pioneers, in the course of the opening phase of this world-encircling Crusade, in the virgin territories of the globe, must, if this primacy is to remain unimpaired, be increased, doubled, nay trebled, and must manifest itself not only in foreign fields where the prizes so laboriously won during the last twelve months must, at whatever sacrifice, be meticulously preserved, but throughout the entire length and breadth of the American Union, and particularly in the goal cities, where hitherto the work has stagnated, and which must, in the year now entered, become the scene of the finest exploits which the home front has yet seen. A veritable exodus from the large cities where a considerable number of believers have, over a period of years, congregated, both on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, as well as in the heart of the country, and where, owing to the tempo and the distractions of city life, the progress of the Faith has been retarded, must signalize the inauguration of this most intensive and challenging phase of the Crusade on the home front. Most certainly and emphatically must the lead be given by the two focal centers of Bahá'í activity which rank among the oldest of and occupy the most honored position among, the cities throughout the American Union, the one as the mother city of the North American continent, the other named by `Abdu'l-Bahá the City of the Covenant. Indeed, so grave are the exigencies of the present hour, and so critical the political position of the country, that were a bare fifteen adult Bahá'ís to be left in each of these cities, over which unsuspected dangers are hanging, it would still be regarded as adequate for the maintenance of their local spiritual assemblies." [Shoghi Effendi, 28 Jul. 1954 ---------- From: Juan R Cole 1[SMTP:jrcole@umich.edu] Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 1999 7:01 AM To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Out of email contact (Re: FYI) Juan Cole is out of email contact until June 6 ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 1999 6:46 AM Subject: Re: HTML Postings They haven't bothered me. In fact, a little color kind spices things up around here. Probably most news readers are HTML capable anymore. Regardless, this is an unmoderated newsgroup, and if people wish to post using HTML, it's ultimately up to them. Notice the word used in the charter is "discouraged" not prohibited. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Ron House wrote in message news:37532B17.208950AE@usq.edu.au... > Some postings have recently appeared in HTML. Just a reminder that the > newsgroup charter says: > > : To facilitate viewing in news readers that are not > : HTML-capable, HTML-formatted postings are strongly discouraged. > > -- > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > > You can only be right if you have the courage to be wrong. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 1999 6:53 AM Subject: Re: Mark Foster's hatred of Mahdi Mr Mahdi wrote in message news:19990528125126.01859.00000822@ng-ck1.aol.com... > >Personally, I find the requirements that AOL's religious fora contain > >only supportive messages to be unreasonable and unacceptable, so I > >wouldn't use them. There should be some room for discussion of > >opposition, as long as it's conducted in a rational, intelligent > >matter. For examples of such topics here on t.r.b and a.r.b, look at > >the occasional threads on the resurrection of Jesus, where Dale Grider > >advocates a traditional Christian viewpoint and Pat Kohli and John > >Noland are defending the Baha'i interpretations of the Resurrection. > >I wouldn't have any problem with that discussion taking place on the > >AOL Baha'i forum. > > Roger, the reason why I am posting this here because I am documenting > censorship and harassment by bahais like Mark Foster. This has nothing to do > with AOL policy. Bahais in the very same message boards have called me punk, > bully, thug, terrorist, fundamentalist, ex-con, etc. Calling names is a AOL > TOS violation, but Mark Fosters allows it. There is not justification for the > above insults and nicknames to be used on me. It is against AOL TOS and > against common courtesy. Like I said before, non-bahais like Nadle and > Christine challenges the bahai faith all the time, Christine constantly comes > and complains why women are not allowed in the UHJ. Those posts are never > removed and sent to TOS, although these posts were "arguing with the bahais." I've witnessed all of the above on AOL by Mark Foster and other Bahais. Mahdi is quite truthfully reporting the way in which AOL is abused by the Bahais who controled the forums there. Susan Maneck referred to my views as "garbage" with impunity, Foster permitting it. I heard many other such insults of myself or others from Bahais and often complained of the double standard being used by Bahais on AOL. > > Since I was commissioned to do bigger and better things, my presence in the > message boards has decreased in the last few days. I am regular posting the > the soc.religion.islam Newsgroup, so I am not wasting my time preaching to a > bunch of brain dead blind faith having cultish personality simpletons that the > bahai message boards have. > > People like Ron House are also examples of bahai censorship. Imagine in a > "unmorderated" forum, bahais like Ron House still wants censorship. This is > beyond crazy. I suggest that he goes to alt.religion.islam or any other > unmoderate newsgroup and see the chaos over there. > Mahdi Ron House was never really behind the creation of talk.religion.bahai. In fact, most of the Bahais, probably all, involved at one time or another were basically moles attempting to defeat it from the inside. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 1999 7:01 AM To: Juan Cole Subject: FYI On the contrary, Dr. Cole's article covers many trivial events in the struggling life of a Bah'i community toward maturation. His article is very appealing to an illitertae audience who are unaware of the glorious and exalted goals set for the American Baha'i community by the Universal House of Justice based on the Will of Abdu'l-Baha and the beloved Guardian. Unaware of such an exalted future, dominated by a cult of faithless scholars who only utilize "reason" without "faith", the noth American Baha'i community is turned into arena of struggle for dominace of egotistical, self-centered, arrogant, power-seeking individuals. However, to the faithful ones of that community these events are but the mental tests promised by Abdu'l-Baha which in their due course will purge that community from dross of these contaminations, but in this process how many a dried leaf must fall off the tree of the Faith, can only be answered in the near future. In the following quotes, the faithful is encouraged to have patience and to follow a specific divine guideline until the community is cleansed for its ulimate destiny. To which group each one of us wishes to belong, is absolutely a matter of our God-given free will. Mesbah Javid. --------------------------------------------------------------- Patrick Henry wrote in message news:7ip7ql$6ma$1@remarQ.com... I suppose you mean this collection of irrelevant quotations to be related in some way to Professor Cole's article but I note you fail to address even a single point that he actually makes in his essay. https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm A common Bahai technique.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Mesbah Javid <11111174@3web.net> wrote in message news:7il5t4$d8r$1@iceman.tac.net... A review of Dr. Juan Cole's article at: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm about American Baha'i community, and comparing its contents with those exalted mandates specified by the Universal House of Justice for its destiny, gives us a vision as to where the American Baha'i community stands at its road to spiritual progress: Reconstruction of Human Society: "The Baha'i work for the reconstruction of human society can thus be seen to comprise three streams: the most fundamental is the spreading of the Word of God, the winning of the allegiance of ever-greater numbers of men and women to the Cause of Baha'u'llah and the establishment of the Baha'i Administrative Order; concurrent with this is the contribution to human advancement and to the progress of the Baha'i community made by individual Baha'is in the pursuit of their daily work; and then there are the projects and institutions for human advancement launched and operated by Baha'i Spiritual Assemblies as their resources grow and the range of their activities expands. It is for the Universal House of Justice to direct the energies of the believers in these various channels and to make known what activities are timely and have priority..." [UHJ, 21 Aug. 1977] Darkest Phase of History and Mass Conversion: "The Universal House of Justice is aware of the magnitude of the problems that the Baha'i communities face, but as the response to the Message of Baha'u'llah increases and as the Baha'i community throughout the world shows its ability to overcome these problems, the attention of men and women of every stratum of society will increasingly be drawn to the Faith. The most urgent need now--so late is the hour--is for the Baha'is to spread the Message, while they are still able to do so, to the largest possible number of their fellow human beings, simultaneously expanding and consolidating the Baha'i community as quickly as they can with the resources at their disposal. As mankind passes through the darkest phase of its history, the Baha'i community will have to face not only entry by troops, which it is now experiencing, but, before too long, mass conversion." [UHJ, 21 Aug. 1977] Role of Baha'i Scholar: "Scholarship has a high station in the Baha'i teachings, and Baha'i scholars have a great responsibility. We believe that they would do well to concentrate upon the ascertainment of truth--of a fuller understanding of the subject of their scholarship, whatever its field--not upon exposing and attacking the error of others, whether they be of non-Baha'i or of their fellow believers. Inevitably the demonstration of truth exposes the falsity of error, but the emphasis and motive are important." [UHJ, 3 Jan. 1979] "In scientific investigation when searching after the facts of any matter a Baha'i must, of course, be entirely openminded, but in his interpretation of the facts and his evaluation of evidence we do not see by what logic he can ignore the truth of the Baha'i Revelation which he has already accepted; to do so would, we feel, be both hypocritical and unscholarly. "Undoubtedly the fact that Baha'i scholars of the history and teachings of the Faith believe in the Faith that they are studying will be a grave flaw in the eyes of many non-Baha'i academics, whose own dogmatic materialism passes without comment because it is fashionable; but this difficulty is one that Baha'i scholars share with their fellow believers in many fields of human endeavor. "If Baha'i scholars will try to avoid this snare of allowing a divorce between their faith and their reason, we are sure that they will also avoid many of the occasions for tension arising between themselves and their fellow believers." [UHJ, 3 Jan. 1979] The Most Wrong Scholar: "One danger is faced by only a few: those whose work requires them to read the writings of Covenant-breakers. They have to remember that they are by no means immune to the spiritual poison that such works distill, and that they must approach this aspect of their work with great caution, alert to the danger that it presents. The second danger, which may well be as insidious, is that of spiritual pride and arrogance. Baha'i scholars, especially those who are scholars in the teachings and history of the Faith itself, would be well advised to remember that scholars have often been most wrong when they have been most certain that they were right. The virtues of moderation, humility and humor in regard to one's own work and ideas are a potent protection against this danger." [UHJ, 3 Jan. 1979] Non-Baha'i vs. Baha'i Historian: "A Baha'i scholar conscious of this distinction will not make the mistake of regarding the sayings and beliefs of certain Baha'is at any one time as being the Baha'i Faith. The Baha'i Faith is the Revelation of Baha'u'llah: His Own Words as interpreted by Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian. It is a revelation of such staggering magnitude that no Baha'i at this early stage in Baha'i history can rightly claim to have more than a partial and imperfect understanding of it. Thus, Baha'i historians would see the overcoming of early misconceptions held by the Baha'i community, or by parts of the Baha'i community, not as "developments of the Baha'i Faith"--as a non-Baha'i historian might well regard them--but as growth of that community's understanding of the Baha'i Revelation." [UHJ, 3 Jan. 1979] Psychiatric Treatment and Reorientation of Some New Baha'is: "As you are well aware, many people come into the Faith needing psychiatric treatment, and it is often very difficult for them to find a psychiatrist who will not urge them to some course of behavior which is contrary to the teachings of the Faith. There are a number of Baha'i psychologists and psychiatrists who are endeavoring to develop their skills in the light of the Revelation of Baha'u'llah, and use can certainly be made of their services where available..." [UHJ to US NSA, 2 Dec. 1976] "In addition to specific problems of child education, you instance the difficulties of local communities which are faced with the task of reorienting and integrating into the Cause new believers who enter with all sorts of immoral and even criminal tendencies from their former life. This is indeed difficult, but this is the very stuff of the work of the Cause. The Baha'i Faith not only provides teachings in accordance with which the behavior of human beings can be reformed, but also makes available a spiritual power which reinforces the devoted efforts of every believer, whether veteran or neophyte." [UHJ to US NSA, 2 Dec. 1976] Spiritual Life of Local Baha'i Community: "Thus, what is most imperative for the promotion of the spiritual life of local Baha'i communities is the stimulation of the believers to increase their devotion to Baha'u'llah, their absolute reliance upon Him and upon His love, and their determination to apply His teachings in every aspect of their lives. This stimulation can be conveyed from heart to heart and mind to mind by devoted Baha'is without the need of formal training..." [UHJ to US NSA, 2 Dec. 1976] "Hope is welling up in my anxious, overburdened heart that the North American Bahá'í Community may yet emerge triumphant over the prevailing crisis, demonstrate its capacity to preserve its hard-won prizes and redeem its pledges through a further display of its qualities of unconquerable faith, unbreakable solidarity, dauntless valor and heroic self-sacrifice, and vindicate its right to primacy in the world community of the followers of Bahá'u'lláh. High water mark is still unattained notwithstanding the mounting tide of enthusiastic response displayed by an aroused community. Dangerous passage now forded in this eleventh-hour campaign. I am fervently praying that further intensification of effort, sustained, coordinated, consecrated and unanimously exerted, will sweep its members on crest of the wave to total victory. I feel assured that cumulative efforts of participants in emergency campaign launched by entire community will increasingly attract the promised inflowing grace of the holy Author of its destinies, will demonstrate afresh its worthiness of the paternal care of its divine Founder, will win added commendation from its sister communities of the Eastern Hemisphere, deepen the admiration and inspire the emulation of its daughter communities in Latin America and the European continent, and strengthen the attachment and reinforce the brotherly affection of its Guardian. " [Shoghi Effendi, 13 Feb. 1948] AMERICA PASSING THROUGH CRISIS "Moreover, the country of which it forms a part is passing through a crisis which, in its spiritual, moral, social and political aspects, is of extreme seriousness--a seriousness which to a superficial observer is liable to be dangerously underestimated. "The steady and alarming deterioration in the standard of morality as exemplified by the appalling increase of crime, by political corruption in ever widening and ever higher circles, by the loosening of the sacred ties of marriage, by the inordinate craving for pleasure and diversion, and by the marked and progressive slackening of parental control, is no doubt the most arresting and distressing aspect of the decline that has set in, and can be clearly perceived, in the fortunes of the entire nation." [Shoghi Effendi, 28 Jul. 1954] "The American nation, of which the community of the Most Great Name forms as yet a negligible and infinitesimal part, stands, indeed, from whichever angle one observes its immediate fortunes, in grave peril. The woes and tribulations which threaten it are partly avoidable, but mostly inevitable and God-sent, for by reason of them a government and people clinging tenaciously to the obsolescent doctrine of absolute sovereignty and upholding a political system, manifestly at variance with the needs of a world already contracted into a neighborhood and crying out for unity, will find itself purged of its anachronistic conceptions, and prepared to play a preponderating role, as foretold by `Abdu'l-Bahá, in the hoisting of the standard of the Lesser Peace, in the unification of mankind, and in the establishment of a world federal government on this planet. These same fiery tribulations will not only firmly weld the American nation to its sister nations in both hemispheres, but will through their cleansing effect, purge it thoroughly of the accumulated dross which ingrained racial prejudice, rampant materialism, widespread ungodliness and moral laxity have combined, in the course of successive generations, to produce, and which have prevented her thus far from assuming the role of world spiritual leadership forecast by `Abdu'l-Bahá's unerring pen--a role which she is bound to fulfill through travail and sorrow." [Shoghi Effendi, 28 Jul. 1954] AMERICAN BAHÁ'ÍS STAND AT CROSSROADS "The American Bahá'í Community, the leaven destined to leaven the whole, cannot hope, at this critical juncture in the fortunes of a struggling, perilously situated, spiritually moribund nation, to either escape the trials with which this nation is confronted, nor claim to be wholly immune from the evils that stain its character. "At so critical a period, at so challenging an hour, the members of a community, invested by `Abdu'l-Bahá with a primacy which can, through neglect and apathy, be allowed to lose its vital power and driving force, are immersed in a task, and are faced with responsibilities, which a World Spiritual Crusade, the third and greatest collective enterprise embarked upon in American Bahá'í history, has thrust upon them before the eyes of their admiring and expectant sister communities throughout the world. They now stand at the crossroads, unable to relax for a moment, or hesitate as to which road they should tread, or to allow any decline in the high standard they have, for no less than six decades, undeviatingly upheld. Nay, if this primacy is to be safeguarded and enhanced, a consecration, not only on the part of a chosen few, to every single objective of the Ten-Year Plan to which they are now pledged, and a pouring out of substance, not only by those of limited means, but by the richest and wealthiest, in a degree involving the truest sacrifice, for the purpose of insuring the attainment of the aims and purposes of the Plan in its present phase of development, are imperative and can brook no delay. "The mighty and laudable effort exerted, by a considerable number of pioneers, in the course of the opening phase of this world-encircling Crusade, in the virgin territories of the globe, must, if this primacy is to remain unimpaired, be increased, doubled, nay trebled, and must manifest itself not only in foreign fields where the prizes so laboriously won during the last twelve months must, at whatever sacrifice, be meticulously preserved, but throughout the entire length and breadth of the American Union, and particularly in the goal cities, where hitherto the work has stagnated, and which must, in the year now entered, become the scene of the finest exploits which the home front has yet seen. A veritable exodus from the large cities where a considerable number of believers have, over a period of years, congregated, both on the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, as well as in the heart of the country, and where, owing to the tempo and the distractions of city life, the progress of the Faith has been retarded, must signalize the inauguration of this most intensive and challenging phase of the Crusade on the home front. Most certainly and emphatically must the lead be given by the two focal centers of Bahá'í activity which rank among the oldest of and occupy the most honored position among, the cities throughout the American Union, the one as the mother city of the North American continent, the other named by `Abdu'l-Bahá the City of the Covenant. Indeed, so grave are the exigencies of the present hour, and so critical the political position of the country, that were a bare fifteen adult Bahá'ís to be left in each of these cities, over which unsuspected dangers are hanging, it would still be regarded as adequate for the maintenance of their local spiritual assemblies." [Shoghi Effendi, 28 Jul. 1954 ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 1999 8:02 AM Subject: Re: HTML Postings <> Perhaps it's time to upgrade! -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Roger Reini wrote in message news:3758e8ab.14296907@news.newsguy.com... > On Tue, 1 Jun 1999 06:46:55 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > wrote: > > >They haven't bothered me. In fact, a little color > >kind spices things up around here. Probably > >most news readers are HTML capable anymore. > >Regardless, this is an unmoderated newsgroup, > >and if people wish to post using HTML, it's > >ultimately up to them. Notice the word used in > >the charter is "discouraged" not prohibited. > > This is a touchy subject (what isn't on this newsgroup?). > > I agree with Ron; since Usenet was originally a text-based system, the > posts should still be text-based, not HTML. My main newsreader, Agent > (a very popular newsreader) balks at converting some HTML posts to > plain text. > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 1999 8:40 AM Subject: Re: House warns of opposition "campaign" If this message is from the UHJ, it shows quite well how isolation and paranoia work to brand and label every view other than its own fundamentalist interpretation of Baha'u'llah's Teachings as heretical and suspect. Baha'u'llah emphatically stated this kind of fanaticism would not happen in his dispensation. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:37544173.0@vlinsvr... > Being discussed heatedly on Talisman at the moment, the following > letter was sent to every NSA: > > THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE > BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE > > Department of the Secretariat > 7 April 1999 > > To all National Spiritual Assemblies > > Dear Baha'i Friends, > > Issues Related to the Study of the Baha'i Faith > > In May of 1998, Baha'i Canada reproduced a collection of letters > which the Universal House of Justice had written to various > individuals on the subject of academic study of the Baha'i Faith. > Copies of this compilation were subsequently mailed by the > Canadian National Spiritual Assembly to its sister Assemblies. > The reprint has now been made generally available in booklet form > by the United States Baha'i Publishing Trust. The House of > Justice has asked us to forward you a copy of the latter > publication with the following comments. > > As a number of the friends are aware,, a campaign of internal > opposition to the Teachings is currently being carried on through > the use of the Internet, a communications system that now reaches > virtually every part of the world. Differing from attacks > familiar in the past, it seeks to recast the entire Faith into a > socio-poliotical ideology alien to Baha'u'llah's intent. In the > place of the institutional authority established by His Covenant, > it promotes a kind of interpretive authority which those behind > it attribute to the views of persons technically trained in > Middle East studies. > > Early in 1996, the deliberate nature of the plan was revealed in > an accidental posting to an Internet list which Baha'i > subscribers had believed was dedicated to scholarly exploration > of the Cause. Some of the people responsible resigned from the > Faith when the Counsellors pointed out to them the direction > their activitities were taking. A small number of others > continue to promote the campaign within the Baha'i community. > > In the past, in situations of a somewhat similar nature, the > patience and compassion shown by `Abdu'l Baha and the Guardian > helped various believers who had been misled by ill-intentioned > persons to eventually free themselves from such entanglements. > In this same spirit of forbearance the Universal House of Justice > has intervened in the current situation only to the extent that > it has been unavoidable, trusting to the good sense and the > goodwill of the believers involved to awaken to the spiritual > dangers to which they are exposing themselves. Nevertheless, > certain Counsellors and National Spiritual Assemblies are > monitoring the problem closely, and the friends can be confident > that whatever further steps are needed to protect the integrity > of the Cause will be taken. > > As passages in the enclosed reprint make clear, this campaign of > internal opposition-- while purporting to accept the legitimacy > of the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice as twin > succesors of Baha'u'llah and the Centre of His Covenant-- > attempts to cast doubt on the nature and the scope of the > authority conferred on them in the Writings. When other Baha'is > have pointed out that such arguments contradict explicit > statements of the Master, persons behind the scheme have > responded by calling into question the soundness of `Abdu'l > Baha'is own judgment and perspective. Gradually, these arguments > have exposed the view of those involved that Baha'u'llah Himself > was not the voice of God to our age but merely a particularly > enlightened moral philosopher, one whose primary concern was to > reform existing society. > > By itself, such opposition would likely stand little change of > influencing reasonably informed Baha'is. As one of the letters > in the enclosed reprint (20 July 1997) points out, the scheme > relies for effect, therefore, on exploiting the confusion created > in modern thought by the reigning doctrines of materialism. > ALthough the reality of God's continuous relationship with His > creation and His intervention in human life and history are the > very essen of the teachigns of the Founders of the revealed > religions, dogmatic materialism today insists that even the > nature of religion itself can be adequately understood only > through the use of an academic methodology deigned to ignore the > truths that make religion what it is. > > In general, the strategy being pursued has been to avoid direct > attacks on the Faith's Central Figures. The effort, rather, has > been to sow the seeds of doubt among believers about the Faith's > teachings and institutions by appealing to unexamined prejudices > that Baha'is may have unconciously absorbed from non-Baha'i > society. In defiance of the clear interpretations of `Abdu'l > Baha and the Guardian, for example, Baha'u'llah's limiting of > membership on the Universal House of Justice to men is > misrepresented as merely a "temporary measure" subject to eventual > revision if sufficient pressure is brought to bear. Similarly, > Shoghi Effendi's explanation of Baha'u'llah's vision of the > future Baha'i World Commonwealth that will unite spiritual and > civil authority is dismissed in favour of the assertion that the > modern political concept of "separation of church and state" is > someone one that Baha'u'llah intended as a basic principle of the > World Order he has founded. Particularly subtle is an attempt to > suggest that the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar should evolve into a seat of > quasi-doctrinal authority, parallel to and essentially > independent of the Local House of Justice, which would permit > various interests to insinuate themselves into the direction of > the life processes of the Cause. > > (continued in part two) ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 1999 8:43 AM Subject: Re: The Cause will triumph! Rachel, I think you've probably understood the UHJ's latest fascist tract quite accurately.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Michael McKenny wrote in message news:7j0oq7$8e8@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > > Greetings, Rachel. > Many thanks for your comments. > I hope you and any other individual who comes under any unpleasant > influence from Baha'i authorities as a consequence of any remarks made here > will provide a complete record of this. In my opinion the negative fallout > for the Baha'i authorities because of their mishandling of freely expressed > views on e-mail lists has had the beneficial result that they are now able > to tolerate the lesser evil, if you will, of letting people say what they > think here. I think rising above the old style attempt by the powerful to > dominate information can only have an overall beneficial influence on the > Baha'i Faith. > I am very interested in your reference to the Ridvan message of the > Universal House of Justice. Could you or someone kindly post this message > here. If it was posted earlier, then I missed it. If it wasn't are Baha'is > not falling a bit short in providing relevant material to this newsgroup? > May this find you very well, may the future treat you ever more > favourably and may the days when any follower of Baha'u'llah need fear to > express sincerely felt views be forever past. > All the Best, > Michael > > Rachel Woodlock (rachel@rwoodlock.freeserve.co.uk) writes: > > BRR > > > > I am not entirely comfortable with continuing to use my own name on > > the internet. I am aware that some people, people with power, have > > fundamentally misunderstood the nature of USENET and email lists and > > the types of discussions that arise on these forums... > > > > I think that is why the last few paragraphs of the 156 Ridvan message > > rankle - because it comes across to me as the latter rather than the > > former. I do hope I am the only one who has misunderstood it this > > way. > > -- > "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." > (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 1999 8:49 AM Subject: Re: Attacks on Baha'i Administrative Order from Within & Without Rachel, Thank you for posting what appears to me to be a highly insightful piece on the dynamics that underlie much of what transpires here on talk.religion.bahai, where, in my opinion, much of the discussion or debate is between essentially stage two personalities and stage four. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Rachel Woodlock wrote in message news:3753bba2.5447292@news.freeserve.net... > BRR > > One of the things that I have been interested in recently is the idea > that the administrative order would be 'attacked' from within. > > Is it possible that rather than identifying and scapegoating > particular individuals as enemies from within; that the administrative > order is 'attacked' by an overabundance of what M. Scott Peck calls > "stage two" mentalities in its ranks? That when the majority of > Baha'is develop into "stage four" people, is when the Baha'i > administrative order might truly develop and flourish. > > For those who haven't read any of Peck's works: > > In "Further Along the Road Less Travelled" - chapter seven, Peck > writes there are essentially four stages of spiritual growth. > > Stage One: Chaotic/antisocial. "In general this is a stage of absent > spirituality and the people at this stage are utterly unprincipled. I > call it antisocial because while they are capable of pretending to be > loving, actually all of their relationships with their fellow human > beings are self-serving and covertly, if not overtly, manipulative. > Chaotic because, being unprincipled, they have no mechanism that might > govern them other than their own will." (page 121) > > Stage Two: Formal/institutional. "I label it institutional because > people in it are dependent on an institution for their governance. > For some the institution may be a prison...For others the institution > may be the military...For still others the institution to which they > submit themselves for their governance may be a highly organised > business corporation. But for most people, it is the church. Indeed > the majority of churchgoers fall into Stage Two, the > formal/institutional stage... > > Stage Two people become very, very upset if someone starts changing > forms or rituals, altering their liturgy or introducing new hymns... > > Another thing that tends to characterize people's religious behaviour > in this stage is that their vision of God is almost that of an > external being. They have very little understanding of that half of > God which lives inside each of us - what theologians term immanent - > the dwelling divinity within the human spirit. They almost totally > think of God as up there, out there. They generally envision God > along the masculine model, and whil they believe Him to be a loving > being, they also ascribe to Him a certain kind of punitive power which > He is not afraid to use on appropriate occasions. It is a vision of > God as a giant benevolent cop in the sky." (pages 122-123) > > Stage Three: Skeptic/individual. "...speaking generally, people in > Stage Three are ahead of people in Stage Two in their spirituality, > although they are not religious in the ordinary sense of the word. > They are not the least bit antisocial. Often they are deeply involved > in society. They are the kinds of people who tend to make up the > backbone of organisations like Physicians for Social Responsibility or > the ecology movement. They make committed and loving parents. > Frequently they are scientists, and certainly scientific-minded. > Invariably they are truth-seekers." (pages 124-125) > > Stage Four: Mystical/communal. "They are people who have seen a kind > of cohesion beneath the surface of things. Throughout the ages, > mystics have seen connections between men and women, between humans > and other creatures, between people walking the earth and those who > aren't even here. Seeing that kind of interconnectedness beneath the > surface, mystics of all cultures and religions have spoken of things > in terms of unity and community. They also have always spoken in > terms of paradox. (page 125) > > He then goes on to narrate how the one thing in common all the great > religions of the world have, is the ability to speak to the different > stages - with the result that the religion of a "Stage Two" might be > *called* the same thing as the religion of a "Stage Four" but they > look worlds apart in practice! > > He also makes the point that people in the lower stages generally feel > "threatened" by the higher stages. So a "Stage Two" mentality can be > extremely threatened by those in "Stage Three" and "Stage Four". > > Just a thought > Rachel > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 03, 1999 6:47 AM Subject: Re: House warns of opposition "campaign" K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:375542cb.0@vlinsvr... > My own comments on the letter follow. > : > : As a number of the friends are aware,, a campaign of internal > : opposition to the Teachings is currently being carried on through > : the use of the Internet, a communications system that now reaches > : virtually every part of the world. > > This is not true, and reflects the biased understanding of a > single partisan faction. A faction that regards itself as > capable of *defining* "the Teachings" and rejecting the > understanding that others bring to the subject. "Campaign of > internal opposition" implies that > 1) There is organized cooperation among enrolled Baha'is > 2) Who seek to oppose Baha'u'llah's teachings > > which is preposterous on the face of it. Promoting one's own > understanding of the Teachings, to be considered along with > everyone else's, is not waging any campaign against them. > > Differing from attacks > : familiar in the past, it seeks to recast the entire Faith into a > : socio-poliotical ideology alien to Baha'u'llah's intent. > > This of course begs the question. I would urge anyone interested > in weighing the issue of Baha'u'llah's intent to read Modernity > and the Millennium, by Juan Cole. *This book is the first on > Baha'u'llah by a university press* and should be looked at with > respect by Baha'is even if they disagree with it. It should have > been received as the signal work on its subject that it is, not > turned into the occasion of a partisan witchhunt. Peter Smith's The Babi & Bahai Religions was published by Cambridge University Press in 1987. Other than Cole's book it's really the only other one I'd recommend as worth reading on the Bahai Faith.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > In the > : place of the institutional authority established by His Covenant, > : it promotes a kind of interpretive authority which those behind > : it attribute to the views of persons technically trained in > : Middle East studies. > > This is a total nonsequitur. The authority of technically > trained scholars to explicate texts is what it is. It does not > and never has threatened Baha'i institutional authority > established by the Covenant. By seeing a threat to the Covenant > in what would in any other religion be considered normal > scholarly endeavors, those institutions are undermining their own > authority. > : > : Early in 1996, the deliberate nature of the plan was revealed in > : an accidental posting to an Internet list which Baha'i > : subscribers had believed was dedicated to scholarly exploration > : of the Cause. > > Whose plan? What plan? No such plan was revealed and in fact > the post in question showed *opposition* to any > "campaign." Showed it explicitly and emphatically in fact. > > Some of the people responsible resigned from the > : Faith when the Counsellors pointed out to them the direction > : their activitities were taking. > > In plain English, threatened them with sanctions. > > A small number of others > : continue to promote the campaign within the Baha'i community. > > Meaning, did not allow themselves to be intimidated into > withdrawing, were not sanctioned, but now find themselves unnamed > yet the target of a campaign of intimidation and exclusion nonetheless. > > snip > : In this same spirit of forbearance the Universal House of Justice > : has intervened in the current situation only to the extent that > : it has been unavoidable, > > Rather, has been judged to be unavoidable, mistakenly IMO. > > : of the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice as twin > : succesors of Baha'u'llah and the Centre of His Covenant-- > : attempts to cast doubt on the nature and the scope of the > : authority conferred on them in the Writings. > > Only a dogmatist authoritarian would translate the reality of > "attempts to understand on the basis of the original texts the > nature and the scope..." into the thought crime of > "attempts to cast doubt." The presumption all along is that the > normal scholarly activities of 1) trying to understand and 2) > communicating with other students of the subject are not normal > or innocuous but rather a fundamental threat to the legitimacy of > the institutions, and an attempt to take over the Faith. > > When other Baha'is > : have pointed out that such arguments contradict explicit > : statements of the Master, persons behind the scheme have > : responded by calling into question the soundness of `Abdu'l > : Baha'is own judgment and perspective. > > Since there is no scheme, who is meant by "persons behind the > scheme?" I recall no such calling into question by any Baha'i on > any list or newsgroup. > > Gradually, these arguments > : have exposed the view of those involved that Baha'u'llah Himself > : was not the voice of God to our age but merely a particularly > : enlightened moral philosopher, one whose primary concern was to > : reform existing society. > > That's a very telling either/or. What if there's no opposition > there? What if the voice of God to our age *was* that of a > particularly enlightened moral philosopher whose primary concern > was to reform existing society? > > : influencing reasonably informed Baha'is. As one of the letters > : in the enclosed reprint (20 July 1997) points out, the scheme > > This "scheme" accusation being repeated often enough, people will > forget to ask for evidence as to whether there is or ever has been > such a scheme. > > : relies for effect, therefore, on exploiting the confusion created > : in modern thought by the reigning doctrines of materialism. > > So, there is a cabal of unnamed persons who have consciously set > out to undermine the authority of Baha'i institutions and beliefs > by deliberately choosing to exploit the confusion caused by > materialism? That seems awfully far fetched. > > snip > > : religions, dogmatic materialism today insists that even the > : nature of religion itself can be adequately understood only > : through the use of an academic methodology deigned to ignore the > : truths that make religion what it is. > > There is no such thing as dogmatic materialism in the social > sciences and history any more. Academically methodology in > religious studies is hardly "designed to ignore the truths" but > rather to focus on the observable realities of how those truths > manifest in history, psychology, sociology etc. > : > : In general, the strategy being pursued has been to avoid direct > : attacks on the Faith's Central Figures. > > Assuming there is a strategy or scheme. But what if these > unnamed malefactors actually avoid direct attacks on the Central > Figures, not out of some strategic considerations, but because > *they believe in them*? > > The effort, rather, has > : been to sow the seeds of doubt among believers about the Faith's > : teachings and institutions by appealing to unexamined prejudices > : that Baha'is may have unconciously absorbed from non-Baha'i > : society. > > More presumption that the motives of those trying to explore > independent investigation of truth are actually those of > traitors out to harm the Baha'is. > > In defiance of the clear interpretations of `Abdu'l > : Baha and the Guardian, for example, Baha'u'llah's limiting of > : membership on the Universal House of Justice to men is > : misrepresented as merely a "temporary measure" subject to eventual > : revision if sufficient pressure is brought to bear. > > That is a matter for discussion, not backchannel denunciation. > Let all the evidence be brought forth and discussed in broad > daylight among collegial scholars and experts. On what basis is > the alleged position a misrepresentation? > > Similarly, > : Shoghi Effendi's explanation of Baha'u'llah's vision of the > : future Baha'i World Commonwealth that will unite spiritual and > : civil authority is dismissed in favour of the assertion that the > : modern political concept of "separation of church and state" is > : someone one that Baha'u'llah intended as a basic principle of the > : World Order he has founded. > > It is totally obvious that for a scholar constructing an > understanding of what Baha'u'llah meant cannot rely on a fourth > generation explanation of same, but must go to the original sources. > *Any* scholar would do the same. Cole should be read, discussed, > argued with perhaps, critiqued. But to treat the fundamental > responsibility of a historian as a deliberate threat to the > legitimacy of Baha'i institutions implies that the evidence > presented by Cole *cannot be discussed*. > > Particularly subtle is an attempt to > : suggest that the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar should evolve into a seat of > : quasi-doctrinal authority, parallel to and essentially > : independent of the Local House of Justice, which would permit > : various interests to insinuate themselves into the direction of > : the life processes of the Cause. > > That is *so* subtle as to show in sharp detail the defensive and > highly imaginative mindset of anyone who would perceive the > discussion in question as treasonous. > > More later... ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 03, 1999 6:52 AM Subject: Re: Killfiles and filtering Kathy, You haven't shared with us yet your understanding or reaction to Juan Cole's Panopticon article. https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Or are you only interested in accepting the fundamentalist view of things? Incidentally, I notice you've posted from FORD.COM, as Roger Reini has. Are you actually Reini as a troll? Can't rule out anything when it comes to Bahai fanatics. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:37601597.93039407@news.newsguy.com... > Hi. Apologies for the delay in posting this; I said a week or more ago > that I'd post filtering suggestions. > > Why filter? Is there someone who posts off-topic all of the time > (K*rcz*wski)? Is there someone who posts the same stuff over and over > and over and ...? Is there a subject that always provokes a heated > flamewar? You're tired of responding to those who don't care to listen, > or tired of being angry when you read your favorite group. If you'd > like a little help in clearing our what you feel is 'noise' so you can > enjoy the 'signal', you may want to start using programmatic filtering. > > I don't have experience with a lot of different packages, so I'm going > to offer instructions for the one I know well, and refer you to another > group to ask for help with other packages. > > I use Agent at home (). It's a very nice, > very cheap ($30) software package. When you find a posting that has > characteristics you'd more happily ignore, click the alternate (usually > right) mouse button and select Filters | Add Kill Filter. A dialog box > will pop up with either an author or subject highlighted (depending on > which you'd last selected). For authors, you can filter on name, email > address or both; I usually filter on name. For subjects, the filtering > will include the full subject of the thread. To switch what is being > filtered, click on 'Paste Author' (there's a pulldown menu to select an > author option) or 'Paste Subject'. Whatever expression is used will be > matched exactly. > > A bit of my philosophy: some people who post on repetitive topics are > not polite and keep changing the subject lines or their names. So > filtering out their postings may become complicated. But those are the > people you may especially wish to discourage by never, ever responding > to their posts. Someone who morphs to evade killfiles ignores that > though he or she has the right to speak, there is no right to be heard > (or read, in this case :). > > Agent is a Windows program. There are many newsreaders for Unix, > Windows and Macs. I believe all of the Unix readers have filtering > capability. The coverage is less than 100% for Windows and the Mac. > Netscape I believe has newsgroup filters in the version I'm using now > (4.51), but I've not tried them. > > If you're a Windows user of Eudora or similar dedicated email package, > you might particularly appreciate Microplanet Gravity > (, $40), which is a newsreader only package > (Agent is news and mail). Gravity has more advanced news filtering than > Agent, if I remember correctly. > > The newsgroup is a useful resource to ask > about particular newsreaders. > > If you like your software package and it doesn't filter, you can of > course sort by subject or author when you enter a group, and mark the > posts you don't want to see as read. Then proceed to read the group. > > Hope this helped. > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (at home) > Confused about newsgroups? Visit ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 03, 1999 6:57 AM Subject: Re: Opposition, was Re: Mark Foster's hatred of Mahdi "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Roger Reini wrote in message news:375d0f55.89738566@news.newsguy.com... > On Tue, 1 Jun 1999 23:19:36 +0100, Chris Manvell > wrote: > > >On talk.religion.bahai, Roger Reini (mailto:rreini@wwnet.net) wrote: > >>On Tue, 1 Jun 1999 06:53:39 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > >> wrote: > >>>Ron House was never really behind the creation > >>>of talk.religion.bahai. In fact, most of the Bahais, > >>>probably all, involved at one time or another were > >>>basically moles attempting to defeat it from the inside. > >> > >>I think this is inaccurate. He was a co-proponent on one proposal > >>(the second, I believe -- or was it the third?), and I do remember him > >>being active in the discussions. So I'd say he played a role in > >>t.r.b's ultimate creation. > >> > >>I also think it's inaccurate to say that most if not all of the > >>Baha'is who were involved in t.r.b's creation were "moles" who were > >>actually trying to defeat it. I think it's unfair to them to cast > >>aspersions about their motives, especially when they don't seem to me > >>to be backed up by the evidence. > >> > >>People's opinions do change. Initially, I was opposed to t.r.b's > >>formation, though I never voted against it (I'd abstained in the first > >>ballot but voted yes in the other two). But my opinion changed over > >>time. I'm sure that was true of others. > > > >Heh! So now I'm a mole. Actually, one of my favourite characters from > >fiction is Mole in Wind in the Willows, much more of a gentleman than > >that braggart Toad. Roger, your patience amazes me! But what this has to > >do with the subject matter (itself totally uncalled for) has me beat. > > It has strayed, so that's why I've changed the subject. > > Possibly on topic: Paul Johnson forwarded a note from Talisman, > ostensibly from the Universal House of Justice to all national > spiritual assemblies, speaking about new forms of internal opposition > to the Faith which are now developing. I don't know if the message is > authentic or not, but it appears to me to be. It is something for all > of us believers to be aware of, IMHO. > > > > >Oh, and yes, Ron was a co-proponent for the 2nd proposal. > > I wasn't sure which one he'd been involved with -- they're starting to > blend together for me. > > > >All the best to all a yez, > > > >Chis > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 03, 1999 7:01 AM Subject: Re: House warns of opposition "campaign" By the way, Juan Cole's book can be ordered on Amazon.com at https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0231110812/o/qid=924015204/sr=2-1/002 -1823748-4014252 -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:375542cb.0@vlinsvr... > My own comments on the letter follow. > : > : As a number of the friends are aware,, a campaign of internal > : opposition to the Teachings is currently being carried on through > : the use of the Internet, a communications system that now reaches > : virtually every part of the world. > > This is not true, and reflects the biased understanding of a > single partisan faction. A faction that regards itself as > capable of *defining* "the Teachings" and rejecting the > understanding that others bring to the subject. "Campaign of > internal opposition" implies that > 1) There is organized cooperation among enrolled Baha'is > 2) Who seek to oppose Baha'u'llah's teachings > > which is preposterous on the face of it. Promoting one's own > understanding of the Teachings, to be considered along with > everyone else's, is not waging any campaign against them. > > Differing from attacks > : familiar in the past, it seeks to recast the entire Faith into a > : socio-poliotical ideology alien to Baha'u'llah's intent. > > This of course begs the question. I would urge anyone interested > in weighing the issue of Baha'u'llah's intent to read Modernity > and the Millennium, by Juan Cole. *This book is the first on > Baha'u'llah by a university press* and should be looked at with > respect by Baha'is even if they disagree with it. It should have > been received as the signal work on its subject that it is, not > turned into the occasion of a partisan witchhunt. > > In the > : place of the institutional authority established by His Covenant, > : it promotes a kind of interpretive authority which those behind > : it attribute to the views of persons technically trained in > : Middle East studies. > > This is a total nonsequitur. The authority of technically > trained scholars to explicate texts is what it is. It does not > and never has threatened Baha'i institutional authority > established by the Covenant. By seeing a threat to the Covenant > in what would in any other religion be considered normal > scholarly endeavors, those institutions are undermining their own > authority. > : > : Early in 1996, the deliberate nature of the plan was revealed in > : an accidental posting to an Internet list which Baha'i > : subscribers had believed was dedicated to scholarly exploration > : of the Cause. > > Whose plan? What plan? No such plan was revealed and in fact > the post in question showed *opposition* to any > "campaign." Showed it explicitly and emphatically in fact. > > Some of the people responsible resigned from the > : Faith when the Counsellors pointed out to them the direction > : their activitities were taking. > > In plain English, threatened them with sanctions. > > A small number of others > : continue to promote the campaign within the Baha'i community. > > Meaning, did not allow themselves to be intimidated into > withdrawing, were not sanctioned, but now find themselves unnamed > yet the target of a campaign of intimidation and exclusion nonetheless. > > snip > : In this same spirit of forbearance the Universal House of Justice > : has intervened in the current situation only to the extent that > : it has been unavoidable, > > Rather, has been judged to be unavoidable, mistakenly IMO. > > : of the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice as twin > : succesors of Baha'u'llah and the Centre of His Covenant-- > : attempts to cast doubt on the nature and the scope of the > : authority conferred on them in the Writings. > > Only a dogmatist authoritarian would translate the reality of > "attempts to understand on the basis of the original texts the > nature and the scope..." into the thought crime of > "attempts to cast doubt." The presumption all along is that the > normal scholarly activities of 1) trying to understand and 2) > communicating with other students of the subject are not normal > or innocuous but rather a fundamental threat to the legitimacy of > the institutions, and an attempt to take over the Faith. > > When other Baha'is > : have pointed out that such arguments contradict explicit > : statements of the Master, persons behind the scheme have > : responded by calling into question the soundness of `Abdu'l > : Baha'is own judgment and perspective. > > Since there is no scheme, who is meant by "persons behind the > scheme?" I recall no such calling into question by any Baha'i on > any list or newsgroup. > > Gradually, these arguments > : have exposed the view of those involved that Baha'u'llah Himself > : was not the voice of God to our age but merely a particularly > : enlightened moral philosopher, one whose primary concern was to > : reform existing society. > > That's a very telling either/or. What if there's no opposition > there? What if the voice of God to our age *was* that of a > particularly enlightened moral philosopher whose primary concern > was to reform existing society? > > : influencing reasonably informed Baha'is. As one of the letters > : in the enclosed reprint (20 July 1997) points out, the scheme > > This "scheme" accusation being repeated often enough, people will > forget to ask for evidence as to whether there is or ever has been > such a scheme. > > : relies for effect, therefore, on exploiting the confusion created > : in modern thought by the reigning doctrines of materialism. > > So, there is a cabal of unnamed persons who have consciously set > out to undermine the authority of Baha'i institutions and beliefs > by deliberately choosing to exploit the confusion caused by > materialism? That seems awfully far fetched. > > snip > > : religions, dogmatic materialism today insists that even the > : nature of religion itself can be adequately understood only > : through the use of an academic methodology deigned to ignore the > : truths that make religion what it is. > > There is no such thing as dogmatic materialism in the social > sciences and history any more. Academically methodology in > religious studies is hardly "designed to ignore the truths" but > rather to focus on the observable realities of how those truths > manifest in history, psychology, sociology etc. > : > : In general, the strategy being pursued has been to avoid direct > : attacks on the Faith's Central Figures. > > Assuming there is a strategy or scheme. But what if these > unnamed malefactors actually avoid direct attacks on the Central > Figures, not out of some strategic considerations, but because > *they believe in them*? > > The effort, rather, has > : been to sow the seeds of doubt among believers about the Faith's > : teachings and institutions by appealing to unexamined prejudices > : that Baha'is may have unconciously absorbed from non-Baha'i > : society. > > More presumption that the motives of those trying to explore > independent investigation of truth are actually those of > traitors out to harm the Baha'is. > > In defiance of the clear interpretations of `Abdu'l > : Baha and the Guardian, for example, Baha'u'llah's limiting of > : membership on the Universal House of Justice to men is > : misrepresented as merely a "temporary measure" subject to eventual > : revision if sufficient pressure is brought to bear. > > That is a matter for discussion, not backchannel denunciation. > Let all the evidence be brought forth and discussed in broad > daylight among collegial scholars and experts. On what basis is > the alleged position a misrepresentation? > > Similarly, > : Shoghi Effendi's explanation of Baha'u'llah's vision of the > : future Baha'i World Commonwealth that will unite spiritual and > : civil authority is dismissed in favour of the assertion that the > : modern political concept of "separation of church and state" is > : someone one that Baha'u'llah intended as a basic principle of the > : World Order he has founded. > > It is totally obvious that for a scholar constructing an > understanding of what Baha'u'llah meant cannot rely on a fourth > generation explanation of same, but must go to the original sources. > *Any* scholar would do the same. Cole should be read, discussed, > argued with perhaps, critiqued. But to treat the fundamental > responsibility of a historian as a deliberate threat to the > legitimacy of Baha'i institutions implies that the evidence > presented by Cole *cannot be discussed*. > > Particularly subtle is an attempt to > : suggest that the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar should evolve into a seat of > : quasi-doctrinal authority, parallel to and essentially > : independent of the Local House of Justice, which would permit > : various interests to insinuate themselves into the direction of > : the life processes of the Cause. > > That is *so* subtle as to show in sharp detail the defensive and > highly imaginative mindset of anyone who would perceive the > discussion in question as treasonous. > > More later... ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 03, 1999 7:14 AM Subject: Re: You were warned before Mr. Mahdi, I suggest you crosspost all your messages also to alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.misc, where many Christians and people of other faiths exchange views, including at times some Muslims. You are one of the very few people who witnessed what the supposed Forum Leader Mark Foster did to me to seduce AOL personnel into suspending my account. I thank you, sincerely, for stating the truth here on talk.religion.bahai, though the fundamentalists will only abuse you for it. You'll perceive there are indeed many Bahai trolls and moles here on talk.religion.bahai too who will work deceitfully to create false impressions about you personally as they did on AOL. Nevertheless, I assert again, that by and large I witnessed on AOL Bahais attacking Mahdi as he has said they did. The newcomer here would do well to take all views with a grain of salt and investigate the truth for her or himself. I'd suggest beginning with Juan Cole's article on Bahai censorship, as an excellent historical introduction and overview of what has transpired during the last decade: Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Mr Mahdi wrote in message news:19990529160839.13204.00006536@ng-fk1.aol.com... > Hello Fred, > > The elation of your abscence on AOL by bahai fundamentalists like Susan, Wendy, > and Mark shows a pattern of irrational censorship that occurs amongst certain > bahais, esp. the ones who are "prominent" in the bahai community. As I have > said before, and as you have defended, my posting of what Mark did to me was > not a personal attack on Mark, I was documenting cult-like censorship by bahais > which happened to be on AOL. > > >Non-Bahai observers might really want to note > >the manner in which fundamentalist Bahais attempt > >to silence opinions they don't care to hear, or have > >others hear.... > > Fred, I said once before, I would like for non-bahais in other newsgroups or > organization to know about whats going on with censorship and cult-like > behavior with bahais. While I am not posting about the bahai faith in > soc.islam.religion, I am trying to find a forum that is best suited for causing > awareness amongst socially-consecious people. They need to know whats going on > with what I see many bahais trying to portray the bahai faith as a "feel-good > religion." What kind of feel-good religion allows bahais to call other bahais > as deviant apostates and non-bahais agitators (talking about how certain bahais > on AOL portrayed Fred Glaysher as)? > > I hope that organizations, open-minded people, etc., become aware of the level > of cult-like censorship that is occuring. I am not attacking a person or > complaining about certain AOL members, I am documenting censorship and > cult-like behavior and double-standards in the bahai faith. > Mahdi ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 03, 1999 7:17 AM Subject: Re: You were warned before Again, Mr. Mahdi here is speaking the truth, as I too witnessed it on AOL. Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Also see regarding AOL: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm https://209.185.176.10/~fglaysher/AOLcensorship.txt https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Mr Mahdi wrote in message news:19990529235024.09178.00009177@ng35.aol.com... > >I challenged Mr. > >Mahdi's attempt to smear Mark Foster's reputation. Mr. Mahdi has yet to > >substantiate an allegation of racism, though he seems to accuse Susan > >Maneck of it as well. > > I posted a four-part post documenting Mark Foster's recent irrational behavior. > Fred Glaysher has a whole website documenting bahai censorship, including > those on AOL. I say racism in this instance not as a person who hates people > because of their race, I meant that Mark Foster doesnt like me becuase I am > muslim who doesnt believe in the bahai faith. I know the word for this is > predujice, but I decided to use racism. I am the only muslim who regularly > posts on the AOL bahai message boards, and I had over 2 dozen of my posts > removed and sent to TOS. Non-bahais like Christine and Nadle often write > critical posts about and against the bahai faith, and bahais write insulting > posts against me all the time, all according to Mark's definition of TOS > violation fit the description of a TOSable post. Like I keep saying, I am > documenting bahai censorship and cult-like activites and not attacking people > for the sake of attacking people. > Mahdi ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 03, 1999 7:18 AM Subject: Re: You were warned before https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm https://209.185.176.10/~fglaysher/AOLcensorship.txt https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm wrote in message news:7iqo2v$apk$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > In article <7ip7e4$lc1$1@remarQ.com>, > "Patrick Henry" wrote: > > > > > >I have, and I will again, complain to the service providers of > any > > > > >persons who post attacks on particular individuals to this > newsgroup. > > > If > > > > >you want to discuss topics RELATED TO THE BAHA'I FAITH, fine. The > > > > >behaviour of AOL is not a subject within this newsgroup's > charter. > > > > > > I agree w/ Ron. > > > > I don't. Bahai censorship on AOL is relevant to this > > newsgroup. Mr. Mahdi has every right to bring it up. > > How many AOL religious fora did you use? How often did you use ones > other than the Baha'i one? What guidelines does AOL give its members on > use of religious fora? I have no way of knowing if the Baha'i AOL fora > is typical, in spec or out of spec. I have no way to get in and find > out. > > As far as I can tell AOL has rules which you and Mahdi choose/chose to > ignore. I hardly see how your violation of Terms of Service is really > something to start a thread on pertaining to the Baha'i Faith, its > history, etc. That doesn't mean I don't believe that you would > > > Censorship has become the very essence of > > Bahai "community" life and is within the terms of > > the Charter for trb. > > No Fred, censorship is not the essence of community life. > > > Bahais manipulated and distorted > > the rules of AOL to suppress messages from me and > > Mahdi,as well as others. > > What were the rules? How were they distorted? > > > In an unmoderated newsgroup > > such as this, such facts are pertinent, not off-topic, > > though Bahai fundamentalists will say otherwise, > > finding flimsy pretexts for deriding Mahdi. > > Recently Mr.Mahdi started numerous threads alleging that Mark Foster was > an anti-Muslim racist. I saw no facts substantiated those titles in > Mr.Mahdi's messages. Now Mr.Mahdi shifts his accusation to one of > prejudice and a faith-wide character flaw, or something. I see adverse > generalizations. I think facts which support thesises would be an > upgrade; so far it looks like a personal attack turned into a weak > excuse of 'anything else'. > > B. > - Pat > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, June 04, 1999 8:07 AM Subject: Re: Killfiles and filtering Far from a joke, it may be a very real possibility that Kathy Pascoe is a Roger Reini troll from his ford account or home account. One should not be too hasty to dismiss it: A link to deja.com showing Kathy Pascoe's postings for this year: https://www.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/qs.xp?ST=PS&QRY=ford&defaultOp=AND&DBS=1&OP=d nquery.xp&LNG=ALL&subjects=&groups=&authors=kathy@scconsult.com&fromdate=oct +1+1998&todate=Dec+30+1998&showsort=score&maxhits=100 https://www.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/qs.xp?ST=PS&QRY=&defaultOp=AND&DBS=1&OP=dnque ry.xp&LNG=ALL&subjects=&groups=&authors=kathy@scconsult.com&fromdate=Jan+1+1 999&todate=Dec+30+1999&showsort=score&maxhits=100 SAMPLE: Subject: Re: Critical mass Date: 1998/11/26 Author: Kathy Pascoe Posting History On Wed, 25 Nov 1998 21:45:36 GMT, trebor@sirius.com wrote: > In article <365C2A79.B1AE233E@ford.com>, > Kathy Pascoe wrote: > > trebor@sirius.com wrote: > > > How pissed were you when Deja News spammed? And iName? > > > > I didn't get either of them. Tough to be pissed under the > > circumstances. > > Up until now, the premise was "If Ford started spamming," and it was > understood to mean spamming in general, and not spamming specific people. Understood. > > Activists who can only muster outrage when personally affected do not further > they cause they claim to support. Apologies for having been flip. I did not read the iName threads, so I have no opinion on that situation. Re Dejanews, it looks to me from what I've read that there was a clumsy attempt to cover up what appears to have been a spam run. I'm somewhat hesitant to say 'You must die for spamming me' when I, as a Dejanews customer who is very reachable, didn't get caught in the net of the mailing list they used. So I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and assume they'll learn from this experience and spam no more. In other words, I don't think they're on a par with what I've read about peoples' experience with Amazon (who have also never spammed me). I'd prefer that you not assume I'm among those who think you're nuts for being pissed at Dejanews and iName. Nor do I recall a 'one true activist' attitude requirement for nanae. -- Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (at home) -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:7j6ajl$2hng@drn.newsguy.com... > In article <928407151.336.63@news.remarQ.com>, "Patrick says... > > > >You haven't shared with us yet your understanding or > >reaction to Juan Cole's Panopticon article. > > I enjoyed it. It filled in the blanks I'd had about Juan's > experiences. > > >Incidentally, I notice you've posted from FORD.COM, > >as Roger Reini has. Are you actually Reini as a troll? > > That was pretty funny, Fred. > > Ford's a big place. I'd be surprised if there weren't a few > more Ford folk lurking. > > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (home) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, June 04, 1999 1:36 PM Subject: Re: House warns of opposition "campaign" As a Bahai in good standing now for over 23 years, I believe Michael McKenny's analysis of the problem is not far off the mark, if at all.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Michael McKenny wrote in message news:7j8k9m$kho@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > > Greetings. > Continuing an examination of the misinformation spread by the UHJ: > > > Differing from attacks > > familiar in the past, it seeks to recast the entire Faith into a > > socio-poliotical ideology alien to Baha'u'llah's intent. > > Now, Baha'u'llah stated that as a consequence of certain basic > spiritual premises (the nobility and equal value of human souls, the > rich diversity of the harmonious garden of divine creation, the evolution > of spirituality on this planet, indeed the arrival of humans in this > age at the threshhold of the new stage of the spiritual maturity of the > species, etc.) certain basic premises current in Nineteenth Century thought > had become anachronistic and outdated, if they had ever had divine approval > at any time. > Among these political and social attitudes Baha'u'llah directed humans > to reach above were the inequaltities of class, race, nation, sex and creed > and the contentions and conflicts occasioned by views of inferiority and > superiority; the absolutist rule of ecclessiastical and monarchical systems; > the suppression of human thought justified by an exclusive awareness of > divine will by theocrats relying on a solely literalist understanding of > sacred texts; the opposition of religious thought and modern scientific > understandings and discoveries, etc. > It is precisely this spiritual foundation of Baha'u'llah's Revelation > which has been set in opposition to the legitimate succession within the > Baha'i Faith, and only because those who have come to occupy the highest > positions of power within the Baha'i Faith have caused this confrontation. > They have done this by ignoring the spiritual basis of Baha'u'llah's > Revelation and focusing their attention on the political and social area > of activity, and, through their opposition to the political and social > deductions provided by Baha'u'llah. > Now, since Baha'u'llah stated that in this day God had removed power > and authority from ecclessiastical elites seeking to impose a strictly > literalist interpretation of scriptures upon a populace these elites were > trying to keep in ignorant and divided subservience, it is no wonder that > even religious leaders coming to head the Baha'i Faith, by their ignoring > the spiritual foundation of their own religion, and insisting that literal > texts stating their authority within the Baha'i Faith allowed them to set > aside the broad-minded directions of Baha'u'llah and rule in the same > manner and with the same attitudes that Baha'u'llah had declared failed > to meet the progressive needs of the Nineteenth Century, it is no wonder > that these "Baha'i" religious leaders should find themselves included in > the prophetic declarations of Baha'u'llah that they are deprived of the > support of the spiritual realm. > This is clearly the reason that, notwithstanding all the energy they > have sought to arouse and direct, notwithstanding their imposition of the > most magnificent literal vocabulary in support of their ability, even their > necessity, to refrain from fulfilling their responsibilities, > notwithstanding the use of the most effective means of previous political > players, still, they have so poorly aided the Cause they head. > There is room for intense debate on coming to grips with this effort > by those who are legitimately at the helm of the Baha'i Faith to effect a > complete redirection of the Baha'i Religion away from the intent of the > Founder of the Faith. And, it ought to be fully understood that all the > practical thought individuals have expressed in e-mail lists concerning > the understanding of passages of scripture seeming to provide various > complementary means for the functioning of the Baha'i system, owe their > origin to the reality that the current members of the Universal House of > Justice have gone to such an extreme of renouncing the spiritual basis of > the system, transforming the Baha'i Faith into another Nineteenth Century > absolutist system, employing past political techniques striving to oppose > the spiritual concepts promoted by Baha'u'llah. > Personally, I agree with that progessive thought of Baha'u'llah's > and of the Nineteenth Century forward, that there ought to be freedom of > religion, avoiding the extreme of freedom to engage in religious wars. So, > if there is a body of individuals desiring to erect and to submit to the > kind of Nineteenth Century ecclessiastical system Baha'u'llah declared > lacked divine support, I'm happy to let them do so, though it might make > more sense were they to call it something other than Baha'i. I am largely > concerned that what they are choosing to do be clearly understood by all. > And, if Baha'u'llah really had the divine influence He claimed, then > the continuing evolution of the spiritual foundations and their results in > the physical realm which has been taking place in the world at large since > His arrival will continue to be manifest to the human species, whatever > those who call themselves Baha'i pre-occupy themselves with. > Again, you've received some hastily jotted down thoughts, and still I > believe they contain a degree of clarity on the fundamental aspect of this > current state of Baha'i. > May today find everyone very well, may tomorrow treat you even more > kindly and may each day after that be better than the one it succeeds. > All the Best, > Michael > > -- > "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." > (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, June 05, 1999 10:10 AM Subject: Re: Laws and Institutions...Become Really Effective Only When I don't believe this is an effective answer to a reasonable and genuine question. A lot irrelevant quotations really don't amount to much. It is not self-evident whether or how they relate to current discussion. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Eddie wrote in message news:7jahre$1jtf@enews3.newsguy.com... > Dear David, > > I thing you know ,We don't have priests,why do you want javid's > interpretations? Go yourself to the source and immerse youself in the > bahai writings . > > Adelard R. > > David Bowie wrote in message <3756a68c$0$3122@fountain.mindlink.net>... > >While I appreciate the posting of relevant guidance from Baha'i sources I > >wonder what is served by sending excerpts without any commentary. > > > >Perhaps Mesbah Javid would conisder giving us the fruit of his > contemplation > >on the passges he posts. > > > >Thanks, David Bowie > > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, June 05, 1999 10:12 AM Subject: Re: Killfiles and filtering I'm not convinced. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Roger Reini wrote in message news:3759e184.134614506@news.newsguy.com... > On Fri, 4 Jun 1999 08:07:22 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > wrote: > > >Far from a joke, it may be a very real possibility that Kathy Pascoe > >is a Roger Reini troll from his ford account or home account. One > >should not be too hasty to dismiss it: > > > > On the contrary, it is a non-existent possibility. You are doing an > injustice to Ms. Pascoe and myself by repeating this nonsense. Kindly > cease and desist from saying this in the future. > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:f_glaysher@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, June 05, 1999 10:24 AM To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Fwd: Re: Query >From: Q1914@aol.com >To: f_glaysher@hotmail.com >Subject: Re: Query >Date: Sat, 22 May 1999 13:11:37 EDT > > Thank you this will be very helpful > _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit https://www.msn.com ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 07, 1999 10:32 AM Subject: Re: The UHJ letter to NSAs about the Internet Also available, along with commentary on it, at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Majnunpost.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm John Noland wrote in message news:ZiY53.445$sU6.1106@news.flash.net... > Ron House wrote in message > news:37582093.19497C07@usq.edu.au... > > The contents of this accidental posting would appear to be a critical > > issue. Although it indicates the view of only one person, it seems to > > have coloured the UHJ's opinion of the entire issue. If their judgement > > of the letter is accurate, it goes a long way to explaining their > > beliefs. So can anyone who knows which letter they are referring to > > please post it here so we can see for ourselves? > > As per your request, here is the accidental posting in question: > > To: Talisman@indiana.edu > ****** > Subject: Majnun: Reality checks > Date: Wed, 7 Feb 1996 22:11:29 -0500 (EST) > Gentlemen and lady: > > I really must--uncharacteristically--agree with my good wife. > > 1. *Any* sort of an organization is an absolute nonstarter at this point. > That is the one thing that will not in any way be tolerated. There is a > clear precedent in the Guardian's handling of the New History Society. It > will just get us all thrown out on our ears, force the decent people to back > the scoundrels, and in all likely push the Faith back into the intellectual > ghetto, much like happened after the expulsion of Sohrab. Let's forget it > and erase the messages suggesting it. > > 2. Ditto *Modest Proposal II*. It didn't work last time and it won't work > this time. It will just polarize the situation. > > 3. Ditto direct attacks on individuals. Leave them to dig their own graves; > they have, after all, staff to help them. Attacks on members of the NSA by > organized or perceived-to-be-organized agitators, particularly members of > the notorious ex-West LA crowd, will force the House to rally to the defence > of the NSA. > > 4. Let us remember that we have won three rounds recently: Talisman was not > strangled in its cradle; the NSA seems to have backed down on attacking > ****--according to rumor because they feared that ******* would sue them, I > am gratified to say; and the NSA is standing > its ground against the House on the issue of the Baha'i encyclopedia. > > 5. We have hit on a winning strategy, I think: > a) Avoid direct confrontations whenever possible. > b) If attacked, as in ****'s case, indicate that we are prepared to stand > our ground and make trouble. > c) Get information and ideas into circulation. > d) Keep the heat on whenever it can be done without direct > confrontations. > e) Do not allow ourselves to be painted as bad Baha's. > f) Give the powers-that-be a graceful way out of their problems. > > They're starting to eat their horses inside the fortress; let's stay safely > in the trenches and not jump up and charge the cannons. This means that we > need to keep doing what we are doing: no committees, manifestos, or > unnecessary martyrs. In particular, now is the time to lay on earnest > charm. > > And, ****, as for you, I do not want any more of these inflammatory > statements. You have no independent clout yet apart from whatever your > family connections might be, and we will need you for the next > generation's fights. There is no point in your getting thrown out now. > > So lay off the manifesto-making and work on your Arabic verb tables, or I > will drop you from Talisman. What is the 8th form feminine plural > imperative of Q-R-B? > > ******** > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 7:04 AM Subject: Re: Test of orthodoxy??? John, Makes a number of valid observations and closes with a request for consultation, which will never come on these matters as long as the UHJ continues to distort Baha'u'llah's Teachings into fundamentalism. Its recent paranoid announcements this spring show it is only capable of construing every opinion other than its own unsanctioned interpretations as opposition and attacks on the faith. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm John Noland wrote in message news:IEV63.423$up4.460@news.flash.net... > Mesbah Javid <11111174@3web.net> wrote in message > news:7jfb5g$i4c$1@iceman.tac.net... > > So can we conclude that Dr. Cole falls into the > > definition of Covenant-breakers or not yet? > > You seem to be suggesting that the Baha'i Faith should adopt some sort of > formal test of orthodoxy above and beyond believing Baha'u'llah is Who He > says He is and in God's Covenant with us. > > Would you pass such a test? Would I? Would anyone? No. Such tests of > Orthodoxy are not a part of the Baha'i Faith and to me are really anathema. > If we aren't allowed the freedom to investigate Baha'u'llah's Revelation for > ourselves then what are we to do? > > I would suggest to all concerned that if a person doesn't like or disagrees > with the findings of scholarly studies that they should respond in an > appropriate manner, which would be using scholarly methods to refute them. > Scholarship is not a static thing. It is fluid and dynamic. It doesn't stand > still and it is always open to revision. > > There are exciting possibilities for a vibrant Baha'i intellectual > community, > but the possibilities won't be realized until some of the problems that Dr. > Cole and Fred Glaysher point out are rectified. One of the things many > scholars and artists object to is the Baha'i pre-publication review. Why is > this still in place? I can see it's usefulness in ensuring factual > information in literature aimed at the seeker or new Baha'i, but to > scholarly material or poetry? If I were Juan Cole, I would find much to > object to. If after much education and a lot of research, you submitted > material for publication and it were reviewed, edited and portions nixed by > a person with absolutely no credentials in your field of study how would you > feel? How can Baha'i intellectual life advance if all of our authors and > scholars are prohibited from building upon the foundation laid by their > forerunners? I'll refrain from making any suggestions here for alternatives, > but I would like to at least see some of these issues opened up for > consultation. > > Thanks, > John > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 7:16 AM Subject: Tyranny: UHJ From: FG To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; bahai-faith @ makelist.com Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM July 24,1998 Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." The tragic loss of Bahai lives in Iran and the subsequent exploitation of their deaths by Bahai spokesmen, often in the American media, always courting the President and other members of the government, has become a predictable pattern rendered intolerable in the context of continuing and pervasive Bahai censorship and denial of human and civil rights in the United States and elsewhere. Such incidents as I queried you about in my unanswered email of March 31, 1997, available on my Web site, regarding the crushing of the magazine Dialogue, the resignations of a number of scholars from the Bahai Encyclopedia, the attacks on the listserv known as Talisman I at Indiana University, the harassing and blacklisting of many individuals, Bahai and non-Bahai, suggest profoundly deep-seated problems within the Bahai community and administration. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/To-UHJ1.htm To these incidents must now be added the apparent conspiracy for more than a year and a half of the Bahai Computer and Communications Committee (BCCA), under the chairmanship of Mark Towfiq, to defeat twice now, along with the collusion of other Bahais, the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith which would be known as talk.religion.bahai. You may find extensive documentation for all of these violations of the basic human rights of many Bahais and non-Bahais on my Web site, "The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm Because the third interest poll for talk.religion.bahai on Usenet is approaching, after August 28th, I ask you again to investigate the BCCA and its depriving me of access last November from all private Bahai-only mailing lists at a crucial moment just when the tide of discussion was going very much in favor of the newsgroup, noted by many observers. I also ask whether you supported or were involved in that decision? The relevant files can be found on my Web site under Bahai-Discuss Archives. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm Similarly, I would like to know whether your institution or the BCCA has approved of or advocated the recent ban of my email signature file by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai, as well as their complete ban for more than a year and a half now on all discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai. The prevailing atmosphere of suppression of free speech and religious conscience that now characterizes the Bahai Faith cannot but call into question the honesty of many members of the Bahai administration and perhaps the institutions themselves. I ask once more whether censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith and what passages of the Bahai Writings support it, what are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship? Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ------ Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 7:18 AM Subject: Tyranny: Bahais on AOL In August of 1998 I took out an account on AOL. It quickly became apparent that my fellow Bahais were using AOL in such a way as to further withhold knowledge and information from AOL's more than 14 million members. It appeared to me that there were four main issues. Alt.religion.bahai, which had been created in April of 1997 and which had had more than 20,000 messages posted to it, was not even offered in the list of AOL newsgroups. AOL personnel with which I spoke over the phone were very puzzled why it wasn't and even implied that some action would have had to have been taken to keep it from automatically being picked up and added to their newsgroups. It took more than a month of strenuous effort to get AOL to add alt.religion.bahai. On the AOL Bahai Forums it became apparent that Bahais were manipulating and controlling information by NOT making it available, by essentially preserving the frozen, non-functioning state of affairs or the status quo: 1. The Libraries were not accepting new uploads for others then to download and read. 2. The list of Newsgroups on the Main Menu for Bahai offered only soc.religion.bahai with no mention of alt.religion.bahai, or talk.religion.bahai once it was created in January of 1999. Coupled with soc.religion.bahai's suppression of all mention of alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai, this prevents people from even hearing of their existence. 3. The available links for Web Sites on the Main Menu for Bahai did not offered my website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience, though it has to be one of the most visited sites on the Bahai Faith with more than 7,000 hits since May 1998. As the months went by, my repeated attempts to improve these deficiencies met with greater and greater opposition from the Bahai fundamentalists on AOL. Similiarly, my requests, beginning in August of 1998, that the Forum Leader, Mark Foster, who no one had seen for months, resign, for derilection of duty, were increasingly opposed while various excuses were offered for his absence. Not until talk.religion.bahai was passed five months later in January 1999 did he suddenly reappear only to begin immediately reporting absolutely EVERY message I posted to AOL as a TOS. It quickly became clear to me that he was back in order to target and build a case against me to have me suspended from AOL. My account was then temporarily suspended on three different occasions and finally terminated March 6, 1999. Of the four issues, only two have partially been remedied. 1. Alt.religion.bahai and now talk.religion.bahai are available under AOL's Keyword Newsgroups, Expert Add. 2. The Libraries are accepting some uploads, though Foster banned the 15+ megabytes I uploaded in late February of my entire archive of discussion for talk.religion.bahai and which is at least available on my website. It's obvious Foster is finding pretexts for suppressing further uploads. While Foster has claimed since mid-January that alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai would be added to the Main Menu under Newsgroups, he continued to make excuses for it not happening. As of March 9, 1999 they were not yet listed under Newsgroups along with soc.religion.bahai. All of these factors, coupled with Mark Foster's abuse of his position as Forum Leader and his harassing and targetting of dissenting voices, not only mine, leaves no doubt that he and other Bahais, including some among the Bahai Administration, are involved in censoring discourse on AOL. For an instance of "back-channel" email coercion on AOL see https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm For an instance of Foster's double standard handling fundamentalist Bahais see Susan Maneck's accusations on AOL against me of "slander" and references to my views as "garbage": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm The immediate pretext for terminating my account, according to the AOL official with whom I spoke on the phone, was that I had pointed out in a newly created Folder called Censorship that I and other AOL members had requested a Folder entitled Bahai Censorship and thereby undermined the authority of the Forum Leader.... In closing let me add that AOL personnel are extremely uninformed about the Bahai Faith, especially its practice of censorship, and its ability to exploit the TOS system.... Half a megabyte of messages documenting Bahai censorship on AOL may be found at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 7:18 AM Subject: Resisting Tyranny: FAQ arb & trb ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Alt.Religion.Bahai, Talk.Religion.Bahai This FAQ will be reposted approximately every two weeks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- People with only web access might want to use www.dejanews.com www.reference.com or www.newsguy.com They all offer reading and posting capabilities for people who can't directly access alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai and filter out spam. Alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai are available on America Online (AOL) Keyword, Newsgroups, then search for alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai If your ISP does not offer talk.religion.bahai, follow this news.groupie advice: "If your ISP doesn't have the group shortly, I suggest that you ask the newsmaster there to add it (Try news@isp.net, or newsmaster@isp.net) Ask politely. Include the msg ID of the results posting, and of the newgroup msg." Dave Cornejo's RESULT posting: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=431106082&CONTEXT=918305125.781648012&hi tnum=0 David Lawrence's newgroup msg creating talk.religion.bahai: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=434026333&CONTEXT=918304600.713490686&hi tnum=3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: Not all people agree on the interpretations given below. Question #1 "Why create arb or t.r.b.?" ANSWER #1: Because many people believe they experienced or are continuing to experience censorship when attempting to post to soc.religion.bahai. See the quotations from Abdu'l-Baha: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #2: Because the Bahai writings support free speech and religious conscience. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #3: [fill in the blank according to your own opinion.] Question #2: "Why do the srb moderators oppose trb?" ANSWER: Perhaps they'll supply an answer to place here. (Two years later their NO votes are their only answer.) Question #3: "Are Bahais opposed to freedom of speech and conscience?" ANSWER: Despite glowing words of love and support for other people's opinions, despite the Universal House of Justice stating at least publicly it is not opposed to an unmoderated forum, the record of actual behavior by Bahais and on soc.religion.bahai and the experience of many Bahais and people who have left the Bahai Faith give serious reason for concern. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chronology of major events: talk.religion.bahai ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- January 17, 1997: The 1st proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted to news.announce.newgroups. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRFD.htm Early March 1997: Mark Towfiq, chairman of the BCCA, the Bahai Computer and Communication Association, posts to three Bahai-only mailing lists a call for Bahais to vote NO against talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Towfiq.htm March 1997: soc.religion.bahai bans all discussion of talk.religion.bahai from its newsgroup. This ban is still in effect more than a year and a half later. March 31, 1997: The 1st proposal was defeated 157 YES to 691 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRESULT.htm April 3, 1997: Jonathan Grobe, a non-Bahai, creates alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/arb.htm October 14, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message stating it has no objection to unmoderated newsgroups: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ1.htm November 1997: At a time when discussion was highly favorable in support of talk.religion.bahai, the BCCA deprives Frederick Glaysher of access to the private Bahai-only mailing list bahai-discuss and all of its other lists, inflaming Bahai passions against trb. See bahai-discuss archived files and correspondence between Frederick Glaysher and the BCCA committee: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm December 19, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message that suggests it does not understand the nature of Usenet interest polling: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ2.htm January 12, 1998: The 2nd proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRFD.htm February 22, 1998: The 2nd proposal was defeated 109 YES to 65 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRESULT.htm May 25, 1998: srb bans all messages from Frederick Glaysher that contain his signature file: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb23.htm September 9,1998: America Online (AOL) places a Bahai-inspired TOS against Frederick Glaysher; AOL removes the TOS after considering both sides of the issue, i.e., Bahai messages attacking and threatening him and the experience of others: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm September 14, 1998: soc.religion.bahai extends its ban on Frederick Glaysher's signature file to include all signature files and URLs from all posters, allowing only email addresses and the name of the poster: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srbban.htm October 14, 1998: Soc.religion.bahai moderator Bill Hyman backbites and casts aspersions on proponent Ron House and attempts to undermine the new support for the "neutral" RFD: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb67.htm December 3, 1998: The Call For Votes (CFV) was posted to news.announce.newgroups and news.groups for the 3rd interest poll for talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRFD.htm December 7, 1998: Bahai scholar Susan Maneck begins her NO vote campaign on AOL and alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm January 10, 1999: Talk.religion.bahai passes 218: 63. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRESULT.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- For past discussion of censorship on soc.religion.bahai and other issues, including censorship within the Bahai community, see the website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/FAQ.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 7:19 AM Subject: Tyranny: Bahai Techniques During the last several years or more a number of observers have noted the common methods many Bahais use to avoid various issues or discredit people who hold opinions other than their own: Frederick Glaysher, May 12, 1992: "The Baha'i Faith has become very oppressive and manipulative of the individual. That to me is merely a statement of fact, as I have experienced it, for nearly sixteen years now [over 22]. The usual stratagem in dealing with anyone who would express his conscience in good faith is to pretend the Cause is above any kind of criticism whatsoever while intimating that anyone who would speak honestly must have something wrong with him, i.e., his spiritual life isn't what it should be, he doesn't understand the nature of unity, or he's accused of trying to obtain power for himself, which at times seems merely a calculated way of discrediting the person, and so on. Another common strategy used to acquire control over the individual is to humor the person by letting him pour himself out, etc., and then self-righteously giving him the Truth." Ron House, November 14, 1997: "I know what you mean. I've found over the years that there is a technique used by traditional Baha'is and others to squash dissension: harry the dissenter so much he says something intemperate, then point out how 'loving' and 'compassionate' they are and how nasty the dissenter is. The trouble is that this technique works, so I've been making a conscious effort not to fall for it. Also, when they get the dissenter discouraged and miserable enough, he invariably makes a slip-up sooner or later that they can REALLY let loose the venom over. IMHO, they did this to you when you misread Sharon's intentions. At any other time, they would overlook faults, as Baha'u'llah says, but when they're in this mode they go for the jugular. Very sad." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/House2.htm Frederick Glaysher, June 1998: "Some of the most striking methods demonstrated repeatedly by many Bahais during the last year and a half of discussion about an unmoderated newsgroup is their refusal to listen and respond to the criticisms of those who are in favor of talk.religion.bahai, ignoring their concerns, never responding analytically to their messages and reasoning and logic and evidence, attacking them through character assassination and ad hominem, ganging up on individuals, and "circling the wagons" around every action of the srb moderators or others who are opposed to talk.religion.bahai." "More than twenty different people on my web site have posted messages explaining their experience with srb censorship yet many srb Bahais NEVER address their concerns. Ignoring such charges will not make them go away. NO ONE has to "try" to link the trb interest poll with censorship on srb; the moderators themselves have done that by suppressing droves of people for years. There are many people who believe such suppression is part and parcel of the Bahai community as it exists today. A YES vote need not necessarily support such a belief. There are other reasons Bahais might vote YES." Fran Baker, May 1998: "Just have to say that in my experience this is a common technique of manipulative people in general; it is especially effective with thoughtful people who are willing to see both sides of things, i.e., their own fault. I consider this brow-beating technique to be a form of abuse. The only way to deal with it is to call them on it every time and to refuse to let yourself be beat up, i.e., not to do your part of the "tango." This can be very hard to do, but it works.You can break this pattern in a personal relationship. I don't know whether it's possible when a group acts this way. Very scary." Dr. Juan Cole, June 12, 1998: "Let me ask you why in the world you think that I would risk my professional reputation by publicly stating falsehoods? ...The very technique of the more glaze-eyed among these people is to unbearably bully a Baha'i whom they don't like, use unjustified threats of declaring him or her a CB to silence the individual, and if the person will not be silenced, then to depend upon the gullibility of the Baha'is in refusing to listen to any victim's story because, of course, the Baha'i institutions are infallible and divinely guided and could never do anything wrong. It is a perfect racket." "Of course, this technique of making liberals go away has been enormously successful, and ex-Baha'i liberals have no credibility with the remaining Baha'is nor do most of them have any energy to continue to make a case, either to the Baha'is or the outside world, for the incredible abuses that go on inside this organization ostensibly committed to tolerance!" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Cole10.htm K. Paul Johnson, September 15, 1998: "If that principle [people are innocent until proven guilty] were followed by Baha'i administration and individuals in their condemnations of their fellow believers, I would have very little to complain about regarding Baha'i affairs. But character assassination by innuendo is the preferred way of dealing with anything remotely resembling dissidence. Seems like that's exactly what you're doing to Juan Cole in your message. Saying I don't want to know what you've "got" on him, thus attacking me but insinuating you have some awful proof of unspecified guilt on his part. If that's not character assassination by innuendo, what is?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson18.htm Gibro28W, October 12, 1998: "In summary, the biggest problem, as I see it, is that most Baha'is don't take criticism seriously--they tune it out as "negative" or "harmful to spiritual growth." This selfish attitude is very stupid. First of all, Baha'is entice people to join them. When they do, they indoctrinate them until they think like the group. But as soon as a red flare of doubt goes up in the convert's mind, they're cordoned off by the group and reminded of their "spiritual" obligations in the name of Baha'u'llah or the "Covenant." If left unresolved and doubt gives vent to prolonged criticism, the convert is sent packing or is kicked out. What we have here is a broken family that had failed to truly listen to the needs of its members in the first place." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb73.htm Barthaman on September 14, 1998: "Baha'i dissenters, more or less, are wounded souls abandoned by their fathers,so-to-speak. They have been cast out and dismissed or shunned without having had a fair hearing. Consider their pain when the rest of their "family" dismisses them too. Can you know what it's like to be accused of heresy and shunned following a sincere intellectual conflict (inspired by doubt)-- after you've sacrificed years in devoted service to your religion? Can you comprehend their sense of betrayal and injustice? This is why disillusioned believers leave their religions each year--while some still hang around, banging on the door now and then, demanding a refund for their lost youth. In time they will have to move on, however, writing the Baha'i Faith off as another lesson in fraud. Mock these people all you want--but for the grace of God, the next dissenter could be you. Don't be too confident, my friend." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb66.htm Juan Cole wrote, February 23, 1999: "There is nothing to be puzzled by. Right wing Baha'is only like to hear the sound of their own voices (which are the only voices they will admit to being "Baha'i" at all)." "Obviously, the world is so constructed that they cannot in fact only hear their own voices. They are forced to hear other voices that differ from theirs. This most disturbs them when the voices come from enrolled Baha'is or when the voices speak of the Baha'i faith." "The way they sometimes deal with the enrolled Baha'is is to summon them to a heresy inquiry and threaten them with being shunned if they do not fall silent." "With non-Baha'is or with ex-Baha'is, they deal with their speech about the faith by backbiting, slandering and libelling the speaker. You will note that since I've been on this list I have been accused of long-term heresy, of "claiming authority," of out and out lying (though that was retracted, twice), of misrepresentation, of 'playing fast and loose with the facts,' and even of being 'delusional.' I have been accused of all these falsehoods by *Baha'is*, by prominent Baha'is. I have been backbitten by them." "This shows that all the talk about the danger a sharp tongue can do, all the talk about the need for harmony, for returning poison with honey, for a sin-covering eye, is just *talk* among right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute." "Paul Johnson has seen all these things, as well, for the past five years. He can explain it to you." Cf. K. Paul Johnson's general reflections on coercive techniques https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson21.htm And LaAeterna's method of silencing opponents https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb65.htm Comments on the related techniques of Susan Maneck: Juan Cole, February 13, 1999: "It is a very, very, very weird religion. And if anyone is reading Susan Maneck's absolutely bone-chilling screeds on the desirability of Heresy Trials and carefulness in Shunning, they are seeing what it is like at the core of the religion." "I really am sorry for them and her, since they seem sort of filled with hate and quite paranoid, yet say they are preaching love, unity and tolerance. Susan will say, 'may your abdomen be split by lightning and your guts fall out you filthy heretic whom I wish I could just have shunned and buried', and then she'll sign herself "warmest" and slander a university by adding it to her sig line. As if what she is about has anything at all to do with *universities*!" Frederick Glaysher, February 15, 1999: "Ms. Maneck's approach appears to me to be always to shunt the discussion off or back to who said what where when why how and so on.... The farther back in time the better, since the person's memory, being human, is bound to be unable to keep up or to have stocked the evidence needed on his or her hard drive or find it on dejanews.com. And it then allows her to claim pretty much anything she wants to while seeming to have discredited her opponent. Further, she relies on the tactics of demagoguery knowing they usually prevail and will be supported by other fundamentalist Bahais. By shrieking "slander" and referring to others' opinions as "garbage," she is able to create an emotional atmosphere that essentially negates whatever the topic or content might be and that allows her to appear to win what is often a narrowly legalistic point or interpretation." "All of this is done, of course, in conjunction with her employing the more common Bahai techniques of intimidation and psychological demonization and terrorism." Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 7:20 AM Subject: Tyranny: Bahai Bullies & Fundamentalists I'm alarmed at the recent Bahai attempts at character assassination, ridicule, and generally portraying me and others as disturbed individuals. I have never claimed to be perfect. At times I have apologized to Bahais, Muslims, and other non-Bahais when I felt, or was convinced, that I was wrong or had spoken unfairly. I find the constant technique to portray me as a megalomanic or paranoid quite offensive. Similarly, the tactic of accusing me of spam for posting my opinions is calculated to discredit the validity of my and others' concerns regarding censorship in Bahai forums and has also been used on AOL. Such accusations reveal the frustration that Bahai fundamentalists apparently feel over my having found ways of enduring and resisting the onslaught of their concerted attacks, while preserving a historical record on a markedly ephermeral medium for innocent Bahais and non-Bahais.... Fair-minded Bahai and non-Bahai observers may judge for themselves whether my and others' allegations of censorship are valid by reading the record preserved under "Assorted Controversial Documents" on my website at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm As further corroboration that I am not the only person concerned with the intolerance and censorship that has overtaken the Bahai Faith, I recommend Professor Juan Cole's new book Modernity & the Millennium: The Genesis of the Bahai Faith in the Nineteenth-Century Middle East, available through Columbia University Press or Amazon.com at https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 In his conclusion, which would never have passed the system of Bahai "review" that the UHJ imposes on all publications brought out under its tight control, Professor Cole, of the Department of History at The University of Michigan, quite accurately identifies the distortions that have been wreaked upon Baha'u'llah's Teachings: "Some contemporary leaders of the Baha'i Faith have given answers increasingly similar to those of fundamentalists, stressing scriptural literalism, patriachy, theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values. While the values of the nineteenth- century Baha'i movement, which was far more tolerant, continue to exist as a minority view, by the late 1990s a different set of emphases prevailed." (196) He himself and many others, as evidence under the "Assorted Controversial Documents," have suffered at the hands of the fundamentalists who have taken control of the religion: "The rise of academic Baha'i scholarship has caused tension in the community, whose present-day leadership tends to be fundamentalist and antiliberal in orientation, and this has led to pressure on a number of prominent academics to resign or dissociate themselves from the movement." (201) These same forces of fundamentalist orthodoxy are evident on AOL, talk.religion.bahai, and alt.religion.bahai for impartial viewers to witness. They will be evident to all perceptive observers of whatever forum Bahais may be trying to control and influence. As a Bahai for more than 23 years, I myself have always found especially repulsive the manner in which Bahai fundamentalists attempt to manipulate the institutions and leaders of government, the United Nations, and public opinion, while pretending to values they deride in private or at Bahai-only meetings. Ultimately, it is the Bahai Universal House of Justice that is responsible for the perversion and corruption of such clear and elevating teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. The UHJ is also in the end responsible for inciting Bahai fanatics and fundamentalists to attack other Bahais and non-Bahais merely for their views expressed on and off line in free forums of public discussion. I recommend all newcomers to these matters read "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm On Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 7:21 AM Subject: Tyranny: Bahai Chairman Steals from Dead Widow Dismissal of Judge James F. Nelson, Chair of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, in April, 1999. April 6, 1999 Delegates to the 1999 Baha'i National ConventionBeloved Friends, We deeply regret the necessity of informing you that James F. Nelson has been guilty of gross negligence in the performance of his duties as a member of the National Spiritual Assembly and that, although he has expressed his profound regret for the related occurrences, and has effected full restitution of the damage done, he has felt impelled, by his awareness of the high responsibility of the post in which he has been serving, to tender his resignation from the membership of the National Spiritual Assembly, and the National Spiritual Assembly has accepted this resignation. At this painful moment the National Spiritual Assembly offers James Nelson its loving support and prayers. NATIONAL SPIRITUAL ASSEMBLY OF THE BAHA'IS OF THE UNITED STATES [signed] Robert C. HendersonSecretary-General cc: Continental Counselors serving tthe United States ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- CommentaryDate: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 09:14:15 -0700From: Steven Scholl Subject: NelsonTo: talisman@umich.edu Here is all I know about the situation. Jim Nelson was helping an elderly Baha'i in Pasadena with her finances. I believe he had some power to sign checks from her account for paying bills, etc. She told Jim that she wanted her payment to the huquq [the 19% tax on some income to be paid to the Universal House of Justice in Haifa, Israel according to Baha'i law] to be set up as an endowment rather than being a lump sum payment. On her death, Jim placed the huquq funds from her accounts into a new account under his name. This led to protests from the estate's executor and prompted the NSA to go on the war path with claims of wrongdoing. I do not know if the executor of the estate is a Baha'i or not. Since the huquq funds would be directed to Haifa, one can imagine why [National Spiritual Assembly secretary-general Robert C.] Henderson would be upset by Jim's action. Henderson has been accused in the past of mismanagement of funds, of hijacking contributions earmarked to the World Centre into a special NSA account, skimming off the interest and then at the end of the year sending the principle along to Haifa. But this is purely personal speculation on my part. This is the only thing I have heard in terms of "wrongdoing" on Nelson's part, whereas Henderson's letter to the delegates refers to "related occurrences" in the plural. As for restitution, I understand that the money never went anywhere and, in the end, the funds were handled according to the wishes of the deceased Baha'i in the way Jim was planning to set up in the first place. So, what does this all indicate? My take is that for years there has been rivalries and factions on the NSA, especially between the West Coast Gang led by the Nelsons (with Bill Davis and Juana Conrad) vs. the Henderson/Kazemzadeh block. I have heard that in their rebuke to Nelson the NSA refered to his "careless" behavior, while in the letter to the delegates they refer to "gross negligence in the performance of duties." My view is that if the NSA was sincere in their concern for Nelson and his spiritual growth, they would have simply accepted his resignation and informed the delegates that after years of service, Judge Nelson has resigned for health or personal reasons. The letter to the delegates seems to me to be a blatant campaign maneuver. It seems aimed at (1) publicly humiliating Jim Nelson and (2) helping guide the delegates in their voting for a candidate from the Henderson/Kazemzadeh Good Old Boys Network rather than from the now suspect Nelson Network. As someone who has dealt with Henderson and Kazemzadeh in the past and had them use lies and slander in their attacks on my beliefs and behavior, this latest outburst is not at all surprising and fits their modus operandi perfectly. That is to say, the timing and the pure sleeziness of this blatant political manuvering fits with their history of self-promotion combined with vicious personal attacks against those who might threaten their grip of power over the American Baha'i community. Having been absent from these Baha'i cultural wars now for several years, I do find it fascinating that since many of us old "heretics" have either left the faith, lost rights, or gone into the grand occultation of self-imposed exile and inactivity, the leadership, at a loss for enemies, seems intent on feeding on each other. Needless to say, it will be interesting how the delegates respond to this news, whether they will back Henderson and Kazemzadeh by voting in one of their cronies or protest this action by voting in a West coast candidate. Steve -----------------------------------------------------Date: 4-14-99 To: talisman@umich.eduFrom: Juan ColeSubject: Re: NSA elections Actually, early twentieth century Baha'is under `Abdu'l-Baha had perfectly democratic elections, and were instructed to do it that way by `Abdu'l-Baha. During WW I when there was conflict over whether to support the war effort or adopt a pacifist stance, hawks like Mason Remey organized a campaign for the NSA in 1917 in which they captured it and reversed the previous pacifist policy! Older Baha'is spoke of the times when Republican and Democratic Baha'is wouldn't speak with one another. The problem with the current situation is not merely that the voting records of the NSA members are completely unknown. It is that the activities and policies of the NSA as a whole are almost completely unknown! What exactly do these people do? What policies have they made? What effect have the policies had? Have they been good for the growth of the community, numerically and spiritually? Without knowing the answer to this question, how can the delegates even begin to vote intelligently? Though, as we have seen, the very rules of the elections leave them with little potentialimpact. We know that there were about 48,000 adult Baha'is with good addresses in the US in 1978. There are now about 60,000. In the meantime 12,000 Iranians immigrated. This means that there has been no growth in over twenty years. *None*. Of course, hundreds if not a few thousands of people have come in during the past two decades, but enormous numbers of them have gone right back out. Would any CEO who had not increased his earnings a single penny over twenty years be reappointed by the board? The exclusivistic policies of Mr. Henderson, who is frankly mean-spirited, have contributed enormously to this Great Stagnation. He was the one who cracked down on Dialogue magazine in such a nasty way. He bullied Baha'i travel agents in 1991, for the Lord knows what reward from the corrupt Corporate Travel Consultants. He agitated behind the scenes for a crackdown on talisman@indiana.edu. He has chased travel teachers out of the country, seeing them as an electoral threat should they become successful. I have no idea about the propriety of Jim Nelson's book-keeping practices, but surely for Henderson to publicly smear him after Jim served on the NSA 1971-1999, in circumstances where Nelson cannot even publicly defend himself, is the height of sleaze. Henderson has arranged for himself to live rent free free in a 9-bedroom mansion (having the Bourgeois studio knocked down to build it, against UHJ instructions) with free Baha'i maids and gardeners, and his main business seems to be bullying Baha'is into silence behind the scenes. And I fully acknowledge that he is probably acting rationally given the way the Baha'i system is structured. So, I think all these things are related: the fact that the Baha'i faith in the US has been going nowhere fast for decades; the fact that the electoral system seems to elect the ambitious and greedy (and paranoid) to the top offices; the fact that even initially upright people are made perpetual incumbents, exposing them to the temptations of absolute power held for decades and corrupting them; the fact that the electoral system provides an incentive for the incumbents to slap down and chase out potential competitors; the fact that it would not be in the incumbents' interest for the faith to expand, become more open, attract a lot of new voters who might rock the boat. Term limits would go a long way toward solving all these problems. In fact, why not have staggered elections for 4-year terms? You could elect 5 members in 2000 and 4 in 2002. People who don't serve as long as Nelson did might not become tempted to act high-handedly. They wouldn't face reelection and so would have no reason to fear being unseated by active young folks. Counselor Fred Schechter, one of the people who falsely accused me, once told a friend of mine that anyone who becomes active in the faith will be attacked (by the faith's officials, it is implied). We hadn't at the time realized that Schechter intended to *act* on this observation! This is a dysfunctional system, folks. There are ways in which it destroyed Dan Jordan (forcing him to live a lie and to resort to secret trysts), Allen Ward, and now Jim Nelson--not to mention the spiritual harm it has wreaked on the Baby Boom intellectuals who were enticed in with promises of tolerance and justice (!!!). When Glenford Mitchell had become a huge pain in the ass as NSA secretary and was finally elected off it to the UHJ, everyone breathed a big sigh of relief. And when Henderson came in, the word was that he was a good guy, and we were all relieved. And then in a few short years he demonstrated that he was an even bigger pain in the ass than Mitchell had been. Even dumping Henderson wouldn't solve the problem. The *system* creates the Hendersons and the Nelsons. If anyone cared about the fortunes of the faith as opposed to the size of their marble offices, they would fix the system. cheers Juan ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Return to DocumentsTo Baha'i StudiesTo Talisman wrote in message news:7focup$gi9$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com... > Documents and discussions regarding the recent dismissal of the chairmanof > the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the US for 'financial > improprieties' may be found at:> > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/bhnsa.htm>> cheers Juan>>> -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity and the Millennium: The Genesis of the Baha'i Faith* at: > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448> Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 7:21 AM Subject: Tyranny: Attacks from Bahais Incessant Bahai attacks upon my freedom of speech and liberty have made it necessary for me to adopt a persona for my own protection and well being. Other measures have been taken. During the last three months, Bahais have twice flooded my hotmail account with up to 1000 messages per day resulting in considerable inconvenience and expenditure of time and effort to block, and ultimately close, the offending accounts; they have, by using Bahai trolls, especially Gyr Falcon, slandered, maligned, and caricatured me in a further effort to discredit me and portray me on talk.religion.bahai and elsewhere as a disturbed and errant individual; through concerted false charges and allegations against me, they have now succeeded in deceiving Hotmail into closing my email account, which I depended on for a considerable part of my income and livelihood. For documentation of many similar incidents of Bahai oppression during the last decade, see Frederick Glaysher's website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 7:22 AM Subject: Tyranny: soc.religion.bahai Robert J. Pease, December 5, 1998: "I support your efforts to expose SRB as a fundamentalist group." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb84.htm Ron House: "I think the following is a clear case of malicious rejection of an article by the worst of the moderators of soc.religion.bahai." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb53.htm Timothy Mulligan: "(Sigh) Fred, I'm beginning to think you're right about those SRB moderators." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb59.htm RobertNik: "these guys are pompous arseholes IMHO." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb54.htm Bruce Burrill: "What are Baha'i afraid of?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb60.htm Zuteflute: "Frankly I could not see anything in the letter I wrote which would prompt someone to ask whether or not I am a Baha'i." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb50.htm YU ZIR: "But as an outsider, I can perhaps see the point Fred Glaysher is making, and which point none of SRB's defenders seem to address." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb46.htm Matthew Cromer: "The current moderators regulate the contents--posting articles which they agree with...." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb47.htm Kavosh Soltani, December 9, 1998: "So many Bahais on these forums have shown to be ready to forget logic and reason, ignore clear evidence and Word of God, and come up with exactly the same line of tired and inaccurate excuses and arguments to justify their position, that it can not be a simple coincidence." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb77.htm Shakti3, December 4, 1998: "Sorry to hear that you've been surpressed on srb. Your comments were alway very "right on." Altho it does not surprise me one bit, seeing the way these newsgroups operate." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Ex7.htm Harold Shinsato: "It seems like there is an oppression over the Baha'i Faith." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb33.htm Steve Tomljenovic, December 3, 1998: "The moderators are a bit overzealous at times. Since all the controversy started, it has gotten worse." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb79.htm Laeterna: "To say I was flabberghasted at this type of "moderating" was putting it mildly indeed." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored2.htm Guy Macon" "Please explain which portion of the charter the following post violates." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored1.htm Robin Peters: "I think you're to be commended for your persistence in the face of consistent censorship." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb43.htm jgoldberg: "I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. " https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb57.htm Ruletherod, November 17, 1998: "Too much damage has already been done in the name and to the name of Baha'u'llah by right-wing administrative bullies, linear-thinking apologists, and doctrinaire-fundamentalists. You can't just blame it all on the critics." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb76.htm Many other similar messages may be found on my web site under soc.religion.bahai censorship. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 7:25 AM Subject: Re: Juan Cole's theory of mutilation. The mutilation is a reality, not a theory. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 11:57 AM Subject: Re: Golden Opportunity for Western Baha'is What they've actually revealed is what a bunch of idiots they really are. Their isolationist mind-set is what produces this type of hysteria. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Mesbah Javid <11111174@3web.net> wrote in message news:7jhdlg$dln$1@iceman.tac.net... UHJ already has revealed activities of some individuals in its letter of 7 April 1999: -closed minds, -hearts darkened with malice, -sowing the seeds of doubt, -dogmatic materialists, -internal opposition, -resisting Baha'u'llah in new guise, -promoting of their own ideological agenda -distorting facts about future Baha'i World Commonwealth -defying the clear interpretations of Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian -admitting that women must be members of the UHJ too -undermining the station of Baha'u'llah -seeking to recast entire Faith into a socio-political ideology -etc. This gives westerrn believers a golden opportunity to examine their steadfastness in the Faith of Baha'u'llah. As we acquire necessary steadfastness, next more sever tests are in store for us all. Be prepared for opposition to the Cause of God by the Pope and Anglican Church and then an orchestrated five-continent opposition by clergy of all past religions with support of politicians. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 1999 7:22 AM Subject: Re: Commentary on the letter of the House of Justice dated April 7, 1999 (pt. 1) For those who have not yet read it, the Majnun post may be found at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Majnunpost.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm wrote in message news:7jepcp$6l2$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > In article <7je936$1mu$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, > jricole@my-deja.com wrote: > > Now, after this admittedly lengthy, but I think very necessary > preparation, let us turn to the letter of 7 April 1999 from our dear, > human, brothers, the members of the Universal House of Justice. (Though > to be fair, it should be noted that the letter is most immediately from > the Department of the Secretariat, and that very frequently such letters > are generated by one member or a handful of members of the House within > whose portfolio the subject lies). > > > >THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE > > >Department of the Secretariat 7 April 1999 To all National Spiritual > Assemblies > > >Dear Baha'i Friends, > > >Issues Related to the Study of the Baha'i Faith > > >In May of 1998, Baha'i Canada reproduced a collection of letters which > >the Universal House of Justice had written to various individuals on > >the subject of the academic study of the Baha'i Faith. Copies of this > >compilation were subsequently mailed by the Canadian National Spiritual > >Assembly to its sister Assemblies. The reprint has now been made > >generally available in booklet form by the United States Baha'i > >Publishing Trust. The House of Justice has asked us to forward you a > >copy of the latter publication with the following comments. > > >As a number of the friends are aware, a campaign of internal opposition > >to the Teachings is currently being carried on through the use of the > >Internet, a communications system that now reaches virtually every part > >of the world. > > I know that our dear Baha'i brothers who are members of the Universal > House of Justice view certain developments in this ominous fashion, but > I really believe that this is another instance where these blessed souls > have been deprived, through no fault of their own, of the ability to > take a long view of the development of the faith and to avoid straying > from their only legitimate function, of legislation. There is no cabal > promoting 'internal opposition' to *the* Teachings of the Baha'i faith. > There are some sincere Baha'is whose individual, non-authoritative > interpretation of the Baha'i texts has differed from that of Doug > Martin, Ian Semple, Farzam Arbab and other members of the Universal > House of Justice. For the latter to label this difference of opinion > among devoted believers "internal opposition to the Teachings" is to > demonstrate an unfortunate inability to grant others their due and to > recognize their sincerity. It is also to claim official Interpretive > authority for our brothers on the House of Justice, since they are > claiming the right to declare interpretations at variance with their own > "opposed" to the Teachings. Yet, as the extensive quotations presented > above definitively prove, the House of Justice has no such authority. > It is only by loving and frank consultation that the Baha'i community > can help its challenged ("mutilated") Head pull back from this brink and > return to the straight path. > > >Differing from attacks familiar in the past, it seeks to recast the > >entire Faith into a socio-political ideology alien to Baha'u'llah's > >intent. > > Again, our dear brothers are mistakenly claiming the right to determine > "Baha'u'llah's intent," which is a matter of Interpretation, not of > legislation. They are speaking beyond their purview. If they believe > that any Baha'i intellectual has sought to cast the faith as a > 'socio-political ideology,' they have simply misunderstood that person's > intent, and it is hoped that further consultations will clarify matters. > > >In the place of the institutional authority established by His > >Covenant, it promotes a kind of interpretive authority which those > >behind it attribute to the views of persons technically trained in > >Middle East studies. > > I know that the emergence of academic Baha'i studies among Baha'is in > the West has been very painful for our beloved brothers on the Universal > House of Justice. Academics such as Denis MacEoin at Cambridge > pioneered a new way of looking at Babi-Baha'i history and texts in the > 1970s, learning Arabic and Persian, using historical tools such as > putting things in their context, and trying to seek the original meaning > of these texts. As a result, he was so cuttingly attacked by some > conservative Baha'is that he was forced out of the Baha'i faith. In > biblical studies such an approach is called Higher Criticism, and it > underpins works such as John Dominic Crossan's books on the historical > Jesus. Such an approach to religion is normal and taken for granted > among thinking persons in the modern and postmodern world. It is, > however, vehemently rejected by religious fundamentalists and by most > thinkers in the Global South. > > I think the problems have arisen, however, because non-academics do not > understand the nature of academic writing. In the academic world, no > one accepts an argument from authority. No proposition is true because > such and such historian asserts it. It is true because it can be proven > to be true by texts and reasoning. When it cannot in this way be > upheld, the proposition is revised or rejected. The process is like > that in science. Thus, academic writing is an on-going dialogue--fluid, > unstable, not fixed. When an academic such as myself writes about the > Baha'i faith from an academic point of view, he or she is in a sense > merely putting forward personal insights based on available texts and > upon reasoned analysis of them. > > This academic writing, being a form of individual, non-authoritative > interpretation subject to public debate and revision, should not be seen > as forming a threat to, or an alternative to, the authoritative > interpretation of `Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi. Given that the > Universal House of Justice is Interpretatively challenged, however, that > body may over time find that academic writing actually is helpful to it, > owing to the rigor of its methods. At the very least, such writing > poses no threat to the integrity of the faith, and was encouraged by all > the Holy Figures. What Mirza Abu'l-Fadl wrote was simply a 19th century > form of academic Baha'i discourse, and he was praised for it by > `Abdu'l-Baha. Shoghi Effendi named Fadil Mazandarani and H.M. Balyuzi > (the latter with formal academic credentials in history from the London > School of Economics) as Hands of the Cause! Indeed, it was Shoghi > Effendi who instructed Mr. Balyuzi to write the biography of > Baha'u'llah, knowing full well his command of academic methods. > Academic writing should be seen for the tentative, revise-able, > non-authoritative discourse that it is. > > >Early in 1996, the deliberate nature of the plan was revealed in an > >accidental posting to an Internet list which Baha'i subscribers had > >believed was dedicated to scholarly exploration of the Cause. > > The Universal House of Justice has been given misinformation here. This > is a constant problem. Since our dear brothers in Haifa are so busy > running the entire Baha'i world, they do not have time individually to > investigate every issue. They depend heavily on reports from their > counselors and NSA members. Unfortunately, some of these persons in the > U.S. are personally unreliable; a few have frankly paranoid tendencies > that cloud their reports. John Walbridge's famous "majnun" posting to > the first Talisman list does not demonstrate the existence of any sort > of plot or conspiracy, but rather quite the opposite--it shows that he > believed that it was inappropriate to "organize" and that rather the > effects of email consultation would be salutory for the faith in > themselves. For what it is worth, I also condemned the hotheaded > suggestions of a majnun subscriber, which were in any case not very > serious. > > >Some of the people responsible resigned from the Faith when Counsellors > >pointed out to them the direction their activities were taking. A small > >number of others continue to promote the campaign within the Baha'i > >community. > > Well, I am afraid that there was only one person responsible for the > majnun posting, or maybe two if you counted the poster to whom it came > as a response. I wasn't responsible for either one and didn't agree at > all with the one or with much of the latter, and several others whom the > Counselors bothered were also entirely innocent in this regard. As I > have pointed out, the majnun posting itself is not something that would > be considered "criminal" in any civilized system. Moreover, I can > attest as an eye-witness that if the House of Justice merely desired > that the Counselors consult with me about the "direction" my > "activities" were taking, then Counselor Stephen Birkland grossly > exceeded his instructions, since in fact he threatened me and others > with being declared covenant breakers and sentenced to the "social > death" of shunning merely for our talisman email postings! > > >In the past, in situations of a somewhat similar nature, the patience > >and compassion shown by 'Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian helped various > >believers who had been misled by ill-intentioned persons to eventually > >free themselves from such entanglements. > > > There have not been any similar situations in the past, because neither > `Abdu'l-Baha nor Shoghi Effendi bothered Baha'i scholars such as Mirza > Abu'l-Fadl or George Townshend or Hasan Balyuzi, but rather encouraged > them. While the Talisman academics do not have the stature of either > one, they were continuing, and saw themselves as continuing, the > intellectual tasks begun by those giants. > > >In this same spirit of forbearance the Universal House of Justice has > >intervened in the current situation only to the extent that has been > >unavoidable, trusting to the good sense and the goodwill of the > >believers involved to awaken to the spiritual dangers to which they are > >exposing themselves. Nevertheless, certain Counsellors and National > >Spiritual Assemblies are monitoring the problem closely, and the > >friends can be confident that whatever further steps are needed to > >protect the integrity of the Cause will be taken. > > I think the Universal House of Justice has in fact been relatively > measured in its further communications after Mr. Birkland's disastrous > handling of the situation in 1996. Given my own anger and sometimes > immoderate email messages about the entire situation, this seems > admirable. We should not forget, however, that the House of Justice > authorized threats against prominent Baha'i academics by Mr. Birkland in > 1996; that it had the International Teaching Centre threaten other email > posters in 1997, and expelled Michael McKenny from the Baha'i faith that > year. The House of Justice has encouraged what can only be > characterized as dishonest behavior among some rightwing Baha'i > intellectuals, as it admits when it says it has put the counselors and > NSAs up to spying on the Baha'is,which I regret not only because > dishonesty and snooping are unethical but because I think this behavior > betrays a lack of trust in the very good will and good judgment they say > they believe in. This April 7 letter seems to me a further unfortunate > and unnecessary departure from moderation. > > >As passages in the enclosed reprint make clear, this campaign of > >internal opposition -- while purporting to accept the legitimacy of the > >Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice as twin successors of > >Baha'u'llah and the Centre of His Covenant -- attempts to cast doubt on > >the nature and scope of the authority conferred on them in the > >Writings. > > I think the real problem is that some Baha'is, especially the powerful > ones, have a somewhat naive and absolutist approach to the Baha'i > institutions and are reluctant to admit of any limitations on them, even > those delineated by the Holy Figures themselves! However, Shoghi > Effendi warned against such "extreme orthodoxy" (Baha'i Administration > p. 42). Again, the House of Justice is straying into matters of > Interpretation, which are not its purview. > > >When other Baha'is have pointed out that such arguments contradict > >explicit statements of the Master, persons behind the scheme have > >responded by calling into question the soundness of 'Abdu'l-Baha's own > >judgement and perspective. > > There is not and never has been any concerted "scheme" on the part of > Western Baha'i intellectuals to undermine the Baha'i faith. Most of the > people the counselors targeted didn't even get along in the 1980s! To > now amalgamate Professor Linda Walbridge (a Baha'i for 25 years, a > pioneer to difficult posts in Lebanon and Jordan who was forced out of > the faith for her stand for women's rights) and Steve Scholl (similarly > an old-time Baha'i, former editor of Dialogue magazine similarly > threatened, bullied and forced out) is to ignore the major tiff between > the two acted out in Dialogue magazine itself! The discourse here most > unfortunately resembles that explored by Hofstadter in his classic "The > Paranoid Style in American Politics." > > I would be interested in seeing the particular quote calling into > question `Abdu'l-Baha's judgment and perspective. I don't personally > remember anything like that, and I saw it all. The big to-do on > Talisman I was over `Abdu'l-Baha's mistaken statement, gleaned from > medieval Muslim historiography, that Socrates met the Israeli prophets > in the holy land, which is certainly untrue (which prophets were in the > Holy Land during Socrates' life anyway, and why do the ancient Greek > authorities deny he ever travelled abroad?) In any case, `Abdu'l-Baha > himself denied to his companions that he claimed to be infallible > ("da`vat-i ma`sumiyyat namikunam"), which was one of the charges > levelled against him by the Muhammad-`Ali covenant breakers. Surely the > House of Justice does not desire to confirm the covenant breakers' > charges about the Baha'is by falling into the sort of idolatry where > `Abdu'l-Baha's judgment can never be questioned? > > >Gradually, these arguments have exposed the view of those involved that > >Baha'u'llah Himself was not the voice of God to our age but merely a > >particularly enlightened moral philosopher, one whose primary concern > >was to reform existing society. > > I just don't know who ever said such a thing. May we have at least a > quote, please? Much of Talisman I is up on the World Wide Web, so it is > easy enough to quote. This assertion sets up a non-existent straw man > that is easy to knock down. When Birkland barged into my living room > and interrogated me on behalf of the House of Justice, one of the things > he said was, 'How can you say you are a Baha'i when you talk about > Baha'u'llah as though he were a historical person?' This was one of the > heresy charges against me and others, and it is probably what lies > behind this mysterious passage. > > I think this problem has to do in part with the differences in discourse > about religion between most Iranians and most educated Westerners. > Iranians often show their piety by a kind of exaltation of holy > personages that most Westerners would feel excessive and even paralyzing > or idolatrous. We can't have a world religion if Mr. Nakhjavani isn't > going to make a place for the Denis MacEoins and Juan Coles and Linda > Walbridges whose discourse he finds distasteful because they are Western > academics. All I can say is that a majority of American Christians > certainly believe that Jesus was a historical person, and only > fundamentalists would deny that they are Christians. that I speak about > Baha'u'llah as a historical person does not mean I reduce him to a > philosopher. I happen to have written a long essay on the "Concept of > Manifestation in the Baha'i Writings." I know what a Manifestation of > God is, and I believe Baha'u'llah was one. > > There are two wider points I have to reemphasize here. The first is that > Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha both fully recognized the humanity and > historicity of the Manifestations of God. > > Explaining the meaning of "clouds" in past scriptures in His Book of > Certitude, pp. 71-72, Baha'u'llah freely admits to the mortality of the > Manifestations: "In another sense, they mean the appearance of that > immortal Beauty in the image of mortal man, with such human limitations > as eating and drinking, poverty and riches, glory and abasement, > sleeping and waking, and such other things as cast doubt in the minds of > men, and cause them to turn away. All such veils are symbolically > referred to as 'clouds.'" Although Baha'u'llah recognizes that > discourse acknowledging the historical limitations on the Manifestations > can form a stumbling block to some,He clearly cannot have desired to the > fact of it covered up, since He Himself proclaimed it here! > > The second is that it is simply is not the place of the Universal House > of Justice to inquire into my personal beliefs or those of anyone else, > expressed in email messages, about Baha'i theology and the station of > Baha'u'llah. This area of conscience is not a matter of legislation. > It is, frankly, none of their business, and `Abdu'l-Baha explicitly > forbade them from interfering in it. While they are welcome to their own > theological opinions, and are welcome even to lobby for those, using > their vast prestige within the community, they do not have the right to > Interpret authoritatively. The Baha'i faith was not designed by > Baha'u'llah to be a religion of orthodoxy, but rather, like Islam, a > religion of orthopraxy, of right practice of law and ritual. > > If the House of Justice made a law, like the Carribean dictator in Woody > Allen's film *Bananas*, that we must all change our underwear every day, > and that we must all wear it on the outside so it can be checked, then > my understanding of the Covenant is that we should have to do so. The > House of Justice may enact laws and punish behavior. But they may not > promulgate dogmas and punish individuals for their conscientious > expressions of belief. It is simply not the case that such speech is a > form of behavior, and making it a crime is to create thought-crimes, as > in totalitarian states. Where they criminalize mere individual opinion, > the House of Justice breaks the Covenant `Abdu'l-Baha established with > the intellectuals of the West in His own day, with Hyppolite Dreyfus and > Auguste Forel and others, which pledged that the Baha'i faith would not > be a persecuting, anti-intellectual religion like so many of the others. > > To be continued . . . > > > > -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan, > jrcole@umich.edu > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity and the Millennium: The Genesis of the Baha'i Faith > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 1999 8:00 AM Subject: Re: Commentary on the letter of the House of Justice dated April 7, 1999 (pt. 3) Professor Cole: I marvel at and admire your courage and tenacity, and, most of all, the sincerity and depth of your belief and trust in Baha'u'llah.... Thank you, once again, for an intelligent response to what you rightly describe as the UHJ's latest "outburst of vehement ignorance." -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Where you find the strength and inner resources Juan Cole wrote in message news:7jfj5r$e3j$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > The House of Justice wrote: > > >By itself, such opposition would likely stand little chance of > >influencing reasonably informed Baha'is. As one of the letters in the > >enclosed reprint (20 July 1997) points out, the scheme relies for > >effect, therefore, on exploiting the confusion created in modern > >thought by the reigning doctrines of materialism. > > Cole replies: > > Again, the word "scheme" here is troubling insofar as it indicates a > preconceived and deliberately plotted attempt to do something dishonest. > Its mere use puts the intellectuals on the defensive and makes them > have to deny it. It is too ridiculous to deny. I became a Baha'i in > 1972 while an undergraduate at Northwestern University, and was already > committed to the academic life at that time. I was, of course, somewhat > nervous about whether it was good to join an organized religion, given > the miserable experience thinking people have had with them. But I was > constantly reassured, by the Baha'i scriptures themselves, by > `Abdu'l-Baha's talks (which are now increasingly being tossed out of the > Canon by the fundamentalists) and letters, by members of my local > community, by members of the National Spiritual Assembly like Firuz > Kazemzadeh and Dan Jordan, and ultimately in correspondence by the > Universal House of Justice itself that there was no contradiction > between the life of the intellect and spiritual life in the Baha'i > faith! > > The Universal House of Justice even once wrote me that they preferred to > maintain literature Review because they found the Roman Catholic system > of maintaining an index of forbidden books distasteful! (And now they > are assiduously developing an index of forbidden books that cannot be > carried by Baha'i publishing trusts.) > > For them now to characterize all academic writing about religion as in > its essence "materialist" is for them to renege on all those promises > that were made me and others all along the line. They are also > contradicting Shoghi Effendi's clear advice that Baha'is major in > subjects like Comparative Religions and History at university! Make no > mistake. They are not concerned here with *real* materialism, such as > that of Marx or Democritus or Milton Friedman. They view *all* academic > writing about religion, including by phenomenologists and sympathetic > ethnographers, as "materialist." Writing that would be dismissed by > real materialists as fluffy and "culturalist" would nevertheless be seen > by our dear brothers in Haifa as "materialist." This is because they > have what can only be described as a fundamentalist mindset, and feel > about academic approaches to religion rather as Pat Robertson, Jerry > Falwell, and Ayatollah Khamenei do. > > I think they have a right to their point of view on this matter. I > simply insist on my right (and the right of others) to differ with them > here. The Baha'i faith, if it is to be truly all-embracing, has to have > place in it for Western intellectuals committed to human rights and > freedom of thought. `Abdu'l-Baha promised us there would be a place for > us at His table, and now we are being expelled from His House by > bouncers in business suits, and told to hit the road. This would not be > so bad--religions after all change over time--except that the Universal > House of Justice simply has no standing to pronounce on Interpretive > matters like *academic methodology.* Methodology is in any case a > complex issue that takes years of high-powered graduate study to master, > something none of the present members has done with regard to the > humanities or social sciences. But *it is not even their sphere of > authority*! By criminalizing the work of all the Baha'i academics in > university Religion and History departments in the West, they are making > themselves, and the Faith, look ridiculous. And they are unwittingly > breaking the Covenant `Abdu'l-Baha made with thinking people, promising > us that this sort of thing would not happen in this dispensation. > > >Although the reality of God's continuous relationship with His creation > >and His intervention in human life and history are the very essence of > >the teachings of the Founders of the revealed religions, dogmatic > >materialism today insists that even the nature of religion itself can > >be adequately understood only through the use of an academic > >methodology designed to ignore the truths that make religion what it > >is. > > I once heard Hand of the Cause John Robarts give a talk. Robarts had > been an insurance salesman, and had something of the tent preacher about > him. His stories were about how the uncertain and discouraged young > insurance salesman finally got committed to his job and went out and > sold a million dollars worth of insurance. Or about how a crucial sale > was about to be lost because he seemed to have missed his plane, but > when he prayed mightily, it turned out that another plane was available. > Why was this? Because, of course, God is ever-present, and if you ask > him with sufficient fervor, and He is so inclined, he will conjure up an > airplane for you. Frankly, I was appalled at this superstitious > mindset, which is the same one displayed in this letter. > > Of course, the Abrahamic scriptures, including the Baha'i ones, do have > a discourse of divine intervention in human affairs. But how do we know > that this discourse is not symbolic? If Jesus says he is a door, does > that mean he has a doorknob in his navel? So many things are > acknowledged as symbolic in the Baha'i scriptures--Satan, prophecies, > angels, jinn, even our images of God. How could it be proved that > divine intervention is not a trope intended to produce certain spiritual > effects, such as spiritual reassurance? > > You can call me a dogmatic materialist all you like, but I guarantee you > that an insurance salesman's prayers have no effect whatsoever on the > airline industry's schedules. God doesn't work by breaking the physical > laws that He himself decreed! Whatever happened to the unity of science > and religion, which was supposed to be such a key Baha'i principle? > What *scientist* believes the world is so topsy-turvy that airplanes are > being conjured in and out of existence by the prayers of insurance > salesmen? > > The phrase "dogmatic materialism" is intended to mislead and draw > attention away from the real dogmatism here, which is the dogmatism of a > theological fundamentalism. We have to inhabit a magical world of > faeries, angel feathers, and acabacadabra airplanes or we can't be good > Baha'is. I think it is rather sad that relatively educated persons such > as our dear brothers on the Universal House of Justice are, as late as > the eve of the 21st century, and in complete contradiction to basic > Baha'i principle, imprisoned in such superstitions. But they are > welcome to have any theology they like. They are not welcome to try to > impose their theology on innocent, thinking Baha'is. They are not a > theological institution. They have no authority to Interpret Baha'i > scripture. They should be off somewhere making laws that would better > humankind instead of parroting the fading line of the Jerry Falwells and > other fundamentalist preachers. > > Finally, I am afraid that none of the members of the Universal House of > Justice has the slightest idea of the methodological underpinnings of > current academic methodology in the humanities and human sciences in > Western universities. These underpinnings are very seldom properly > characterized as "materialist," and a colleague who gave a paper in my > department based on a vulgar materialism of the sort in vogue 30 years > ago among Althusserians would be laughed out of the building. They are, > in short, simply poorly informed, as well as trespassing into areas over > which they have been given no authority whatsoever by Baha'i texts. It > is painful for me to see such honored persons, the trustees of such an > exalted Institution, humiliate themselves with this outburst of vehement > ignorance. But we must be reminded that they are doing the best they > can, mutilated and challenged by the absence of a living Guardian, and > must forgive them their sortie into Monty Python-like caricature. > > >In general, the strategy being pursued has been to avoid direct attacks > >on the Faith's Central Figures. > > Well, I haven't attacked any of the Faith's Central Figures because I > admire and believe in them all, though I admire Baha'u'llah most of all. > I am afraid He doesn't get much attention in the current Baha'i Faith. > I on the other hand am the only living Baha'i who so much as bothered > to write a book wholly about him, to spend years reading thousands of > pages of his works. There isn't any strategy at work here. I criticize > God all the time for the Holocaust. If I were annoyed at the Holy > Figures I wouldn't hesitate to say so. > > >The effort, rather, has been to sow the seeds of doubt among believers > >about the Faith's teachings and institutions by appealing to unexamined > >prejudices that Baha'is may have unconsciously absorbed from non-Baha'i > >society. > > Actually, I think Baha'i conservatives and fundamentalists, who want to > abrogate the unity of science and religion, are the ones who have > imbibed prejudices from their Shi`ite and Christian fundamentalist > backgrounds. > > >In defiance of the clear interpretation of 'Abdu'l-Baha and the > >Guardian, for example, Baha'u'llah's limiting of membership on the > >Universal House of Justice to men is misrepresented as merely a > >"temporary measure" subject to eventual revision if sufficient pressure > >is brought to bear. > > Baha'u'llah never limited membership of the Universal House of Justice > to men, and I would very much like to see such a quote. He calls > members of *all* houses of justice, local and universal, "rijal," which > could mean "men" but could also simply mean "notables." Despite his > clear reference to rijal-i buyut-i `adliyyih (men of the houses of > justice), by which he *must* have meant local houses of justice because > of the plural, `Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi both let women onto local > houses of justice. This matter is unclear, and the Universal House of > Justice may eventually decide that women can in fact serve on that body. > The present, seventh House of Justice do not like this possibility, but > they cannot forestall the legislative decisions of its successors, as we > have seen from explicit holy texts. To make it illegal to say that > women may eventually serve is mad, and exceeds their authority. > > >Similarly, Shoghi Effendi's explanation of Baha'u'llah's vision of the > >future Baha'i World Commonwealth that will unite spiritual and civil > >authority is dismissed in favour of the assertion that the modern > >political concept of "separation of church and state" is somehow one > >that Baha'u'llah intended as a basic principle of the World Order He > >has founded. > > In Persian, Shoghi Effendi called the Commonwealth "spiritual." He > explicitly said that Baha'i institutions are not to allow their bodies > to supersede the machinery of the civil state. Baha'u'llah and > `Abdu'l-Baha wrote extensively about the need for religious leaders to > avoid intervening in the affairs of the civil state. A small group of > Baha'i theocrats, including Horace Holley, Mason Remey, and David > Hoffman, attempted for decades to reverse this central Baha'i teaching. > Hoffman met opposition to this idea from Hugh Chance, David Ruhe and > Charles Wolcott, but gradually moved his men into position at the > International Teaching Center and succeeded in getting them elected to > the Universal House of Justice (as well as bringing over Ian Semple to > his side). Now the theocrats on the Universal House of Justice, whose > vision of society differs very little from that of Ayatollah Khomeini if > you substitute the Baha'i institutions for the Shi`ite clergy, wish not > only to reverse the Baha'i scriptures but to make their somewhat odd > views an unchallengeable Baha'i dogma to which all Baha'is must assent. > > Moreover, why is it that they use "modern" as an insult? The Baha'i > faith arose in the modern era (`asr-i jadid). Previous Baha'i leaders > and thinkers were proud of this fact. That the separation of religion > and state is "modern" does not make it bad. It is an 18th century idea > that Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha took up to fight the influence of the > clergy of their day and to ensure that their own religion did not ever > descend into the medieval quagmire of theocracy and Inquisition. In any > case, this is a matter of Intepretation, and the House of Justice has no > standing to promulgate a dogma about the issue, more especially one that > contradicts key writings of Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha! See in > particular `Abdu'l-Baha's *Treatise on Leadership*, which the Baha'i > authorities in Iran have long suppressed: > https://h-net2.msu.edu/~bahai/trans/vol2/absiyasi.htm > > >Particularly subtle is an attempt to suggest that the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar > >should evolve into a seat of quasi-doctrinal authority, parallel to and > >essentially independent of the Local House of Justice, which would > >permit various interests to insinuate themselves into the direction of > >the life processes of the Cause. > > Baha'u'llah urged that a Mashriqu'l-Adhkhar be built in every town and > city. `Abdu'l-Baha was extremely eloquent and urgent about the need for > the Baha'is to build houses of worship in every locality. Shoghi > Effendi admitted that the faith could not be whole until the Mashriq and > its dependencies were widely established and fully functioning. The > Universal House of Justice has intervened to contradict these > pronouncements of Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha, and actually to > persecute Baha'is who wish to build local houses of worship! Yet > Baha'u'llah was quite clear that the Universal House of Justice is *not* > to interfere in matters of worship (`ibadat) or the commandments in > revealed texts. Here, as elsewhere, they are attempting to exceed their > authority and are damaging the Cause of God by stunting its spiritual > growth. Apparently, this policy derives from a desire to ensure that > all monetary resources in the faith go to Haifa, which seems to me > awfully selfish. > > >Typically, when misrepresentations of the kind described are > >challenged, the reaction of those behind the campaign has been to claim > >that their civil rights are being threatened, an assertion that is of > >course meaningless in the light of the purely voluntary nature of > >Baha'i membership. > > Nobody minds his or her interpretation of the Baha'i texts being > "challenged," since all we have are our individual and non-authoritative > opinions, after all. But "challenge" is being used as a euphemism here. > Sincere Baha'is who have never broken a Baha'i law and who have > dedicated their lives to serving the Faith are being threatened by > persons (many of whom don't know much about the Baha'i scriptures and > have lived all their lives in comfortable suburbs) with being *shunned*, > which is in Baha'i terms a form of "social death." And why have they > been so threatened? Because they have speculated that women might serve > on the Universal House of Justice, because they have suggested that the > Baha'i institutions may not in fact be Khomeinist in nature, because > they yearn to see local houses of worship built? These are their > capital crimes. How ridiculous. How absurd. How pitiful. To build an > Inquisition on such trifles. > > As for the truly horrifying idea that Baha'is have *no* human rights in > their own religion, I fear I must go beyond simple consultation here to > outright denunciation. This is monstrous. Baha'u'llah suffered from > lack of due process at the hands of the Ottoman state (headed by the > Muslim Caliph, the equivalent of the Universal House of Justice, > divinely sanctioned and unchallengeable in his society). He openly > condemned this lack of justice. `Abdu'l-Baha spoke of the need for > rights and due process. Human rights are at the core of the Baha'i > scriptures! And yet now we hear that Baha'is have no human rights. > They have no freedom to declare their views or express their conscience. > They may, like Michael McKenny, be tossed about spiritually like so > many sacks of potatoes by our brothers in Haifa. > > As for the idea that the reason Baha'is have no human rights with regard > to their own administrative institutions is that the Baha'i faith is a > voluntary organization, this conclusion is simply illogical. We could > by the same token say that residence in a particular country is > voluntary. So, Iranian Baha'is cannnot be seen to have their human > rights abused by the ayatollahs, because after all they can simply move > to Pakistan or Turkey. They are not required to remain in Iran. Under > this logic there can be *no* human rights abuses anywhere by anyone. > All victims of human rights abuse have the choice of leaving their > situation. > > But let me just assure you that my belief in Baha'u'llah is not > "voluntary" in the way my membership in the local public library is. It > is wrought up with the core of my being, and I could not abandon it > without feeling warped and inauthentic (I know: I tried, for what I > thought was the good of the Faith). I think this is even more true for > those born into the religion. To say that I may have my human rights > abused by the Baha'i authorities, and be subjected to threats, > censorship, and even social death, because I could theoretically > renounce the faith that is at the core of my being, is to abandon all > Baha'i principle and to descend into a medieval sort of Inquisition. I > cannot tell you how I weep at the idea of our beloved Baha'i faith, the > shining hope of a new Age, being so warped as to come to mirror the > Spanish Inquisition, with psychological and cult-like techniques of > intimidation substituted for the rack. > > >Much emphasis is placed by them also on academic freedom, their view of > >which proves, on examination, to be merely freedom on their part to > >pervert scholarly discourse to the promotion of their own ideological > >agenda, while seeking to exclude from discussion features of the Baha'i > >Faith that are central to the Writings of its Founders. > > Academic freedom is the freedom to explore, to seek the truth no matter > where it leads, even to make mistakes. You can't decide beforehand what > is a perversion and what is a breakthrough. As for an ideological > agenda, the 7th House of Justice not only has a rather elaborated one, > but it is one that flies in the face of basic Baha'i scripture and > principle. The real reason they are so afraid of academia is that by > its rigor and method of checking sources and viewing them in context, it > inevitably challenges the Khomeinization of the Baha'i faith in which > they are privily engaged. > > But we need not worry. There are thousands of universities in the > world. My own university has a population of half the entire US Baha'i > community. A little liberal arts college with 2,000 students has a > population equivalent to the Baha'i community of France or Germany. The > Baha'i administration is a big frog in a *very* small pond. It cannot > in fact suppress intellectual life. It has picked a fight with thinking > people the world over, and it is not a fight that any religious > organization has won in the long run. The Vatican finally gave up the > fight with Vatican II in 1965 and has finally apologized to Galileo. > Future Houses of Justice will apologize for the Great Purge of 1996. > > >The effect of continued exposure to such insincerity about matters > >vital to humanity's well-being is spiritually corrosive. When we > >encounter minds that are closed and hearts that are darkened by evident > >malice, Baha'u'llah urges that we leave such persons to God and turn > >our attention to the opportunities which multiply daily for the > >promotion of the truths which He teaches. > > Actually, I don't think Baha'u'llah says any such thing. I recall him > saying that at Ridvan all creation was made ritually pure, and calling > upon us to associate with fragrance and fellowship with all human > beings. Our dear brothers in Haifa must have a different copy of the > Most Holy Book than the one I possess. And their phraseology here opens > the question of what we should do when we encounter insincerity, > duplicity, a cult-like mindset, and hearts darkened with malice among > incumbents in the Baha'i institutions. > > I think we have to send our love out to them as individuals, but we also > have a responsibility to speak out against the harm they may inflict, > with their methods of backroom intimidation and manipulation, upon > individual adherents. We have to be vigilant against their > electioneering, their forcing out of the faith anyone who is vocal and > open-minded, their anti-intellectual prejudices. And, who knows? > Eventually they may themselves see how contrary to the spirit of the > Faith their actions and words are, and may develop that sense of shame > that Baha'u'llah says only a few of us are born with. That cannot be > our concern. > > As Baha'is, our central task is clear: to build up an ever-advancing > *civilization* (which Shoghi Effendi indicates would have academic > studies of religion as one of its components), to serve humankind, to > work for an inclusive global community that has a place for > conservatives and liberals, fundamentalists and academics, black and > white, male and female, urbanite and tribesman. I say this despite the > fact that the current leaders of the Baha'i World Faith are attempting > to exclude a very large and significant proportion of humanity from the > faith (including me!), in order to pursue an extremely narrow and > partisan vision of it. > > The one thing they have gotten right is that the give and take between > the fundamentalist leadership and the Baha'i intellectuals has already > had, and increasingly will have, a galvanizing and salutary effect on > the community, and from this dialectic both sides will ultimately move > closer toward the real Baha'i faith, which we children of the twilight > can only dimly imagine. > > I wish our dear brothers on the Universal House of Justice well, and > pray for them that they will find Baha'u'llah in their hearts, and will > find a way to forsake the persecutorial and somewhat paranoid view they > have of any Baha'i who does not see things the way they do. I pray most > of all that they abandon their forays into theology and inquisitions, > and return to their proper function of legislation and advancing the > interests of humankind. > > Sincerely > > Juan R. I. Cole > Professor > Department of History > University of Michigan > > > -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan jrcole@umich.edu > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity & Millennium: Genesis of Baha'i* > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 09, 1999 8:26 AM Subject: Re: Who is the New NSA Member? Cole wrote: >Anyway, the whole thing goes to prove that it is almost impossible to >get a genuine liberal like Dan Jordan elected to the NSA any more, It should be noted that Daniel Jordan's murder has never been solved and may very well have been an "inside job" motivated, perhaps, by the very fact that he was a liberal conscience. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Juan Cole wrote in message news:7jgujm$sp1$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > The one good thing about knowing History is that you can tell a specious > either/or formulation when you see one. > > In fact, it is a well-known characteristic of one-party systems (and > no-party theocracies like Iran in the 1980s) that they are riven with > internal factionalism. Look at the Soviet Union for heaven's sake. It > is just that the factional fights tend to be hidden from the rank and > file through carefully controlled and censored party organs that are > always full of saccharine celebrations of party victories (can you say > "The American Baha'i"?). There can be a set of party-line apparatchiks > who nevertheless are riven by internal factionalism. It is the rank and > file who have to be careful about the party line. The real fun of > politics is only had by the elite nomenklatura. > > In answer to the question Michael McKenny posed, I think we may safely > say that if the point of moving Jim Nelson off the NSA was to allow > Henderson to expand his faction beyond Kazemzadeh, Conrad and Roberts, > that this attempt failed. (Conrad began in the Nelson camp, and was his > court secretary, promoted onto the NSA by him, but has now become a > partisan of Henderson). > > Dr. Young has a reputation as a moderate, who is committed to teaching > Christians the faith, and to expanding the National Teaching Committee's > budget and activities, and he is probably less hard line on freedom of > speech issues than was Nelson (who was in turn not as bad as Henderson > and Kazemzadeh). I think his emphasis on teaching is great (the NTC is > woefully underfunded and has been for 20 years). I guess I'm not sure > that what we really need is lots more people from an evangelical > background (and with that mindset) in the U.S. Baha'i community . . . > It seems to me likely that he will side with Jack McCants on a lot of > things, and make Jack less isolated. > > Anyway, the whole thing goes to prove that it is almost impossible to > get a genuine liberal like Dan Jordan elected to the NSA any more, and > the best you can hope for is a moderate conservative. On the other > hand, it is possible that this outcome also does signal that the system > of regional councils has in fact made it more difficult for NSA > incumbents to promote their cronies onto the NSA. But note that > previous moderates have very frequently been treated shoddily by > Henderson and Kazemzadeh, and forced after a few years of not being > invited to the important meetings and being double-crossed in various > ways, to move off the NSA to the auxiliary board or to go pioneering > abroad. Of course, the persons most damaged and most easily manipulated > by these techniques of the long knife are the ones who don't expect > them. It is possible that nowadays new NSA members are not so naive. > > > > cheers Juan > > > In article <7jgkqt$100t@news2.newsguy.com>, > "Rick Schaut" wrote: > > The following two messages stand in rather interesting contrast to > each > > other. One sees a single party comparable to that of Communist > governments, > > and another sees multiple parties or "factions," yet both are looking > at the > > same institution. Is it not possible that both perceptions are just > plain > > wrong? > > > > Regards, > > Rick Schaut > > > > Michael McKenny wrote in message > > news:7jb3p2$1o9@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > > > The point of my question was to followup the comment, I believe > by > > Juan, > > > that this secret resignation, or whatever it was, could allow Mr. > Henderson > > > to consolidate his faction's domination of the NSA. > > > > > (alaoudin23@my-deja.com) writes: > > > > Does it really matter? All you have is a party line apparatchik to > > > > continue the Hendersonian oppreSSion. > > > > > > -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan jrcole@umich.edu > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity & Millennium: Genesis of Baha'i* > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, June 11, 1999 3:42 PM Subject: Re: Juan Cole's theory of mutilation. Newcomers may find it helpful to know that Rick Schaut is an assistant or whatever to one of the auxiliary bored members. It's basically his job to harass people online. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Rick Schaut wrote in message news:7jrhas$ktk@news2.newsguy.com... > > Michael McKenny wrote in message > news:7jr0fi$76c@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > > > > "Rick Schaut" (RSSchaut@email.msn.NOSPAMcom) writes: > > > The notion that the statement made by `Abdu'l-Baha was, in any way, > unclear > > > or was taken out of context is a pure fabrication on the part of certain > > > individuals, individuals who lack any interpretive authority whatsoever, > who > > > Which of the following is not true: > > [Snip.] > > > G) The words general house of justice have been translated universal > > house of justice, although this body was not in existence at the time, and > > came not into existence for more than fifty years. > > This one. This is precisely the question that Anthony Lee brought to the > Universal House of Justice, and the Research Department noted that all > instances of the word `umumi (which can mean _both_ "general" and > "universal") in `Abdu'l-Baha's Writings that refer to any House of Justice > were translated, by Shoghi Effendi, to be "Universal". > > As Shoghi Effendi was both the interpreter in these instances and the > authorized interpreter of the Writings, Shoghi Effendi's translation becomes > binding. In other words, the notion that `Abdu'l-Baha could have meant > "general" rather than "universal" when He used the word `umumi is a > non-starter. > > > Regards, > Rick Schaut > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, June 12, 1999 6:40 AM Subject: Re: Daniel Jordan Ron's characterization of my comments is false. My opinion regarding the murder of Daniel Jordan was and still is that any UHJ or administrative so-called order that runs the way this one does could easily produce someone or a group of people or be involved itself in the murder and silencing of an individual who learnt perhaps something he shouldn't have.... The UHJ's recent "outburst of vehement ignorance" only further suggests the blind fanaticism it expects from its members. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Ron House wrote in message news:375F42B2.2C7446B0@usq.edu.au... > Roger Reini wrote: > > > On Wed, 9 Jun 1999 08:26:34 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > > wrote: > > > >It should be noted that Daniel Jordan's murder has never been > > >solved and may very well have been an "inside job" motivated, > > >perhaps, by the very fact that he was a liberal conscience. > > > IMHO, making reckless statements like this begins to approach the > > threshold of libel or slander.... > > I agree completely. I have repeatedly seen claims by Fred that there > have been 'allegations' about this. Once he said on a mailing list that > existed before TRB that he had (from memory) four sources. One of his > four turned up and said she had merely written to Fred after hearing an > earlier claim of his, asking him what evidence he had. She became one of > Fred's 'sources'! Unless and until someone can produce serious evidence, > gossip about some alleged 'inside job' is pointless and can harm > innocent people. I thank you, Roger, for pointing this out. > > -- > Ron House house@usq.edu.au > > You can only be right if you have the courage to be wrong. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, June 12, 1999 6:58 AM Subject: Re: Who is the New NSA Member? You begin to sound like Ms. Maneck: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm Her tactics of hysterically accusing me of slander didn't work, though an old Bahai technique.... https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Roger Reini wrote in message news:37667334.93826263@news.newsguy.com... > On Wed, 9 Jun 1999 08:26:34 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > wrote: > > >Cole wrote: > >>Anyway, the whole thing goes to prove that it is almost impossible to > >>get a genuine liberal like Dan Jordan elected to the NSA any more, > > > >It should be noted that Daniel Jordan's murder has never been > >solved and may very well have been an "inside job" motivated, > >perhaps, by the very fact that he was a liberal conscience. > > > > IMHO, making reckless statements like this begins to approach the > threshold of libel or slander.... > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, June 12, 1999 11:25 AM Subject: Re: Juan Cole's theory of mutilation. Michael McKenny wrote in message news:7jthig$igk@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > Now, I have probably used the term Fantasy or fantasy or even phantasy > many hundreds of times with or without the capital, with the f or the ph, > according to context with the meaning of pertaining to that that body of > literature of which Tolkien's LORD OF THE RINGS is the clearest example. The Nine Nazguls should read it on their knees as they weep over the corpse of the Maiden of Heaven, whom they've so shamelessly murdered and raped.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 13, 1999 9:19 AM Subject: Murder of Daniel Jordan (Re: Warning - Dejanews Posting Rules) Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:37628946.55649B37@earthlink.net... > Fred Glaysher, or his cyberspce permutations, posts anything regarding > the murder of Dr. Daniel Jordan being a work of Baha'is, I will first > pursue action through Dejanews. An old Bahai deception: Accuse, accuse, accuse of slander.... while always ignoring the opinions and views of others. Iranian Bahai fundamentalists are particularly adept at making slanderous charges against others. I repeat: Such fanaticism in the conduct of Bahai affairs during the last decade should cause thoughtful people to pause and reflect that his murder may very well have been, as several Bahais admitted had occurred to them independently at the time of his murder, an "inside job." I point this out again because the UHJ released another fundamentalist statement in April, which Juan Cole has perceptively characterized as an "outburst of vehement ignorance." Given the blind obedience they seek to impose on Bahais, in evident betrayal of Baha'u'llah's own experience and Teachings, they or their subordinates may very well have been behind the murder of Daniel Jordan, who was from a well-known American liberal family. It's feasible Jordan knew or learnt something to his detriment.... Far from slander, I believe it may indeed prove to be the truth. The objective observer should note carefully the way Bahai fundamentalists, instead of being concerned with justice, seek to malign and assassinate my character and reputation--a tactic they've used for over two and a half years now and which is well documented on my website. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 13, 1999 9:21 AM Subject: Re: Warning - Dejanews Posting Rules Again, instead of seeking justice, the fundamentalists seek backbiting and calumny and marshall their numbers through back-channel communication to attack liberals with their ISPs. See the documents on the website below regarding their manipulation of AOL along these lines. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Roger Reini wrote in message news:3763d422.2122242@news.newsguy.com... > I believe that the Deja posting policy is applicable only if one uses > the Deja service to post. It doesn't apply to posts made elsewhere; > however, I believe that other services and ISP's have similar terms of > service. > > According to the headers of the messages, Fred Glaysher does not use > the Deja service to post his messages. Therefore, their terms of > service are not applicable to him. What would be applicable to him > are the terms of service of Remarq. Similarly, I post through > Newsguy, so I am bound by Newsguy's terms of service. And so on, and > so forth. > > > On Sat, 12 Jun 1999 11:22:35 -0500, Saman Ahmadi > wrote: > > > > > > >To Whom It May Concern: > > > >Below are the rules for posting from Dejanews. Under Rule 3, anything > >illegal in Real Life is illegal to post (doesn't matter if one is > >assuming an > >identity). > > > >Slander is, as I understand, a civil offense in the United States of > >America - > >it is, one could argue, a proper limitation on free speech. The next > >time > >Fred Glaysher, or his cyberspce permutations, posts anything regarding > >the murder of Dr. Daniel Jordan being a work of Baha'is, I will first > >pursue action through Dejanews. > > > >One question would be my legal standing in bringing suit against Fred > >Glayesher - well, I am a Baha'i and Glayersher's phrasing of his calumny > > > >so far has been, praise God, all-inclusive. > > > >Baha'u'llah forbids "calumny" and likens it, it seems to me, to > >zenaa/adultry, > >which as I understand the Arabic word includes rape. Fred Glaysher may > >want to pause and reflect and reconisder if this is worthy of a Baha'i > >in > >good standing. > > > >As opposed to most of my posts, there is nothing sacrcastic in the > >above. > > > >Saman Ahmadi > > > > > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 13, 1999 9:27 AM Subject: Re: The Most Wrong Scholar Michael McKenny wrote in message news:7k080r$1bu@freenet-news.carleton.ca... By following the great > Baha'i idea of changing administrative decisions that have been proven > to have been harmful and caused discord, instead of insisting that such > demonstrably erroneous decisions are infallible, the UHJ will remove this > most great danger now afflicting the Baha'is It's just not going to happen. They're locked into their fanatic interpretation of Baha'u'llah's Teachings and everyone else is wrong and heretical. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 13, 1999 9:28 AM Subject: Re: station of scholars and historians in the Baha'i faith I admire the honesty of your questions but Bahai fanatics never answer anything like this. They've been evading such questions for years and will only ignore them or change the subject. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm wrote in message news:7jviml$pr9$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > Saman Ahmadi writes: > > > > Juan, > > > > What should happen when the Universal House of Justice, > > as the body who decides on issues that are unclear, does > > not accept the unauthoratative view of a Baha'i scholar, or > > a group of Baha'i scholars? For example, if the House sees > > no way to legislate the interpretation of some who suggest that > > women should server on the UHJ, what do you think is the next > > step which is consistent with the Covenant? > > > I don't pretend to speak for Juan R. Cole. But you're asking your > question by implicitly laying the onus on the "Baha'i scholar." Answer > this for me. What should happen in the situation when the UHJ begins to > overstep its constitutional mandate and begins by allocating powers to > itself (such as general interpretation on issues pertaining to faith, > belief and conscience) which it clearly was never meant to have and thus > straitjackets the Bahai community into a form of theocratic religious > fascism such as we have today in the Baha'i world? In other words, what > do you do when your religion gets hijacked by career politicians from > within. > > Berekiah1 > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 13, 1999 9:39 AM Subject: More Bahai Threats (Re: ******s theory of mutilation.) Milissa Boyer Kafes wrote in message news:7jv122$lc9$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > Anyway, I wish we could just deal with issues rather than > personalities. Really Frederick, you are going to get sued. Remember > Patrick Henry...He ended up on the wrong end of a rope! Maybe its time > you took a vacation from trb....I took 2 months off and feel so much > better. It would be entirely within the logic of Bahai fanaticism to attempt to harass, threaten, and suppress free speech and conscience through the manipulation and distortion of the judicial process. It should be noted that I have threatened nor slandered anyone. If anyone should be sued, it would be Bahai fanatic "scholars" like Ms. Maneck who repeatedly referred to my opinions as "garbage" and "litter" on AOL and trb. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm Note not one fundamentalist every spoke up against her backbiting and slander but all tacitly supported her. Note too what is the charge of "slander" based on now: My candidly expressed opinion that it is quite conceiveable that an administration that has committed the many acts of transgression against the consciences of many, many of its members that this one has done during the last decade could perhaps have indeed been complicitious in the murder of Dr. Daniel Jordan. I'd be happy to stand in a court of law and state that opinion before an American judge sworn to justice, unlike the members of the UHJ. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > Peace > Milissa Boyer Kafes > mbkafes@bestweb.net > > In article <7jru1j$1ndf@news1.newsguy.com>, > "Rick Schaut" wrote: > > > > Patrick Henry wrote in message > > news:7jror2$sg0$1@news.laserlink.net... > > > Newcomers may find it helpful to know that Rick Schaut > > > is an assistant or whatever to one of the auxiliary bored > > > members. It's basically his job to harass people online. > > > > Actually, the Auxiliary Board member I serve has said that she'd > prefer I > > didn't spend so much time online. > > > > As for my job, I work at Microsoft (a fact that some have deemed worth > > mentioning in the past, though I don't know why) where my job is to > lead a > > team of software developers who are primarily working on the next > version of > > Microsoft Word for the Macintosh. I suppose that the folks who work > for me > > might call that harassing, but no one has said anyting to me about it. > > > > Regards, > > Rick Schaut > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 14, 1999 6:44 AM Subject: New Bahai Fundamentalist Technique - Flooding We seem to be witnessing a new fundamentalist technique: flooding talk.religion.bahai with irrelevant quotations from the Writings as though it were self-evident what their meaning and connection to current discussion is. Upon reflection, it may be an attempted to overload ISPs in order to reach their maximum loading capacity and thereby dump other messages the fundies would like to see, quite literally, go away. The HTML format would help them reach that limit much more quickly and result in faster rollovers, if you will. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 14, 1999 3:56 PM Subject: Re: More Bahai Threats (Re: ******s theory of mutilation.) The objective observer will note the Bahai tactic of resorting to threats and intimidation instead of engaging in discussion. It reminds me of a comment by Dr. Martin Luther King in his Letter from Birmingham Jail: "You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations." Fundamentalist Bahais like Saman typify this same mentality. They rail and threaten me and others who dare speak their minds but express no concern whatsoever for the underlying conditions of censorship and oppression that have led to distrust and contempt for the UHJ and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:376481F1.C68B0CEF@earthlink.net... > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > > > Note too what is the charge of "slander" based on now: > > My candidly expressed opinion that it is quite conceiveable > > that an administration that has committed the many acts of > > transgression against the consciences of many, many of > > its members that this one has done during the last decade > > could perhaps have indeed been complicitious in the > > murder of Dr. Daniel Jordan. I'd be happy to stand in a > > court of law and state that opinion before an American > > judge sworn to justice, unlike the members of the UHJ. > > > > I believe that the line has been crossed - more to follow. > > Saman Ahmadi > > > > > > > -- > > Patrick Henry > > "Give me liberty or give me death." > > Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 14, 1999 4:01 PM Subject: Re: New Bahai Fundamentalist Technique - Flooding They've tried everything else, you see, so I can't put something like this beyond them. As soon as one thing fails to create the censored atmosphere they prefer, they always move on to another tactic. I've been watching this happen now for over two years. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Truth Seeker wrote in message news:7k3fmn$v2g$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > In article <7k2mg6$oqu$1@news.laserlink.net>, > "Patrick Henry" wrote: > > We seem to be witnessing a new fundamentalist technique: > > flooding talk.religion.bahai with irrelevant quotations from > > the Writings as though it were self-evident what their > > meaning and connection to current discussion is. > > > > Upon reflection, it may be an attempted to overload > > ISPs in order to reach their maximum loading capacity > > and thereby dump other messages the fundies would > > like to see, quite literally, go away. The HTML format > > would help them reach that limit much more quickly > > and result in faster rollovers, if you will. > > Interesting point. One nicety of Dejanews is you can see the complete > thread with no time limit. > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 15, 1999 6:13 AM Subject: Re: More Bahai Threats (Re: ******s theory of mutilation.) More vague charges, insinuations, and threats. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:37658B9A.5A4E4348@usa.net... > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > Fundamentalist Bahais like Saman typify this same > > mentality. They rail and threaten me and others who > > dare speak their minds but express no concern > > whatsoever for the underlying conditions of censorship > > and oppression that have led to distrust and contempt > > for the UHJ and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's > > Teachings. > > Show me where I have told you not to say anything. > I *have* told you not to repeat yourself and not to > commit slander. > > Saman Ahmadi > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 1999 6:29 AM Subject: Re: More Bahai Threats (Re: ******s theory of mutilation.) I might add I have never committed slander. If anyone has been slandered on talk.religion.bahai, it is I by the constant character assassination Bahais have marshalled against me for over two and a half years. I'd be happy to appear in court and present an American judge and jury with the evidence of Bahai lies, deceit, censorship, and tyranny over the last decade. I highly doubt any legitimately established jury would look favorably on what Bahai fundamentalists have done to the Walbridges, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Stephen Scholl, and many, many other, indeed, TENS of THOUSANDS, of American ex-Bahais.... I'd be happy to appear in an American court and present the judge and jury with the many passages from the Bahai Writings in which the Figures speak favorably of free speech and conscience, such as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. Only one of the tyrants on Mt. Carmel could distort such passages to mean the kinds of things they had the gall to foist on American Bahais in their statement this April, which Juan Cole has candidly and accurately referred to as an "outburst of vehement ignorance." You falsely accuse me of slander. Far from slandering the UHJ, I have stood up to them and fundamentalists like you, Saman, and honestly spoken my conscience. And thank God I can trust the American legal system to protect me from organizations and people like you. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Patrick Henry wrote in message news:929441589.495.90@news.remarQ.com... > More vague charges, insinuations, and threats. > > -- > Patrick Henry > "Give me liberty or give me death." > Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > Saman Ahmadi wrote in message > news:37658B9A.5A4E4348@usa.net... > > > > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > > > Fundamentalist Bahais like Saman typify this same > > > mentality. They rail and threaten me and others who > > > dare speak their minds but express no concern > > > whatsoever for the underlying conditions of censorship > > > and oppression that have led to distrust and contempt > > > for the UHJ and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's > > > Teachings. > > > > Show me where I have told you not to say anything. > > I *have* told you not to repeat yourself and not to > > commit slander. > > > > Saman Ahmadi > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 1999 6:38 AM Subject: Re: Warning - Dejanews Posting Rules Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:376553C3.FA21BF6B@usa.net... > > > "K. Paul Johnson" wrote: > > > > > > > Speculations about the religious affiliation of an unknown > > murderer are not slanderous, whatever else they may be. I'll > > agree they are objectionable. Who is being slandered? All > > Baha'is? > > > > Fred is not speculating about the religious affliation of the muderer(s) > of Dr. Jordan - he is accusing Baha'is of committing the murder. There > is a subtle difference. It would similar to saying that two Bab'is > tried shoot Nasiridin Shah with a bird shot versus the Babis tried to > have the Shah killed. I do believe Bahais committed or at least probably planned the murder of Dr. Daniel Jordan. That is not slander. That's my honest and candid opinion after watching the way the religion deals with liberals for more than 23 years. > > He has also accused the UHJ of inciting murder. I said it's entirely feasible that a UHJ that operates the way this one does could be capable of such a deed. I still believe that. It's disgraceful "outburst of vehement ignorance" this past April only further proves it. I believe an American judge and jury would probably think likewise. > > So yes, all Baha'is are being slandered. I've often used the word "some." I don't believe all Bahais killed Dr. Daniel Jordan, only some, or probably one, though a cabal, was most likely involved, possibly through the auxiliary board members and the hoods that work for them, or people within the network of Iranian families that actually own and run the Bahai faith. A judge and jury might want to reconsider too whether the Bahai faith merits the tax-free status it enjoys since it definitely operates like a cult anymore.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > > > > > : > > >One question would be my legal standing in bringing suit against Fred > > : > > >Glayesher - well, I am a Baha'i and Glayersher's phrasing of his calumny > > : > > >so far has been, praise God, all-inclusive. > > > > Just because Fred speculates that there was Baha'i involvement > > does not give one particular Baha'i the right to claim to be > > slandered. If Fred's words constitute an accusation against > > specific persons or a specific group of Baha'is, they would have > > cause to sue for slander. Otherwise, I doubt it. > > > > Since the number of Baha'is is small, then "Baha'i" is pretty > specific. But I am not famaliar enough with the law to know > if what Fred is doing satisifes the legal definition of slander. > I am researching it at the moment and will have to judge if > it is worth my time and money to find out. In the meantime there > are other avenues which I am pursuing. Knowing Fred we > are only few short posts away from him pointing the finger at > particular names. > > One thing is clear - Fred has never played chess. > > -saman > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 1999 6:42 AM Subject: Re: Warning - Dejanews Posting Rules Oh, yes, I definitely think the murder of Dr. Daniel Jordan was most likely an "inside job." I have no proof of that but would be entirely within the manner in which the Bahai faith has now come to conduct its affairs through secrecy and intrigue as evidenced by the many acts of suppression of free speech and conscience well documented on my and other websites today. It should again be noted that the idea that it may have been an "inside job" occurred to at least FOUR different Bahais I know of and in fact INDEPENDENTLY of their knowing each other.... A judge and jury might want to ask itself why would that be the case? What kind of "religion" inspires such fears in the hearts and minds of its adherents? -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:3766D972.6B195E55@usa.net... > > > "K. Paul Johnson" wrote: > > > Saman Ahmadi (saman-ahmadi@usa.net) wrote: > > : > > : Fred is not speculating about the religious affliation of the muderer(s) > > : of Dr. Jordan - he is accusing Baha'is of committing the murder. > > > > Not exactly. He is saying he wouldn't be surprised if Baha'is > > did it, Baha'is might have done it, etc. > > If memory serves he has said that he "thinks it was an inside > job". > > > > > > There > > : is a subtle difference. It would similar to saying that two Bab'is > > : tried shoot Nasiridin Shah with a bird shot versus the Babis tried to > > : have the Shah killed. > > > > I don't see the parallel here. If Fred says "Paul did it" I have > > been slandered/libeled. If he says "a librarian did it" I have > > no standing to sue on behalf of 100,000 librarians. If he says > > "I wouldn't be surprised if a librarian did it" even less cause > > for legal action. > > If he said he "thought it was an inside job by Theosophists" I > think that might be slander against Theosophists. > > > > > > : > > : He has also accused the UHJ of inciting murder. > > > > When, how? > > He has stated that the members of UHJ (preceded by > his choice adjectives) have created an atmosphere where > a person or person(s) might take it upon himself to > kill a liberal Baha'i - Fred is backtracking but not far > enough. > > > > > : > > : So yes, all Baha'is are being slandered. > > > > No, they are not. Not unless he says "All Baha'is murdered > > Jordan." > > Is your statement substantively different from "I think Baha'is > killed Dr. Jordan"? > > > > > > > : > > : Since the number of Baha'is is small, > > > > From 5.5 to 7.5 million might be small as a world religion, but > > it sure isn't small as a pool of suspects! > > > > Yes but not all of them have good addresses ;-) > > > > > > > > I'm not familiar with the law either but common sense and > > precedent say no. No more than if he said a Taurus did it, or a > > Texan, etc. > > > > If he ever says a Texan did it then I'd really get mad. > > > > > > : I am researching it at the moment and will have to judge if > > : it is worth my time and money to find out. In the meantime there > > : are other avenues which I am pursuing. Knowing Fred we > > : are only few short posts away from him pointing the finger at > > : particular names. > > > > Even then, wouldn't he have to state "Saman did it" to be > > libelous or slanderous? Saying "It wouldn't surprise me if Saman > > turned out to have done it" coming from Fred would be a simple > > statement of fact. > > > > I don't know - I think this would be similar to the tabloids who > regularly print borderline slander and sometimes get sued and > are convicted. > > Do "Enquiring Minds Want To Know"? > > -saman > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 17, 1999 6:23 AM Subject: UHJ's "Outburst of Vehement Ignorance" Juan Cole's "Commentary on the letter of the House of Justice dated April 7, 1999" may be found at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 17, 1999 6:31 AM Subject: Re: Warning - Dejanews Posting Rules Paul, If you actually know anything about the murder of Daniel Jordan, you should share it with the police. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:3767c00a.0@vlinsvr... > Saman Ahmadi (saman-ahmadi@usa.net) wrote: > : > : > : In repoonse to Bobby Fisher "K. Paul Johnson" wrote: > : > : > Good God, man! This is crazy. Information from sources I > : > consider reliable provide a very plausible explanation of what > : > happened. I won't discuss it here. But Baha'i had nothing to > : > do with it except in the most indirect way. > : > : Come again? > : > : -saman > > This whole thing puts me in an uncomfortable situation. I don't > want to repeat the explanation I've heard from several sources > who seem pretty well-connected and well-informed. But it is a > million miles from what Fred is suggesting. > > Saman, email me privately if you want to know. Yes, Baha'i is > indirectly implicated, but it is the belief system per se and not > any individuals or institutions. > > PJ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 17, 1999 6:32 AM Subject: Re: Warning - Dejanews Posting Rules Saman, Please post David Langess' information regarding the murder Daniel Jordan here. Not all of us are aware of it. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:3767D975.A81D908F@usa.net... > > > "K. Paul Johnson" wrote: > > > Saman, email me privately if you want to know. Yes, Baha'i is > > indirectly implicated, but it is the belief system per se and not > > any individuals or institutions. > > > > PJ > > I was on Talisman whe David Langess posted the > information that he had gathered regarding the murder of > Dr. Jordan. Even though several ideas were investigated > by the Police, there was no evidence to prove any of them > and the murder has remained unsolved. > > -saman > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 17, 1999 6:35 AM Subject: Re: More Bahai Threats (Re: ******s theory of mutilation.) Notice here once again all the fundamentalists can do is threaten and harass others whose views they oppose. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:3767FCAE.7B7443F@usa.net... > > > Chris Manvell wrote: > > > On talk.religion.bahai, Rick Schaut (mailto:RSSchaut@email.msn.NOSPAMcom > > ) wrote: > > > > > >Patrick Henry wrote in message > > >news:7k7u9j$70l$1@news.laserlink.net... > > >> I might add I have never committed slander. > > > > > >This is, in fact, not true. Though, Mr. Glaysher has never comitted a > > >slander that was particularly actionable, he has accused Judge Nelson of > > >having stolen funds when the facts have stated otherwise. > > > > Isn't he actually telling the truth here. I was under the impression > > that he had libelled rather than slandered. And the thing with libel is > > that the evidence does not go away. But, having said that, one cannot > > libel if one is telling the facts. All I can say is that I am glad that > > I am not Fred when the Judge finally finds this group. > > -- > > Is there a difference between libel and slander? > > -saman > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 17, 1999 6:36 AM Subject: Re: More Bahai Threats (Re: ******s theory of mutilation.) Apparently, by doing this in a concerted fashion they hope to dispell the quite correct impression a non-Bahai newcomer or observer might have that the Bahai faith has really become distorted by the UHJ from the vision its Founders' taught. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Chris Manvell wrote in message news:JfHY9HAV5Ba3EA0d@breacais.demon.co.uk... > On talk.religion.bahai, Saman Ahmadi (mailto:saman-ahmadi@usa.net) > wrote: > >Is there a difference between libel and slander? > > Dear Saman, > > In a word, libel is written and slander is spoken. > > Best wishes, > > Chris. > -- > Chris Manvell Tel.:+44(0)1471-822 317 > Breacais Iosal, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Fax.:+44(0)870-056 8081 > Personal Web site: > Association of Baha'i Studies (English speaking Europe): > and > Sgriobtiurean Creidimh nam Baha-i (with English Translations) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 6:39 AM Subject: Re: Warning - Dejanews Posting Rules Michael McKenny wrote in message news:7karse$ohn@freenet-news.carleton.ca... Yes, > to freedom of religion, no to false advertising Well, this is what much of the problem comes down to.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 6:41 AM Subject: Re: ******s theory of mutilation. The Majnun post may be found in full at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Majnunpost.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Rick Schaut wrote in message news:7k8lnp$g0b@news1.newsguy.com... > > Milissa Boyer Kafes wrote in message > news:7k6l0k$3us$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this one! I suppose > > if they hadn't included the snippet from the Majnun post, I would be > > more inclined to believe you. > > The letter from the secretariat made reference to the Majnun post, but I > didn't find anyplace where the letter quoted from it. > > > Regards, > Rick Schaut > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 6:45 AM Subject: Re: Professor Cow Mesbah Javid <11111174@3web.net> wrote in message news:7kbb7s$7u1$1@iceman.tac.net... > Michael McKenny wrote in message > news:7kasru$oqd@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > | Hats off to the cows. Clearly they are sacred beings > very worthy of > | respect, esteem, even worship, moreso than any mere human > religious leader. > Mesbah Javid: > I was quite sure you would prefer to prostrate before cows > rather than before God. A typical Iranian Bahai/Muslim insult. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 6:50 AM Subject: Re: The UHJ letter to NSAs about the Internet The full text is included in Juan Cole's "Commentary" on it: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Deana Marie Holmes wrote in message news:376c1c62.65067569@enews.newsguy.com... > On Sat, 19 Jun 1999 02:34:22 GMT, rreini@wwnet.net (Roger Reini) > wrote: > > >On Sat, 19 Jun 1999 00:54:00 GMT, mirele@newsguy.com (Deana Marie > >Holmes) wrote: > > > >>On Fri, 04 Jun 1999 18:53:07 +0000, Ron House > >>wrote: > >> > >>>Regarding the leaked UHJ letter to NSAs about the 'opposition' on the > >>>Internet, I believe it is important to try to get at the facts behind > >>>this document. First, I am not convinced that this letter was intended > >>>to be kept secret from anyone. It begins: > >> > >>I hope there was no intention to "keep secret." As a certain belief > >>system has learned, attempting to suppress knowledge has meant that > >>its deepest secrets (the ones that people pay thousands of dollars to > >>learn) have been spread all over the Net. > >> > >>IMHO, it would do the UHJ well to have a person here that could > >>discuss, officially, what the UHJ is up to, and explain what certain > >>documents mean. > > > >If the House of Justice wanted to issue a statement for publication on > >this newsgroup, it would. Perhaps it will one day. > > That's not what I said would be best for the UHJ, Roger. > > What I said would be best is if they had someone official hear to > explain what they're up to and what certain documents mean. > > The failure to do this, IMHO, means that people can be damned for not > knowing what's really going on. And to be perfectly blunt about it, > it helps the UHJ cover their butts. > > > mirele ARS Fish-Monger Award Winner ><_'> <_" > ======================================================================= > Our unanimous affirmance of the Court of Appeals' judgment concerning > 16-1-20.2 makes it unnecessary to comment at length on the District > Court's remarkable conclusion that the Federal Constitution imposes no > obstacle to Alabama's establishment of a state religion. > =============== Wallace v. Jaffree, 472 U.S. 38 (1985) ================ > mirele@xmission.com (Deana M. Holmes) mirele_ on EFNet #scientology ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 6:54 AM Subject: Deceit: Bahai UHJ From: FG To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; bahai-faith @ makelist.com Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM July 24,1998 Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." The tragic loss of Bahai lives in Iran and the subsequent exploitation of their deaths by Bahai spokesmen, often in the American media, always courting the President and other members of the government, has become a predictable pattern rendered intolerable in the context of continuing and pervasive Bahai censorship and denial of human and civil rights in the United States and elsewhere. Such incidents as I queried you about in my unanswered email of March 31, 1997, available on my Web site, regarding the crushing of the magazine Dialogue, the resignations of a number of scholars from the Bahai Encyclopedia, the attacks on the listserv known as Talisman I at Indiana University, the harassing and blacklisting of many individuals, Bahai and non-Bahai, suggest profoundly deep-seated problems within the Bahai community and administration. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/To-UHJ1.htm To these incidents must now be added the apparent conspiracy for more than a year and a half of the Bahai Computer and Communications Committee (BCCA), under the chairmanship of Mark Towfiq, to defeat twice now, along with the collusion of other Bahais, the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith which would be known as talk.religion.bahai. You may find extensive documentation for all of these violations of the basic human rights of many Bahais and non-Bahais on my Web site, "The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm Because the third interest poll for talk.religion.bahai on Usenet is approaching, after August 28th, I ask you again to investigate the BCCA and its depriving me of access last November from all private Bahai-only mailing lists at a crucial moment just when the tide of discussion was going very much in favor of the newsgroup, noted by many observers. I also ask whether you supported or were involved in that decision? The relevant files can be found on my Web site under Bahai-Discuss Archives. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm Similarly, I would like to know whether your institution or the BCCA has approved of or advocated the recent ban of my email signature file by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai, as well as their complete ban for more than a year and a half now on all discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai. The prevailing atmosphere of suppression of free speech and religious conscience that now characterizes the Bahai Faith cannot but call into question the honesty of many members of the Bahai administration and perhaps the institutions themselves. I ask once more whether censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith and what passages of the Bahai Writings support it, what are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship? Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ------ Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 6:54 AM Subject: Deceit: Bahais on AOL In August of 1998 I took out an account on AOL. It quickly became apparent that my fellow Bahais were using AOL in such a way as to further withhold knowledge and information from AOL's more than 14 million members. It appeared to me that there were four main issues. Alt.religion.bahai, which had been created in April of 1997 and which had had more than 20,000 messages posted to it, was not even offered in the list of AOL newsgroups. AOL personnel with which I spoke over the phone were very puzzled why it wasn't and even implied that some action would have had to have been taken to keep it from automatically being picked up and added to their newsgroups. It took more than a month of strenuous effort to get AOL to add alt.religion.bahai. On the AOL Bahai Forums it became apparent that Bahais were manipulating and controlling information by NOT making it available, by essentially preserving the frozen, non-functioning state of affairs or the status quo: 1. The Libraries were not accepting new uploads for others then to download and read. 2. The list of Newsgroups on the Main Menu for Bahai offered only soc.religion.bahai with no mention of alt.religion.bahai, or talk.religion.bahai once it was created in January of 1999. Coupled with soc.religion.bahai's suppression of all mention of alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai, this prevents people from even hearing of their existence. 3. The available links for Web Sites on the Main Menu for Bahai did not offered my website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience, though it has to be one of the most visited sites on the Bahai Faith with more than 7,000 hits since May 1998. As the months went by, my repeated attempts to improve these deficiencies met with greater and greater opposition from the Bahai fundamentalists on AOL. Similiarly, my requests, beginning in August of 1998, that the Forum Leader, Mark Foster, who no one had seen for months, resign, for derilection of duty, were increasingly opposed while various excuses were offered for his absence. Not until talk.religion.bahai was passed five months later in January 1999 did he suddenly reappear only to begin immediately reporting absolutely EVERY message I posted to AOL as a TOS. It quickly became clear to me that he was back in order to target and build a case against me to have me suspended from AOL. My account was then temporarily suspended on three different occasions and finally terminated March 6, 1999. Of the four issues, only two have partially been remedied. 1. Alt.religion.bahai and now talk.religion.bahai are available under AOL's Keyword Newsgroups, Expert Add. 2. The Libraries are accepting some uploads, though Foster banned the 15+ megabytes I uploaded in late February of my entire archive of discussion for talk.religion.bahai and which is at least available on my website. It's obvious Foster is finding pretexts for suppressing further uploads. While Foster has claimed since mid-January that alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai would be added to the Main Menu under Newsgroups, he continued to make excuses for it not happening. As of March 9, 1999 they were not yet listed under Newsgroups along with soc.religion.bahai. All of these factors, coupled with Mark Foster's abuse of his position as Forum Leader and his harassing and targetting of dissenting voices, not only mine, leaves no doubt that he and other Bahais, including some among the Bahai Administration, are involved in censoring discourse on AOL. For an instance of "back-channel" email coercion on AOL see https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm For an instance of Foster's double standard handling fundamentalist Bahais see Susan Maneck's accusations on AOL against me of "slander" and references to my views as "garbage": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm The immediate pretext for terminating my account, according to the AOL official with whom I spoke on the phone, was that I had pointed out in a newly created Folder called Censorship that I and other AOL members had requested a Folder entitled Bahai Censorship and thereby undermined the authority of the Forum Leader.... In closing let me add that AOL personnel are extremely uninformed about the Bahai Faith, especially its practice of censorship, and its ability to exploit the TOS system.... Half a megabyte of messages documenting Bahai censorship on AOL may be found at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 6:55 AM Subject: Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for arb, trb ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Alt.Religion.Bahai, Talk.Religion.Bahai This FAQ will be reposted approximately every two weeks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- People with only web access might want to use www.dejanews.com www.reference.com or www.newsguy.com They all offer reading and posting capabilities for people who can't directly access alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai and filter out spam. Alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai are available on America Online (AOL) Keyword, Newsgroups, then search for alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai If your ISP does not offer talk.religion.bahai, follow this news.groupie advice: "If your ISP doesn't have the group shortly, I suggest that you ask the newsmaster there to add it (Try news@isp.net, or newsmaster@isp.net) Ask politely. Include the msg ID of the results posting, and of the newgroup msg." Dave Cornejo's RESULT posting: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=431106082&CONTEXT=918305125.781648012&hi tnum=0 David Lawrence's newgroup msg creating talk.religion.bahai: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=434026333&CONTEXT=918304600.713490686&hi tnum=3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: Not all people agree on the interpretations given below. Question #1 "Why create arb or t.r.b.?" ANSWER #1: Because many people believe they experienced or are continuing to experience censorship when attempting to post to soc.religion.bahai. See the quotations from Abdu'l-Baha: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #2: Because the Bahai writings support free speech and religious conscience. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #3: [fill in the blank according to your own opinion.] Question #2: "Why do the srb moderators oppose trb?" ANSWER: Perhaps they'll supply an answer to place here. (Two years later their NO votes are their only answer.) Question #3: "Are Bahais opposed to freedom of speech and conscience?" ANSWER: Despite glowing words of love and support for other people's opinions, despite the Universal House of Justice stating at least publicly it is not opposed to an unmoderated forum, the record of actual behavior by Bahais and on soc.religion.bahai and the experience of many Bahais and people who have left the Bahai Faith give serious reason for concern. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chronology of major events: talk.religion.bahai ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- January 17, 1997: The 1st proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted to news.announce.newgroups. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRFD.htm Early March 1997: Mark Towfiq, chairman of the BCCA, the Bahai Computer and Communication Association, posts to three Bahai-only mailing lists a call for Bahais to vote NO against talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Towfiq.htm March 1997: soc.religion.bahai bans all discussion of talk.religion.bahai from its newsgroup. This ban is still in effect more than a year and a half later. March 31, 1997: The 1st proposal was defeated 157 YES to 691 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRESULT.htm April 3, 1997: Jonathan Grobe, a non-Bahai, creates alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/arb.htm October 14, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message stating it has no objection to unmoderated newsgroups: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ1.htm November 1997: At a time when discussion was highly favorable in support of talk.religion.bahai, the BCCA deprives Frederick Glaysher of access to the private Bahai-only mailing list bahai-discuss and all of its other lists, inflaming Bahai passions against trb. See bahai-discuss archived files and correspondence between Frederick Glaysher and the BCCA committee: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm December 19, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message that suggests it does not understand the nature of Usenet interest polling: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ2.htm January 12, 1998: The 2nd proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRFD.htm February 22, 1998: The 2nd proposal was defeated 109 YES to 65 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRESULT.htm May 25, 1998: srb bans all messages from Frederick Glaysher that contain his signature file: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb23.htm September 9,1998: America Online (AOL) places a Bahai-inspired TOS against Frederick Glaysher; AOL removes the TOS after considering both sides of the issue, i.e., Bahai messages attacking and threatening him and the experience of others: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm September 14, 1998: soc.religion.bahai extends its ban on Frederick Glaysher's signature file to include all signature files and URLs from all posters, allowing only email addresses and the name of the poster: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srbban.htm October 14, 1998: Soc.religion.bahai moderator Bill Hyman backbites and casts aspersions on proponent Ron House and attempts to undermine the new support for the "neutral" RFD: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb67.htm December 3, 1998: The Call For Votes (CFV) was posted to news.announce.newgroups and news.groups for the 3rd interest poll for talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRFD.htm December 7, 1998: Bahai scholar Susan Maneck begins her NO vote campaign on AOL and alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm January 10, 1999: Talk.religion.bahai passes 218: 63. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRESULT.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- For past discussion of censorship on soc.religion.bahai and other issues, including censorship within the Bahai community, see the website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/FAQ.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 6:56 AM Subject: Deceit: Bahai Techniques During the last several years or more a number of observers have noted the common methods many Bahais use to avoid various issues or discredit people who hold opinions other than their own: Frederick Glaysher, May 12, 1992: "The Baha'i Faith has become very oppressive and manipulative of the individual. That to me is merely a statement of fact, as I have experienced it, for nearly sixteen years now [over 22]. The usual stratagem in dealing with anyone who would express his conscience in good faith is to pretend the Cause is above any kind of criticism whatsoever while intimating that anyone who would speak honestly must have something wrong with him, i.e., his spiritual life isn't what it should be, he doesn't understand the nature of unity, or he's accused of trying to obtain power for himself, which at times seems merely a calculated way of discrediting the person, and so on. Another common strategy used to acquire control over the individual is to humor the person by letting him pour himself out, etc., and then self-righteously giving him the Truth." Ron House, November 14, 1997: "I know what you mean. I've found over the years that there is a technique used by traditional Baha'is and others to squash dissension: harry the dissenter so much he says something intemperate, then point out how 'loving' and 'compassionate' they are and how nasty the dissenter is. The trouble is that this technique works, so I've been making a conscious effort not to fall for it. Also, when they get the dissenter discouraged and miserable enough, he invariably makes a slip-up sooner or later that they can REALLY let loose the venom over. IMHO, they did this to you when you misread Sharon's intentions. At any other time, they would overlook faults, as Baha'u'llah says, but when they're in this mode they go for the jugular. Very sad." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/House2.htm Frederick Glaysher, June 1998: "Some of the most striking methods demonstrated repeatedly by many Bahais during the last year and a half of discussion about an unmoderated newsgroup is their refusal to listen and respond to the criticisms of those who are in favor of talk.religion.bahai, ignoring their concerns, never responding analytically to their messages and reasoning and logic and evidence, attacking them through character assassination and ad hominem, ganging up on individuals, and "circling the wagons" around every action of the srb moderators or others who are opposed to talk.religion.bahai." "More than twenty different people on my web site have posted messages explaining their experience with srb censorship yet many srb Bahais NEVER address their concerns. Ignoring such charges will not make them go away. NO ONE has to "try" to link the trb interest poll with censorship on srb; the moderators themselves have done that by suppressing droves of people for years. There are many people who believe such suppression is part and parcel of the Bahai community as it exists today. A YES vote need not necessarily support such a belief. There are other reasons Bahais might vote YES." Fran Baker, May 1998: "Just have to say that in my experience this is a common technique of manipulative people in general; it is especially effective with thoughtful people who are willing to see both sides of things, i.e., their own fault. I consider this brow-beating technique to be a form of abuse. The only way to deal with it is to call them on it every time and to refuse to let yourself be beat up, i.e., not to do your part of the "tango." This can be very hard to do, but it works.You can break this pattern in a personal relationship. I don't know whether it's possible when a group acts this way. Very scary." Dr. Juan Cole, June 12, 1998: "Let me ask you why in the world you think that I would risk my professional reputation by publicly stating falsehoods? ...The very technique of the more glaze-eyed among these people is to unbearably bully a Baha'i whom they don't like, use unjustified threats of declaring him or her a CB to silence the individual, and if the person will not be silenced, then to depend upon the gullibility of the Baha'is in refusing to listen to any victim's story because, of course, the Baha'i institutions are infallible and divinely guided and could never do anything wrong. It is a perfect racket." "Of course, this technique of making liberals go away has been enormously successful, and ex-Baha'i liberals have no credibility with the remaining Baha'is nor do most of them have any energy to continue to make a case, either to the Baha'is or the outside world, for the incredible abuses that go on inside this organization ostensibly committed to tolerance!" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Cole10.htm K. Paul Johnson, September 15, 1998: "If that principle [people are innocent until proven guilty] were followed by Baha'i administration and individuals in their condemnations of their fellow believers, I would have very little to complain about regarding Baha'i affairs. But character assassination by innuendo is the preferred way of dealing with anything remotely resembling dissidence. Seems like that's exactly what you're doing to Juan Cole in your message. Saying I don't want to know what you've "got" on him, thus attacking me but insinuating you have some awful proof of unspecified guilt on his part. If that's not character assassination by innuendo, what is?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson18.htm Gibro28W, October 12, 1998: "In summary, the biggest problem, as I see it, is that most Baha'is don't take criticism seriously--they tune it out as "negative" or "harmful to spiritual growth." This selfish attitude is very stupid. First of all, Baha'is entice people to join them. When they do, they indoctrinate them until they think like the group. But as soon as a red flare of doubt goes up in the convert's mind, they're cordoned off by the group and reminded of their "spiritual" obligations in the name of Baha'u'llah or the "Covenant." If left unresolved and doubt gives vent to prolonged criticism, the convert is sent packing or is kicked out. What we have here is a broken family that had failed to truly listen to the needs of its members in the first place." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb73.htm Barthaman on September 14, 1998: "Baha'i dissenters, more or less, are wounded souls abandoned by their fathers,so-to-speak. They have been cast out and dismissed or shunned without having had a fair hearing. Consider their pain when the rest of their "family" dismisses them too. Can you know what it's like to be accused of heresy and shunned following a sincere intellectual conflict (inspired by doubt)-- after you've sacrificed years in devoted service to your religion? Can you comprehend their sense of betrayal and injustice? This is why disillusioned believers leave their religions each year--while some still hang around, banging on the door now and then, demanding a refund for their lost youth. In time they will have to move on, however, writing the Baha'i Faith off as another lesson in fraud. Mock these people all you want--but for the grace of God, the next dissenter could be you. Don't be too confident, my friend." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb66.htm Juan Cole wrote, February 23, 1999: "There is nothing to be puzzled by. Right wing Baha'is only like to hear the sound of their own voices (which are the only voices they will admit to being "Baha'i" at all)." "Obviously, the world is so constructed that they cannot in fact only hear their own voices. They are forced to hear other voices that differ from theirs. This most disturbs them when the voices come from enrolled Baha'is or when the voices speak of the Baha'i faith." "The way they sometimes deal with the enrolled Baha'is is to summon them to a heresy inquiry and threaten them with being shunned if they do not fall silent." "With non-Baha'is or with ex-Baha'is, they deal with their speech about the faith by backbiting, slandering and libelling the speaker. You will note that since I've been on this list I have been accused of long-term heresy, of "claiming authority," of out and out lying (though that was retracted, twice), of misrepresentation, of 'playing fast and loose with the facts,' and even of being 'delusional.' I have been accused of all these falsehoods by *Baha'is*, by prominent Baha'is. I have been backbitten by them." "This shows that all the talk about the danger a sharp tongue can do, all the talk about the need for harmony, for returning poison with honey, for a sin-covering eye, is just *talk* among right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute." "Paul Johnson has seen all these things, as well, for the past five years. He can explain it to you." Cf. K. Paul Johnson's general reflections on coercive techniques https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson21.htm And LaAeterna's method of silencing opponents https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb65.htm Comments on the related techniques of Susan Maneck: Juan Cole, February 13, 1999: "It is a very, very, very weird religion. And if anyone is reading Susan Maneck's absolutely bone-chilling screeds on the desirability of Heresy Trials and carefulness in Shunning, they are seeing what it is like at the core of the religion." "I really am sorry for them and her, since they seem sort of filled with hate and quite paranoid, yet say they are preaching love, unity and tolerance. Susan will say, 'may your abdomen be split by lightning and your guts fall out you filthy heretic whom I wish I could just have shunned and buried', and then she'll sign herself "warmest" and slander a university by adding it to her sig line. As if what she is about has anything at all to do with *universities*!" Frederick Glaysher, February 15, 1999: "Ms. Maneck's approach appears to me to be always to shunt the discussion off or back to who said what where when why how and so on.... The farther back in time the better, since the person's memory, being human, is bound to be unable to keep up or to have stocked the evidence needed on his or her hard drive or find it on dejanews.com. And it then allows her to claim pretty much anything she wants to while seeming to have discredited her opponent. Further, she relies on the tactics of demagoguery knowing they usually prevail and will be supported by other fundamentalist Bahais. By shrieking "slander" and referring to others' opinions as "garbage," she is able to create an emotional atmosphere that essentially negates whatever the topic or content might be and that allows her to appear to win what is often a narrowly legalistic point or interpretation." "All of this is done, of course, in conjunction with her employing the more common Bahai techniques of intimidation and psychological demonization and terrorism." Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 6:57 AM Subject: Deceit: Bahai Fundamentalists Bullying I'm alarmed at the recent Bahai attempts at character assassination, ridicule, and generally portraying me and others as disturbed individuals. I have never claimed to be perfect. At times I have apologized to Bahais, Muslims, and other non-Bahais when I felt, or was convinced, that I was wrong or had spoken unfairly. I find the constant technique to portray me as a megalomanic or paranoid quite offensive. Similarly, the tactic of accusing me of spam for posting my opinions is calculated to discredit the validity of my and others' concerns regarding censorship in Bahai forums and has also been used on AOL. Such accusations reveal the frustration that Bahai fundamentalists apparently feel over my having found ways of enduring and resisting the onslaught of their concerted attacks, while preserving a historical record on a markedly ephermeral medium for innocent Bahais and non-Bahais.... Fair-minded Bahai and non-Bahai observers may judge for themselves whether my and others' allegations of censorship are valid by reading the record preserved under "Assorted Controversial Documents" on my website at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm As further corroboration that I am not the only person concerned with the intolerance and censorship that has overtaken the Bahai Faith, I recommend Professor Juan Cole's new book Modernity & the Millennium: The Genesis of the Bahai Faith in the Nineteenth-Century Middle East, available through Columbia University Press or Amazon.com at https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 In his conclusion, which would never have passed the system of Bahai "review" that the UHJ imposes on all publications brought out under its tight control, Professor Cole, of the Department of History at The University of Michigan, quite accurately identifies the distortions that have been wreaked upon Baha'u'llah's Teachings: "Some contemporary leaders of the Baha'i Faith have given answers increasingly similar to those of fundamentalists, stressing scriptural literalism, patriachy, theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values. While the values of the nineteenth- century Baha'i movement, which was far more tolerant, continue to exist as a minority view, by the late 1990s a different set of emphases prevailed." (196) He himself and many others, as evidence under the "Assorted Controversial Documents," have suffered at the hands of the fundamentalists who have taken control of the religion: "The rise of academic Baha'i scholarship has caused tension in the community, whose present-day leadership tends to be fundamentalist and antiliberal in orientation, and this has led to pressure on a number of prominent academics to resign or dissociate themselves from the movement." (201) These same forces of fundamentalist orthodoxy are evident on AOL, talk.religion.bahai, and alt.religion.bahai for impartial viewers to witness. They will be evident to all perceptive observers of whatever forum Bahais may be trying to control and influence. As a Bahai for more than 23 years, I myself have always found especially repulsive the manner in which Bahai fundamentalists attempt to manipulate the institutions and leaders of government, the United Nations, and public opinion, while pretending to values they deride in private or at Bahai-only meetings. Ultimately, it is the Bahai Universal House of Justice that is responsible for the perversion and corruption of such clear and elevating teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. The UHJ is also in the end responsible for inciting Bahai fanatics and fundamentalists to attack other Bahais and non-Bahais merely for their views expressed on and off line in free forums of public discussion. I recommend all newcomers to these matters read "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm On Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 6:58 AM Subject: Bahai NSA Chairman Stealing & NSA Deceit Dismissal of Judge James F. Nelson, Chair of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, in April, 1999. April 6, 1999 Delegates to the 1999 Baha'i National ConventionBeloved Friends, We deeply regret the necessity of informing you that James F. Nelson has been guilty of gross negligence in the performance of his duties as a member of the National Spiritual Assembly and that, although he has expressed his profound regret for the related occurrences, and has effected full restitution of the damage done, he has felt impelled, by his awareness of the high responsibility of the post in which he has been serving, to tender his resignation from the membership of the National Spiritual Assembly, and the National Spiritual Assembly has accepted this resignation. At this painful moment the National Spiritual Assembly offers James Nelson its loving support and prayers. NATIONAL SPIRITUAL ASSEMBLY OF THE BAHA'IS OF THE UNITED STATES [signed] Robert C. HendersonSecretary-General cc: Continental Counselors serving tthe United States ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- CommentaryDate: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 09:14:15 -0700From: Steven Scholl Subject: NelsonTo: talisman@umich.edu Here is all I know about the situation. Jim Nelson was helping an elderly Baha'i in Pasadena with her finances. I believe he had some power to sign checks from her account for paying bills, etc. She told Jim that she wanted her payment to the huquq [the 19% tax on some income to be paid to the Universal House of Justice in Haifa, Israel according to Baha'i law] to be set up as an endowment rather than being a lump sum payment. On her death, Jim placed the huquq funds from her accounts into a new account under his name. This led to protests from the estate's executor and prompted the NSA to go on the war path with claims of wrongdoing. I do not know if the executor of the estate is a Baha'i or not. Since the huquq funds would be directed to Haifa, one can imagine why [National Spiritual Assembly secretary-general Robert C.] Henderson would be upset by Jim's action. Henderson has been accused in the past of mismanagement of funds, of hijacking contributions earmarked to the World Centre into a special NSA account, skimming off the interest and then at the end of the year sending the principle along to Haifa. But this is purely personal speculation on my part. This is the only thing I have heard in terms of "wrongdoing" on Nelson's part, whereas Henderson's letter to the delegates refers to "related occurrences" in the plural. As for restitution, I understand that the money never went anywhere and, in the end, the funds were handled according to the wishes of the deceased Baha'i in the way Jim was planning to set up in the first place. So, what does this all indicate? My take is that for years there has been rivalries and factions on the NSA, especially between the West Coast Gang led by the Nelsons (with Bill Davis and Juana Conrad) vs. the Henderson/Kazemzadeh block. I have heard that in their rebuke to Nelson the NSA refered to his "careless" behavior, while in the letter to the delegates they refer to "gross negligence in the performance of duties." My view is that if the NSA was sincere in their concern for Nelson and his spiritual growth, they would have simply accepted his resignation and informed the delegates that after years of service, Judge Nelson has resigned for health or personal reasons. The letter to the delegates seems to me to be a blatant campaign maneuver. It seems aimed at (1) publicly humiliating Jim Nelson and (2) helping guide the delegates in their voting for a candidate from the Henderson/Kazemzadeh Good Old Boys Network rather than from the now suspect Nelson Network. As someone who has dealt with Henderson and Kazemzadeh in the past and had them use lies and slander in their attacks on my beliefs and behavior, this latest outburst is not at all surprising and fits their modus operandi perfectly. That is to say, the timing and the pure sleeziness of this blatant political manuvering fits with their history of self-promotion combined with vicious personal attacks against those who might threaten their grip of power over the American Baha'i community. Having been absent from these Baha'i cultural wars now for several years, I do find it fascinating that since many of us old "heretics" have either left the faith, lost rights, or gone into the grand occultation of self-imposed exile and inactivity, the leadership, at a loss for enemies, seems intent on feeding on each other. Needless to say, it will be interesting how the delegates respond to this news, whether they will back Henderson and Kazemzadeh by voting in one of their cronies or protest this action by voting in a West coast candidate. Steve -----------------------------------------------------Date: 4-14-99 To: talisman@umich.eduFrom: Juan ColeSubject: Re: NSA elections Actually, early twentieth century Baha'is under `Abdu'l-Baha had perfectly democratic elections, and were instructed to do it that way by `Abdu'l-Baha. During WW I when there was conflict over whether to support the war effort or adopt a pacifist stance, hawks like Mason Remey organized a campaign for the NSA in 1917 in which they captured it and reversed the previous pacifist policy! Older Baha'is spoke of the times when Republican and Democratic Baha'is wouldn't speak with one another. The problem with the current situation is not merely that the voting records of the NSA members are completely unknown. It is that the activities and policies of the NSA as a whole are almost completely unknown! What exactly do these people do? What policies have they made? What effect have the policies had? Have they been good for the growth of the community, numerically and spiritually? Without knowing the answer to this question, how can the delegates even begin to vote intelligently? Though, as we have seen, the very rules of the elections leave them with little potentialimpact. We know that there were about 48,000 adult Baha'is with good addresses in the US in 1978. There are now about 60,000. In the meantime 12,000 Iranians immigrated. This means that there has been no growth in over twenty years. *None*. Of course, hundreds if not a few thousands of people have come in during the past two decades, but enormous numbers of them have gone right back out. Would any CEO who had not increased his earnings a single penny over twenty years be reappointed by the board? The exclusivistic policies of Mr. Henderson, who is frankly mean-spirited, have contributed enormously to this Great Stagnation. He was the one who cracked down on Dialogue magazine in such a nasty way. He bullied Baha'i travel agents in 1991, for the Lord knows what reward from the corrupt Corporate Travel Consultants. He agitated behind the scenes for a crackdown on talisman@indiana.edu. He has chased travel teachers out of the country, seeing them as an electoral threat should they become successful. I have no idea about the propriety of Jim Nelson's book-keeping practices, but surely for Henderson to publicly smear him after Jim served on the NSA 1971-1999, in circumstances where Nelson cannot even publicly defend himself, is the height of sleaze. Henderson has arranged for himself to live rent free free in a 9-bedroom mansion (having the Bourgeois studio knocked down to build it, against UHJ instructions) with free Baha'i maids and gardeners, and his main business seems to be bullying Baha'is into silence behind the scenes. And I fully acknowledge that he is probably acting rationally given the way the Baha'i system is structured. So, I think all these things are related: the fact that the Baha'i faith in the US has been going nowhere fast for decades; the fact that the electoral system seems to elect the ambitious and greedy (and paranoid) to the top offices; the fact that even initially upright people are made perpetual incumbents, exposing them to the temptations of absolute power held for decades and corrupting them; the fact that the electoral system provides an incentive for the incumbents to slap down and chase out potential competitors; the fact that it would not be in the incumbents' interest for the faith to expand, become more open, attract a lot of new voters who might rock the boat. Term limits would go a long way toward solving all these problems. In fact, why not have staggered elections for 4-year terms? You could elect 5 members in 2000 and 4 in 2002. People who don't serve as long as Nelson did might not become tempted to act high-handedly. They wouldn't face reelection and so would have no reason to fear being unseated by active young folks. Counselor Fred Schechter, one of the people who falsely accused me, once told a friend of mine that anyone who becomes active in the faith will be attacked (by the faith's officials, it is implied). We hadn't at the time realized that Schechter intended to *act* on this observation! This is a dysfunctional system, folks. There are ways in which it destroyed Dan Jordan (forcing him to live a lie and to resort to secret trysts), Allen Ward, and now Jim Nelson--not to mention the spiritual harm it has wreaked on the Baby Boom intellectuals who were enticed in with promises of tolerance and justice (!!!). When Glenford Mitchell had become a huge pain in the ass as NSA secretary and was finally elected off it to the UHJ, everyone breathed a big sigh of relief. And when Henderson came in, the word was that he was a good guy, and we were all relieved. And then in a few short years he demonstrated that he was an even bigger pain in the ass than Mitchell had been. Even dumping Henderson wouldn't solve the problem. The *system* creates the Hendersons and the Nelsons. If anyone cared about the fortunes of the faith as opposed to the size of their marble offices, they would fix the system. cheers Juan ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Return to DocumentsTo Baha'i StudiesTo Talisman wrote in message news:7focup$gi9$1@nnrp1.dejanews.com... > Documents and discussions regarding the recent dismissal of the chairmanof > the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the US for 'financial > improprieties' may be found at:> > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/bhnsa.htm>> cheers Juan>>> -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity and the Millennium: The Genesis of the Baha'i Faith* at: > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448> Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 6:59 AM Subject: Deceit: Bahai Attacks Incessant Bahai attacks upon my freedom of speech and liberty have made it necessary for me to adopt a persona for my own protection and well being. Other measures have been taken. During the last three months, Bahais have twice flooded my hotmail account with up to 1000 messages per day resulting in considerable inconvenience and expenditure of time and effort to block, and ultimately close, the offending accounts; they have, by using Bahai trolls, especially Gyr Falcon, slandered, maligned, and caricatured me in a further effort to discredit me and portray me on talk.religion.bahai and elsewhere as a disturbed and errant individual; through concerted false charges and allegations against me, they have now succeeded in deceiving Hotmail into closing my email account, which I depended on for a considerable part of my income and livelihood. For documentation of many similar incidents of Bahai oppression during the last decade, see Frederick Glaysher's website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 6:59 AM Subject: Deceit: on soc.religion.bahai Robert J. Pease, December 5, 1998: "I support your efforts to expose SRB as a fundamentalist group." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb84.htm Ron House: "I think the following is a clear case of malicious rejection of an article by the worst of the moderators of soc.religion.bahai." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb53.htm Timothy Mulligan: "(Sigh) Fred, I'm beginning to think you're right about those SRB moderators." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb59.htm RobertNik: "these guys are pompous arseholes IMHO." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb54.htm Bruce Burrill: "What are Baha'i afraid of?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb60.htm Zuteflute: "Frankly I could not see anything in the letter I wrote which would prompt someone to ask whether or not I am a Baha'i." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb50.htm YU ZIR: "But as an outsider, I can perhaps see the point Fred Glaysher is making, and which point none of SRB's defenders seem to address." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb46.htm Matthew Cromer: "The current moderators regulate the contents--posting articles which they agree with...." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb47.htm Kavosh Soltani, December 9, 1998: "So many Bahais on these forums have shown to be ready to forget logic and reason, ignore clear evidence and Word of God, and come up with exactly the same line of tired and inaccurate excuses and arguments to justify their position, that it can not be a simple coincidence." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb77.htm Shakti3, December 4, 1998: "Sorry to hear that you've been surpressed on srb. Your comments were alway very "right on." Altho it does not surprise me one bit, seeing the way these newsgroups operate." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Ex7.htm Harold Shinsato: "It seems like there is an oppression over the Baha'i Faith." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb33.htm Steve Tomljenovic, December 3, 1998: "The moderators are a bit overzealous at times. Since all the controversy started, it has gotten worse." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb79.htm Laeterna: "To say I was flabberghasted at this type of "moderating" was putting it mildly indeed." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored2.htm Guy Macon" "Please explain which portion of the charter the following post violates." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored1.htm Robin Peters: "I think you're to be commended for your persistence in the face of consistent censorship." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb43.htm jgoldberg: "I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. " https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb57.htm Ruletherod, November 17, 1998: "Too much damage has already been done in the name and to the name of Baha'u'llah by right-wing administrative bullies, linear-thinking apologists, and doctrinaire-fundamentalists. You can't just blame it all on the critics." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb76.htm Many other similar messages may be found on my web site under soc.religion.bahai censorship. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 7:13 AM Subject: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, let me say I have never committed slander. If anyone has been slandered on talk.religion.bahai, it is I by the constant character assassination Bahais have marshalled against me for over two and a half years. I'd be happy to appear in court and present an American judge and jury with the evidence of Bahai lies, deceit, censorship, and tyranny over the last decade. I highly doubt any legitimately established jury would look favorably on what Bahai fundamentalists have done to the Walbridges, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Stephen Scholl, and many, many other, indeed, TENS of THOUSANDS, of American ex-Bahais.... I'd be happy to appear in an American court and present the judge and jury with the many passages from the Bahai Writings in which the Figures speak favorably of free speech and conscience, such as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. Only one of the tyrants on Mt. Carmel could distort such passages to mean the kinds of things they have had the gall to foist on American Bahais in their statement this April, which Juan Cole has candidly and accurately referred to as an "outburst of vehement ignorance." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Bahais falsely accuse me of slander. Far from slandering the UHJ, I have stood up to them and fundamentalists and merely honestly spoken my conscience. I trust the American legal system to protect me from organizations and fundamentalist reprobates. The objective observer will note the Bahai tactic of resorting to threats and intimidation instead of engaging in discussion. It reminds me of a comment by Dr. Martin Luther King in his Letter from Birmingham Jail: "You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations." Fundamentalist Bahais typify this same mentality. They rail and threaten me and others who dare speak their minds but express no concern whatsoever for the underlying conditions of censorship and oppression that have led to distrust and contempt for the UHJ and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 7:15 AM Subject: Re: Warning - Dejanews Posting Rules Saman, Was that a slip of the tongue? Are you afraid to post what you know about the murder of Daniel Jordan? Are you concealing something? -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Patrick Henry wrote in message news:7kaisc$q14$1@news.laserlink.net... > Saman, > > Please post David Langess' information regarding the > murder Daniel Jordan here. Not all of us are aware of > it. > > -- > Patrick Henry > "Give me liberty or give me death." > Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > > Saman Ahmadi wrote in message > news:3767D975.A81D908F@usa.net... > > > > > > "K. Paul Johnson" wrote: > > > > > Saman, email me privately if you want to know. Yes, Baha'i is > > > indirectly implicated, but it is the belief system per se and not > > > any individuals or institutions. > > > > > > PJ > > > > I was on Talisman whe David Langess posted the > > information that he had gathered regarding the murder of > > Dr. Jordan. Even though several ideas were investigated > > by the Police, there was no evidence to prove any of them > > and the murder has remained unsolved. > > > > -saman > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 7:20 AM Subject: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, let me say I have never committed slander. If anyone has been slandered on talk.religion.bahai, it is I by the constant character assassination Bahais have marshalled against me for over two and a half years. I'd be happy to appear in court and present an American judge and jury with the evidence of Bahai lies, deceit, censorship, and tyranny over the last decade. I highly doubt any legitimately established jury would look favorably on what Bahai fundamentalists have done to the Walbridges, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Stephen Scholl, and many, many other, indeed, TENS of THOUSANDS, of American ex-Bahais.... I'd be happy to appear in an American court and present the judge and jury with the many passages from the Bahai Writings in which the Figures speak favorably of free speech and conscience, such as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. Only one of the tyrants on Mt. Carmel could distort such passages to mean the kinds of things they have had the gall to foist on American Bahais in their statement this April, which Juan Cole has candidly and accurately referred to as an "outburst of vehement ignorance." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Bahais falsely accuse me of slander. Far from slandering the UHJ, I have stood up to them and fundamentalists and merely honestly spoken my conscience. I trust the American legal system to protect me from organizations and fundamentalist reprobates. The objective observer will note the Bahai tactic of resorting to threats and intimidation instead of engaging in discussion. It reminds me of a comment by Dr. Martin Luther King in his Letter from Birmingham Jail: "You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations." Fundamentalist Bahais typify this same mentality. They rail and threaten me and others who dare speak their minds but express no concern whatsoever for the underlying conditions of censorship and oppression that have led to distrust and contempt for the UHJ and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. And, yes, I definitely think the murder of the Bahai Dr. Daniel Jordan was most likely an "inside job." I have no proof of that but would be entirely within the manner in which the Bahai faith has now come to conduct its affairs through secrecy and intrigue as evidenced by the many acts of suppression of free speech and conscience well documented on my and other websites today. It should again be noted that the idea that it may have been an "inside job" occurred to at least FOUR different Bahais I know of and in fact INDEPENDENTLY of their knowing each other.... A judge and jury might want to ask itself why would that be the case? What kind of "religion" inspires such fears in the hearts and minds of its adherents? -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ------------------------------------------------------ Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997," which presents a comprehensive survey of the major incidents of Bahai censorship during the last decade: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 7:24 AM Subject: Re: Bahai NSA Chairman Stealing & NSA Deceit "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Kent Johnson wrote in message news:7kl70j$nko$1@autumn.news.rcn.net... > Please note the Steven Scholl is engaging in gossip and back biting in the > comments that Patty here (Fred) is spreading. > > Thank you for not reading. > > --Kent > > Patrick Henry wrote in message <7kl5sk$efn$1@news.laserlink.net>... > >Dismissal of Judge James F. Nelson, Chair of the National Spiritual > >Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States, in April, 1999. > > > >April 6, 1999 > > > >Delegates to the 1999 Baha'i National ConventionBeloved Friends, > > > >We deeply regret the necessity of informing you that James F. Nelson has > >been guilty of gross negligence in the performance of his duties as a > member > >of the National Spiritual Assembly and that, although he has expressed his > >profound regret for the related occurrences, and has effected full > >restitution of the damage done, he has felt impelled, by his awareness of > >the high responsibility of the post in which he has been serving, to tender > >his resignation from the membership of the National Spiritual Assembly, and > >the National Spiritual Assembly has accepted this resignation. > > > >At this painful moment the National Spiritual Assembly offers James Nelson > >its loving support and prayers. > > > >NATIONAL SPIRITUAL ASSEMBLY OF THE BAHA'IS OF THE UNITED STATES > >[signed] > >Robert C. HendersonSecretary-General > >cc: Continental Counselors serving tthe United States > > > >--------------------------------------------------------------------------- > - > >---- > >CommentaryDate: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 09:14:15 -0700From: Steven Scholl > >Subject: NelsonTo: talisman@umich.edu > > > >Here is all I know about the situation. > >Jim Nelson was helping an elderly Baha'i in Pasadena ... > > If Scholl knows anything about the situation he is not sharing how he knows, > only speculation and embellishment, highly charged gossip. > > --Kent > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 7:24 AM Subject: Re: Deceit: Bahai Attacks "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Kent Johnson wrote in message news:7kl6o7$mps$1@autumn.news.rcn.net... > Hahaha. You don't need anyone to discredit you. You do that find just by > yourself. > > --Kent > > Patrick Henry wrote in message <7kl5tr$ek7$1@news.laserlink.net>... > >Incessant Bahai attacks upon my freedom of speech > >and liberty have made it necessary for me to adopt a > >persona for my own protection and well being. Other > >measures have been taken. > > > >During the last three months, Bahais have twice flooded > >my hotmail account with up to 1000 messages per day > >resulting in considerable inconvenience and expenditure > >of time and effort to block, and ultimately close, the > >offending accounts; they have, by using Bahai trolls, > >especially Gyr Falcon, slandered, maligned, and caricatured > >me in a further effort to discredit me and portray me on > >talk.religion.bahai and elsewhere as a disturbed and errant > >individual; through concerted false charges and allegations against > >me, they have now succeeded in deceiving Hotmail into closing > >my email account, which I depended on for a considerable > >part of my income and livelihood. > > > >For documentation of many similar incidents of Bahai oppression > >during the last decade, see Frederick Glaysher's website > >The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > > > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > > >-- > >Patrick Henry > >"Give me liberty, or give me death." > >Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com > > > > > >Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, > >discusses related issues in his journal article "The > >Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": > > > >https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 7:26 AM Subject: Re: Deceit: Bahai Fundamentalists Bullying "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Kent Johnson wrote in message news:7kl73q$nvl$1@autumn.news.rcn.net... > You don't have to be perfect, dude, just respectable. You have not shown > yourself to be even believable on these pages. Much less respectable. > > Sorry. I had hoped we could talk about this mess you make. > > --Kent > > > Patrick Henry wrote in message <7kl5qe$eff$1@news.laserlink.net>... > >I'm alarmed at the recent Bahai attempts at character > >assassination, ridicule, and generally portraying me > >and others as disturbed individuals. > > > >I have never claimed to be perfect. At times I have > >apologized to Bahais, Muslims, and other non-Bahais > >when I felt, or was convinced, that I was wrong or had > >spoken unfairly. I find the constant technique to portray > >me as a megalomanic or paranoid quite offensive. > > > >Similarly, the tactic of accusing me of spam for posting > >my opinions is calculated to discredit the validity of my and > >others' concerns regarding censorship in Bahai forums and > >has also been used on AOL. Such accusations reveal the > >frustration that Bahai fundamentalists apparently feel over > >my having found ways of enduring and resisting the onslaught of > >their concerted attacks, while preserving a historical record on > >a markedly ephermeral medium for innocent Bahais and > >non-Bahais.... > > > >Fair-minded Bahai and non-Bahai observers may > >judge for themselves whether my and others' allegations of > >censorship are valid by reading the record preserved under > >"Assorted Controversial Documents" on my website at > > > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > > >As further corroboration that I am not the only person > >concerned with the intolerance and censorship that has > >overtaken the Bahai Faith, I recommend Professor Juan Cole's > >new book Modernity & the Millennium: The Genesis of the > >Bahai Faith in the Nineteenth-Century Middle East, available > >through Columbia University Press or Amazon.com at > > > >https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 > > > >In his conclusion, which would never have passed the > >system of Bahai "review" that the UHJ imposes on all > >publications brought out under its tight control, Professor Cole, > >of the Department of History at The University of Michigan, > >quite accurately identifies the distortions that have been > >wreaked upon Baha'u'llah's Teachings: > > > >"Some contemporary leaders of the Baha'i Faith have given > >answers increasingly similar to those of fundamentalists, > >stressing scriptural literalism, patriachy, theocracy, > >censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key > >democratic values. While the values of the nineteenth- > >century Baha'i movement, which was far more tolerant, > >continue to exist as a minority view, by the late 1990s a > >different set of emphases prevailed." (196) > > > >He himself and many others, as evidence under the > >"Assorted Controversial Documents," have suffered at the > >hands of the fundamentalists who have taken control of the > >religion: > > > >"The rise of academic Baha'i scholarship has caused > >tension in the community, whose present-day leadership > >tends to be fundamentalist and antiliberal in orientation, > >and this has led to pressure on a number of prominent > >academics to resign or dissociate themselves from the > >movement." (201) > > > >These same forces of fundamentalist orthodoxy are > >evident on AOL, talk.religion.bahai, and alt.religion.bahai > >for impartial viewers to witness. They will be evident > >to all perceptive observers of whatever forum Bahais may > >be trying to control and influence. > > > >As a Bahai for more than 23 years, I myself have always > >found especially repulsive the manner in which Bahai > >fundamentalists attempt to manipulate the institutions and > >leaders of government, the United Nations, and public > >opinion, while pretending to values they deride in private > >or at Bahai-only meetings. > > > >Ultimately, it is the Bahai Universal House of Justice that > >is responsible for the perversion and corruption of such clear > >and elevating teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha as > >the following: > > > >"These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the > >conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that > >liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of > >morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets > >of the contingent world." > >Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. > > > >The UHJ is also in the end responsible for inciting Bahai fanatics > >and fundamentalists to attack other Bahais and non-Bahais > >merely for their views expressed on and off line in free forums > >of public discussion. > > > >I recommend all newcomers to these matters read > >"The Bahai Technique": > > > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm > > > >On Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom > >of Conscience: > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > > > > >Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, > >discusses related issues in his journal article "The > >Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": > > > >https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 21, 1999 7:49 AM Subject: Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Kent Johnson wrote in message news:7kl7lj$q4l$1@autumn.news.rcn.net... > Dude! Hey, pay attention. We are talking about your baseless allegations > of murder. Murder dude. This is your assertion, and it is clearly > slander. I would shut up if I were you, dude. > > --Kent > > Patrick Henry wrote in message <7kl6ns$evf$1@news.laserlink.net>... > >Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, > >let me say I have never committed slander. If anyone has been > >slandered on talk.religion.bahai, it is I by the constant character > >assassination Bahais have marshalled against me for over > >two and a half years. > > > >I'd be happy to appear in court and present an > >American judge and jury with the evidence of Bahai > >lies, deceit, censorship, and tyranny over the last > >decade. I highly doubt any legitimately established jury > >would look favorably on what Bahai fundamentalists > >have done to the Walbridges, Juan Cole, Michael > >McKenny, Stephen Scholl, and many, many other, > >indeed, TENS of THOUSANDS, of American ex-Bahais.... > > > >I'd be happy to appear in an American court and > >present the judge and jury with the many passages > >from the Bahai Writings in which the Figures speak > >favorably of free speech and conscience, such as > >the following: > > > >"These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience > >of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof > >produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement > >of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world. > >Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the > >private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this > >world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of > >divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and > >ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, > >not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of > >control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." > > > >Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. > > > >Only one of the tyrants on Mt. Carmel could distort such > >passages to mean the kinds of things they have had the gall to > >foist on American Bahais in their statement this April, > >which Juan Cole has candidly and accurately referred to > >as an "outburst of vehement ignorance." > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm > > > >Bahais falsely accuse me of slander. Far from slandering > >the UHJ, I have stood up to them and fundamentalists > >and merely honestly spoken my conscience. > > > >I trust the American legal system to protect me from > >organizations and fundamentalist reprobates. > > > >The objective observer will note the Bahai tactic of > >resorting to threats and intimidation instead of engaging > >in discussion. It reminds me of a comment by > >Dr. Martin Luther King in his Letter from Birmingham > >Jail: > > > >"You deplore the demonstrations taking place in > >Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, > >fails to express a similar concern for the conditions > >that brought about the demonstrations." > > > >Fundamentalist Bahais typify this same mentality. They > >rail and threaten me and others who dare speak their > >minds but express no concern whatsoever for the > >underlying conditions of censorship and oppression > >that have led to distrust and contempt for the UHJ > >and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. > > > >-- > >Patrick Henry > >"Give me liberty or give me death." > >Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > > > > > > >Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, > >discusses related issues in his journal article "The > >Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": > > > >https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 6:55 AM Subject: Re: A Message to Fred Glaysher I appreciate your observations, Mr. Mahdi. I think you're quite right about the disinformation and so forth that exists here on talk.religion.bahai and elsewhere, all carefully calculated to manipulate and distort perception. Many of the Bahai fundamentalists have really lost themselves in it, believing they're "helping" the cause by incessant lying. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Mr Mahdi wrote in message news:19990621235730.23148.00003603@ng-bh1.aol.com... > I have noticed a silly cult-like game going on here. I never thought that I > will see a possible lawsuit against a person because he decided to give his > OPINIONS on an issue. I have been to a lot of NGs, chats, message boards, > etc., but only in the TRB have I heard people talking about possible lawsuits > against each other. I can't see how impartial observers can say that there are > no cult-like elements in the bahai faith. This reminds of the Scientology cult > and how they track down and harrass people. A religion with 6 million members > worldwide and about 25,000 to 60,000 in America has more censorship than any > religion on the face of the earth. If you go to soc.religion.islam the > moderators allow non-muslims to write critical posts (not vulgar) posts about > Islam. But in the SRB, I have never seen a post that contained one critical > comment from a non-bahai. To me this shows a cult-like pattern of censorship > and robotic-like programming of people. > > Fred, if this possible lawsuit against you ever becomes a reality, I suggest > that you contact news and television organizations on this matter. People of > the world and America needs to see a side of the bahai faith that they usually > never see. Maybe shows like 60 minutes or any other TV magazines shows will be > a good start and avenue for a large number of people to be aware of whats going > on. > Mahdi ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 6:59 AM Subject: Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, let me say I have never committed slander. If anyone has been slandered on talk.religion.bahai, it is I by the constant character assassination Bahais have marshalled against me for over two and a half years. I'd be happy to appear in court and present an American judge and jury with the evidence of Bahai lies, deceit, censorship, and tyranny over the last decade. I highly doubt any legitimately established jury would look favorably on what Bahai fundamentalists have done to the Walbridges, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Stephen Scholl, and many, many other, indeed, TENS of THOUSANDS, of American ex-Bahais.... I'd be happy to appear in an American court and present the judge and jury with the many passages from the Bahai Writings in which the Figures speak favorably of free speech and conscience, such as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. Only one of the tyrants on Mt. Carmel could distort such passages to mean the kinds of things they have had the gall to foist on American Bahais in their statement this April, which Juan Cole has candidly and accurately referred to as an "outburst of vehement ignorance." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Bahais falsely accuse me of slander. Far from slandering the UHJ, I have stood up to them and fundamentalists and merely honestly spoken my conscience. I trust the American legal system to protect me from organizations and fundamentalist reprobates. The objective observer will note the Bahai tactic of resorting to threats and intimidation instead of engaging in discussion. It reminds me of a comment by Dr. Martin Luther King in his Letter from Birmingham Jail: "You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations." Fundamentalist Bahais typify this same mentality. They rail and threaten me and others who dare speak their minds but express no concern whatsoever for the underlying conditions of censorship and oppression that have led to distrust and contempt for the UHJ and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:376EF2DE.221BD43@earthlink.net... > > I have stated that I may sue you - that is singular. I am not aware of > anyone else's attempt. BTW, my suing you is not a threat - a threat > is I will do this if you do that. You have already crossed that line. > I > said I would first take it up with Dejanews - Roger pointed out that > you were not using Dejanews to post your articles so I suppose it > is bigfoot at first. > > Now, if it gets to the point that I decide to sue you, I will offer > anyone > who wishes to join in a class-action suit, if that is legally possible. > > My feet are firmly on the ground - I am not joking or mincing words. > > Saman Ahmadi > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, > > let me say I have never committed slander. > > P.S. Ever heard of the Furman tapes? > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 7:00 AM Subject: Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Kent Johnson wrote in message news:7kmu11$1e1$1@autumn.news.rcn.net... > Just what is the point of your answer if you only repeat the question? > > --Kent > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 7:24 AM Subject: Re: The Worst Enemies of the Cause are in the Cause Thank God someone has the patience to speak these truths. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Juan Cole wrote in message news:7kc0sg$20l$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > Yes, Roger, it really is sad. Baha'u'llah came to bring tolerance, but > we see "on these newsgroups" narrow-minded persons claiming to be > Baha'is who are the embodiment of intolerance. Baha'u'llah came to > illumine intellects and praised the "learned in Baha'", but we see on > these newsgroups vicious anti-intellectuals who equate thinking with > covenant breaking. Baha'u'llah came to bring a recognition of the > underlying unity of all the great religions, but we see on these > newsgroups triumphalist Baha'is insisting that their way is the only > way, and all others are damned. Baha'u'llah said that in this day the > handmaidens of God (i.e. women) are accounted "as men," but we see on > these newsgroups conservative Baha'is dedicated to a thoroughgoing > patriarchy in which men are the head of the household and men have the > final say on important matters in the Baha'i religion. Baha'u'llah > instructed that a House of Worship be built in every Baha'i community, > but we see on these newsgroups "Baha'is" who condemn this clear > instruction of Baha'u'llah as wrong. Baha'u'llah condemned superstition > and taught the unity of science and religion, but we see on these > newsgroups "Baha'is" who are scriptural literalists and > superstition-mongers no different in their approach from Southern > Baptists or Muslim fundamentalists. Baha'u'llah taught non-interference > by religious bodies in politics, but we see "Baha'is" on these lists > openly advocating a take-over of governments by the Baha'i institutions, > seeking to create a tyrannical theocracy no different in substance from > what exists in contemporary Iran. Baha'u'llah came to bring unity but > we see on these newsgroups "Baha'is" who are eager to condemn anyone who > actually practices Baha'u'llah's real teachings, to cut them off and so > sow disunity. > > Instead of absorbing *Baha'u'llah's* principles, these "Baha'is" are > importing the worst excesses of an age of militant religious > fundamentalism right into the tolerant, loving, universal faith of > Baha'u'llah, twisting it and distorting it beyond recognition. > > They have, indeed, as `Abdu'l-Baha says, forgotten the fundamental law > of love and unity. > > cheers Juan > > > > In article <37683639.1212056@news.newsguy.com>, > rreini@wwnet.net wrote: > > > >"The worst enemies of the Cause are in the Cause and mention > > >the Name of God. We need not fear the enemies on the outside > > >for such can be easily dealt with. But the enemies who call > > >themselves friends and who persistently violate every > > >fundamental law of love and unity, are difficult to be dealt > > >with in this day, for the mercy of God is still great. But > > >ere long this merciful door will be closed and such enemies > > >will be attacked with a madness." > > >[Abdu'l-Baha, quoted by Dr. Edward C. Getsinger, Feb. 1915] > > > > And we can definitely see the truth in what the Master said, here in > > these newsgroups. > > > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ > > > > -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan jrcole@umich.edu > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity & Millennium: Genesis of Baha'i* > https://www.kalimat.com/ > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 7:28 AM Subject: Re: Seventeen Pointers to Deceit "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Roger Reini wrote in message news:3770b11b.83699571@news.newsguy.com... > On Mon, 21 Jun 1999 18:36:03 GMT, rlittle95@my-deja.com wrote: > > >Dear Friends > > > >Today I opened up a.r.b. and found approximately 17 separate posts by > >one individual, who had placed the word "deceit" prominently in the > >subject line of many of them. They made for grim reading. > > I saw these posts (none of which I had to read, as I was already > familiar with their contents) this morning, shortly before leaving for > a funeral. > > A Baha'i from Detroit, Bill Washburn, died this past Saturday while > working on preparing the new Detroit Baha'i Center for occupancy. He > passed to the next life while serving God in this one. Even in his > career as an EMS technician for the city of Detroit, he was always of > service to his fellow man (and woman). > > It was a sad occasion for us today as we gathered at the old center > for his funeral. The room was packed with Baha'is from all over the > area, with family members, with co-workers. We heard all about Bill > and the effects he had on everyone -- devoted family man, dedicated > worker, devout Baha'i. There were many tears today, but there were > also some laughs, reminders of the good times -- of the jokester he > was known to be. > > After the funeral, we left the center and headed to the newly > established Baha'i cemetery west of town. There, we recited the > Prayer for the Dead. I had to return to the office, so I missed the > dinner at the center. > > It was a sad day, to be sure, but it was not a dark day. There was a > definite spirit today. I think I even felt the presence of > Baha'u'llah Himself at today's services. Because of this, I know that > the darkness portrayed in the "Deceit" notes (which last week were > "Tyranny" notes) cannot exist. It is not true. > > > > >Baha'u'llah said that God sends His Manifestations to the worst, most > >decadent spot on the planet, and that the efforts of the forces of > >darkness only serve to put into contrast the light of God. The greater > >the opposition, the greater the relief between hatred and love, > >corruption and virtue. "Baha'u'llah" can be interpreted either as the > >Glory of God, or as the Light of God, so a "Baha'i" ought to be a > >follower of divine illumination. > > > >These seventeen posts all are dark, and they paint a terrible picture > >of Baha'is and the Baha'i Faith. They talk about murder, theft, deceit, > >and more. The author of these attacks believes himself to be a victim > >of Baha'i attacks and has made a webpage to document his belief. > > > >Is the Baha'i Faith the Light of God, or is it the darkness Its Author > >came to dispel? > > > >It is my understanding that 'Abdu'l-Baha' perfectly embodies the > >qualities human beings ought to possess, so learning how He dealt with > >human imperfections in others would help us to deal with imperfections > >within ourselves and others. > > > >How would 'Abdu'l-Baha' respond to those seventeen posts? > > > >Robert A. Little > > > > > >Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > >Share what you know. Learn what you don't. > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 1999 7:28 AM Subject: Re: Caution on the sarcasm "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Roger Reini wrote in message news:376fab2e.82182117@news.newsguy.com... > Might I make a suggestion about the level of sarcasm that's appearing > here? IMHO, it's not the most befitting type of discourse for a > follower of Baha'u'llah, and I think we should try and tone things > down a bit. > > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 1999 6:28 AM Subject: Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, let me say I have never committed slander. If anyone has been slandered on talk.religion.bahai, it is I by the constant character assassination Bahais have marshalled against me for over two and a half years. I'd be happy to appear in court and present an American judge and jury with the evidence of Bahai lies, deceit, censorship, and tyranny over the last decade. I highly doubt any legitimately established jury would look favorably on what Bahai fundamentalists have done to the Walbridges, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Stephen Scholl, and many, many other, indeed, TENS of THOUSANDS, of American ex-Bahais.... I'd be happy to appear in an American court and present the judge and jury with the many passages from the Bahai Writings in which the Figures speak favorably of free speech and conscience, such as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. Only one of the tyrants on Mt. Carmel could distort such passages to mean the kinds of things they have had the gall to foist on American Bahais in their statement this April, which Juan Cole has candidly and accurately referred to as an "outburst of vehement ignorance." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Bahais falsely accuse me of slander. Far from slandering the UHJ, I have stood up to them and fundamentalists and merely honestly spoken my conscience. I trust the American legal system to protect me from organizations and fundamentalist reprobates. The objective observer will note the Bahai tactic of resorting to threats and intimidation instead of engaging in discussion. It reminds me of a comment by Dr. Martin Luther King in his Letter from Birmingham Jail: "You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations." Fundamentalist Bahais typify this same mentality. They rail and threaten me and others who dare speak their minds but express no concern whatsoever for the underlying conditions of censorship and oppression that have led to distrust and contempt for the UHJ and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:376EF2DE.221BD43@earthlink.net... > > I have stated that I may sue you - that is singular. I am not aware of > anyone else's attempt. BTW, my suing you is not a threat - a threat > is I will do this if you do that. You have already crossed that line. > I > said I would first take it up with Dejanews - Roger pointed out that > you were not using Dejanews to post your articles so I suppose it > is bigfoot at first. > > Now, if it gets to the point that I decide to sue you, I will offer > anyone > who wishes to join in a class-action suit, if that is legally possible. > > My feet are firmly on the ground - I am not joking or mincing words. > > Saman Ahmadi > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, > > let me say I have never committed slander. > > P.S. Ever heard of the Furman tapes? > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 1999 6:40 AM Subject: Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Kathy, Neither I nor my publisher is responsible for the apparent spamming of his notice of the publication of my book to you and others as noted on news.groups. I can only assume it is yet another Bahai attempt to attack and slander my reputation and character. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:7kog9l$1tqs@drn.newsguy.com... > In article <930049232.648.13@news.remarQ.com>, "Patrick says... > > > > Please stop spamming. Thank you. > > Please also suggest that your publisher stop sending unsolicited > email in support of your book. It could lose both of you your > Internet access. Thanks again. > > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (home) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 1999 6:56 AM Subject: Re: Bahai the way... Meg & Emma, Neither I nor my publisher is responsible for the apparent spamming of his notice to you of the publication of my book and its availability on Amazon.com. I can only assume it is yet another Bahai attempt to attack and slander my reputation and character. -- Frederick Glaysher Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Meg Worley wrote in message news:7koe3i$17s@steam.stanford.edu... > > For the amusement of the news.groupies -- the following > spam just landed in my mailbox: > > ___________ > > For those interested, has just published > Frederick Glaysher's Into the Ruins: Poems. > > Frederick Glaysher evinces a uniquely tragic vision of the > convulsions and upheavals of the twentieth century, both East > and West, while confronting the literary, philosophical issues of > postmodernism. Excerpts many be found at the author's website: > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/literary.htm > > Into the Ruins may be ordered from the publisher through > the US mail, email, from better bookstores via the wholesaler > Baker & Taylor, Ingram Books, or on Amazon.com, which also > carries a media release and author information: > > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > Hardcover. $17.95. Postage paid. > > -- > John Culver, Publisher > > P. O. Box 81842 > Rochester, MI 48308-1842 > EarthrisePress@hotmail.com > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > For immediate release. . . . > > Contact: John Culver: 248-651-3380 > > Postmodernism and the Century Go Out Together > > For the last four or five decades, writers, poets, and artists have > had a distinct set of minimal concerns and interests, often restricting, > intentionally, subject matter to the everyday level of trips across the > street to visit grandma or reflections on their wheelbarrows and curio > blue jars. The philosophical implications of such artistic agendas > reflect the social and intellectual climate of the 20th century. The > period of postmodernism, since World War II, has often been > compared to the Hellenistic times under the Roman Empire when > writers similarly concentrated on the minor themes of personal life, > while ignoring the challenging experience of the public realm. > > The publisher, John Culver, at , believes social and > philosophical conditions have at last changed enough for a new or > countervailing direction. His publication of Frederick Glaysher's > Into the Ruins suggests such a redirection of artistic energy, one > confronting much of the human experience left out of the balance by > postmodernism. > > Paradoxically, a self-proclaimed suburbanite, Frederick Glaysher goes > very far beyond the casual banalities of modern suburban life. He > studied writing at The University of Michigan with a former Poet > Laureate to The Library of Congress, the African-American poet > Robert Hayden, and lived for more than twenty years outside Michigan > in central Japan, on the Colorado River Indian Tribes Reservation in > Arizona, and on the Illinois side of the Mississippi, ultimately returning > to his hometown near Detroit, with new eyes and a new vision. > > Frederick Glaysher's essays on other writers, from Sophocles and > Robert Browning to T. S. Eliot and Saul Bellow, demonstrate a serious > grasp of the literary tradition, both Western and Non-Western. He > understands why and where he is going. > > A former Fulbright scholar to China in 1994, Frederick Glaysher studied > at Beijing University, the Buddhist Mogao Caves on the old Silk Road, > and elsewhere in China, including the Academia Sinica in Taiwan. While > an NEH scholar in 1995 on India, he further probed the conflicts between > the traditional regional civilizations of Asia and late modernity. In > addition to having studied writing with Robert Hayden, Frederick > Glaysher is the editor of both Hayden's Collected Prose (The University > of Michigan Press) and his Collected Poems (Liveright). > > Quite possibly, nothing like Into the Ruins has been published during this > century. Ironically, in a sense, it may come to be seen as a book that has > its gaze fixed firmly on the 21st century. > > > > > > > > > > > -- > meg@steam.stanford.edu Comparatively Literate ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 1999 7:09 AM Subject: Re Frederick Glaysher's Into the Ruins: Poems Apparently Amazon.com's server was down temporarily when you visited it. Here's their link, if you're interested: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/qid=929111646/sr=1-4/002-0 623512-3264660 Or you can just link off my website: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/literary.htm Incidentally, neither I nor he had anything to do with the spamming of his notice to individuals on news.groups. Do you know the Bahai who did it? Another Bahai attempt to slander and malign my character? It certainly speaks eloquently to the length Bahais will go to suppress voices they don't want others to hear.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Subject: Re: Frederick Glaysher's Into the Ruins: Poems Date: 1999/06/22 Author: Chris Manvell Posting History On talk.religion.bahai, John Culver (mailto:EarthrisePress@hotmail.com) wrote: >For those interested, has just published >Frederick Glaysher's Into the Ruins: Poems. Phew! That's the only and last time I'm visiting Fred's site -- all cookies (tripod's, not Fred's, and about 12 or them the short time I was there) and advertising mini-windows. Never again. And it wasn't on Amazon, though other books were. Anyway, I hope the book sells OK, though, not being "into" poetry, it does not tempt me. Good luck with it Fred, and best wishes, Chris. -- Chris Manvell ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 4:36 PM Subject: Re: A Message to Fred Glaysher Kent, you seem to be ascribing opinions to me that certainly are not mine. Perhaps the "Reply" feature has created a problem for you. I have not and do not believe Mr. Mahdi nor any other regular individual on trb was involved in the murder of Dr. Daniel Jordan, a former member of the Bahai NSA. I have said I would not be surprised if someone in the Bahai administration was officially or unofficially involved in given the way the UHJ has distorted and perverted the Teachings of Baha'u'llah regarding free speech and conscience during the last decade. I don't believe that involves Mr. Mahdi at all. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Kent Johnson wrote in message news:7ks25s$gnl$1@autumn.news.rcn.net... > Fred merely said that he would not be surprised if you were a murderer and a > thief based upon his intimate knowledge of your character and his past > dealings with you. > > --Kent > > Mr Mahdi wrote in message > news:19990623162101.26152.00003561@ng-ba1.aol.com... > > >Say, if it were my opinion, that you, for example, were a lying murderer > and > > >thief, and, even though I have no evidence to back me up, I spread that > > >opinion far and wide, would that be freedom of speech? Would you uphold > my > > >right to spread my opinion wherever I like? > > > > If you were to treat that statement as fact then it would be > libel/slander. > > But if you said that you believed or thought that I could be a possible > thief > > than in most cases it would be just an opinion. In the case with Fred, I > > havent seen evidence that he is treating opinions as facts, if it were the > > case, please present some evidence where Fred made such allegations that > he > > treated as facts. > > Mahdi > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 4:41 PM Subject: False allegation of email spamming (Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits) Kathy Pascoe: The allegation that I or my publisher has sent EMAIL to any individuals regarding the publication of one of my books and its availability on Amazon.com is false. Neither I nor he have sent anyone any email whatsoever. You've become quite loose with your allegations. Shame on you. -- Frederick Glaysher "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:7kre09$11bh@drn.newsguy.com... > In article <7krc78$fti$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, planetjeff@my-deja.com says... > > > >Dude - Kathy never said you spammed on news.groups. Your publisher > >evidently spammed the talk.religion.bahai newsgroup. > > There were actually three posted notices of Fred's book, one ostensibly > from the publisher, the other two (identical to the first) from Fred. > > >Are you saying that the message was a forgery? It doesn't look like > >one. Maybe you're under the impression that a message like this posted > >to Usenet is not considered spam. Well, it is, whether you agree or not. > > Actually, what I was referring to was the sending of unsolicited email > promoting Fred's book. I'm hoping someone can supply me with a copy > so I can check the headers. In spite of Fred's denial, at least one of > the emailed copies was apparently from Fred, though the message was > deleted so I can't check for sure. > > >I don't think your account would necessarily be in jeopardy, because you > >didn't post it. But your publisher should know better. > > Email spam could lose Fred, the publisher or both the email accounts > used to send the messages. Potentially also the websites of both. > > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (home) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 4:48 PM Subject: Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Rick Schaut wrote in message news:7krlhd$28u2@news1.newsguy.com... > First, I've removed talk.religion.misc from the Newsgroups line. Continued > cross-posting to that newsgroup is no longer necessary for propagation > purposes, and is discouraged whenever it's not necessary. Bahai fundamentalists were the first to recommend, even demand, crossposting to talk.religion.misc more than two years ago when they thought it would be a good idea for propaganda points as a way of suppressing the desire of myself and others for the creation of talk.religion.bahai. I.e., they claimed to believe there was really no interest in an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai faith and argued that people could say anything they wanted on tr.misc. Most amusing that they now want to suppress any cross posts to talk.religion.misc. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > Patrick Henry wrote in message > news:930133732.834.13@news.remarQ.com... > > Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, > > let me say I have never committed slander. > > I rather presume that Mr. Glaysher wrote the subject line of the following > message: > > https://www.deja.com/[ST_rn=ps]/getdoc.xp?AN=492050220&fmt=text > > It does constitute slander, despite the fact that it is not likely to ever > appear in a court of law. > > > If anyone has been > > slandered on talk.religion.bahai, it is I by the constant character > > assassination > > I'm reminded of one of Hawkeye Pierce's lines from the old M*A*S*H series > about "definition of character." I'd post the transcript if I could find it > (it's gotta be on the net somewhere). The context, however, is pretty much > the same. > > Mr. Glaysher, if you think you can proove that I've defamed you in any way > that involved any form of calumny, then I wholeheartedly invite you to sue > me. Go to any white pages search engine. You know I live in the state of > Washington, and I'm the only Richard Schaut who lives in King Co. It's not > all that hard to find me. You have no excuse, and I have fairly deep > pockets, so go track down an attorney. > > If you do not choose to sue me, then I ask you, politely, to retract the > statement that you've been subject to character assassination. > > > Regards, > Rick Schaut > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 4:52 PM Subject: Re: Re Frederick Glaysher's Into the Ruins: Poems Roger Reini wrote in message news:3772e400.38154163@news.newsguy.com... > On Wed, 23 Jun 1999 07:09:02 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > wrote: > > >Apparently Amazon.com's server was down temporarily > >when you visited it. Here's their link, if you're interested: > >https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/qid=929111646/sr=1-4/002- 0 > >623512-3264660 > > > >Or you can just link off my website: > > > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/literary.htm > > The latter method may be best, as the link is getting destroyed when > it wraps around in my newsreader. > > > > >Incidentally, neither I nor he had anything to do with the > >spamming of his notice to individuals on news.groups. > > > >Do you know the Bahai who did it? Another Bahai > >attempt to slander and malign my character? It certainly > >speaks eloquently to the length Bahais will go to suppress > >voices they don't want others to hear.... > > Why would someone who wants to suppress your voice go to the trouble > of posting an advertisement for your collection? The logic of this > escapes me. If anyone has email the notice of my book to anyone, I certainly believe it's Bahai fanatics that are involved, given their resort to every imaginable deceit to smear and discredit me during the last three years. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 4:56 PM Subject: Re: What the heck happened to this newsgroup?? Dool Tracy wrote in message news:19990624134912.08641.00003328@ng-fa1.aol.com... > Dool. > (still busy) Merely the same lies, deceits, intrigues, backstabbing, skulduggery, intolerance, and fanaticism that Bahai fundamentalists have been demonstrating here and on majnun, talisman I, talisman II, bahai-discuss, alt.religion.bahai, talk.religion.bahai, talk.religion.misc, and elsewhere for several years now. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 5:06 PM Subject: REVISED: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, let me say I have never committed slander against any individual, Bahai or otherwise, nor against any Bahai institution. If anyone has been slandered on talk.religion.bahai, it is I by the constant character assassination Bahais have marshalled against me for near three years. I'd be happy to appear in court and present an American judge and jury with the evidence of Bahai lies, deceit, censorship, and tyranny over the last decade. I highly doubt any legitimately established jury would look favorably on what Bahai fundamentalists have done to the Walbridges, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Stephen Scholl, and many, many other, indeed, TENS of THOUSANDS, of American ex-Bahais.... I'd be happy to appear in an American court and present the judge and jury with the many passages from the Bahai Writings in which the Figures speak favorably of free speech and conscience, such as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. Only one of the tyrants on Mt. Carmel could distort such passages to mean the kinds of things they have had the gall to foist on American Bahais in their statement this April, which Juan Cole has candidly and accurately referred to as an "outburst of vehement ignorance." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Bahais falsely accuse me of slander. Far from slandering the UHJ, I have stood up to them and fundamentalists and merely honestly spoken my conscience. They are free to call that "slander." I doubt any judge or jury in the West would call it such, especially after reading the EVIDENCE and reflecting on the enormous discrepancy between the sycophantic treatment leaders in government, the UN, and the media regularly receive from Bahais who are interested in attempting to exploit their positions of power for one reason or another and the reality of abuse of the most basic human rights now well documented on Professor Juan Cole's website and on mine. I trust the American legal system to protect me from organizations and fundamentalist reprobates. The objective observer will note the Bahai tactic of resorting to threats and intimidation instead of engaging in discussion, extensively noted in "The Bahai Technique." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm Such tactics remind me of a comment by Dr. Martin Luther King in his Letter from Birmingham Jail: "You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations." Fundamentalist Bahais typify this same mentality. They rail and threaten me and others who dare speak their minds but express no concern whatsoever for the underlying conditions of censorship and oppression that have led to distrust and contempt for the UHJ and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997," which surveys the many, many incidents of censorship and oppression that have taken place in the Bahai faith during the last decade or more: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:376EF2DE.221BD43@earthlink.net... > > I have stated that I may sue you - that is singular. I am not aware of > anyone else's attempt. BTW, my suing you is not a threat - a threat > is I will do this if you do that. You have already crossed that line. > I > said I would first take it up with Dejanews - Roger pointed out that > you were not using Dejanews to post your articles so I suppose it > is bigfoot at first. > > Now, if it gets to the point that I decide to sue you, I will offer > anyone > who wishes to join in a class-action suit, if that is legally possible. > > My feet are firmly on the ground - I am not joking or mincing words. > > Saman Ahmadi > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, > > let me say I have never committed slander. > > P.S. Ever heard of the Furman tapes? > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 5:13 PM Subject: Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits I don't think of myself as a "dude." I'd appreciate it if you'd stop referring to me in this way. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm wrote in message news:7krc78$fti$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Dude - Kathy never said you spammed on news.groups. Your publisher > evidently spammed the talk.religion.bahai newsgroup. Are you saying > that the message was a forgery? It doesn't look like one. Maybe you're > under the impression that a message like this posted to Usenet is not > considered spam. Well, it is, whether you agree or not. > > I don't think your account would necessarily be in jeopardy, because you > didn't post it. But your publisher should know better. > > jeff > > In article <930134444.097.70@news.remarQ.com>, > "Patrick Henry" wrote: > > Kathy, > > > > Neither I nor my publisher is responsible for the apparent > > spamming of his notice of the publication of my book to > > you and others as noted on news.groups. > > > > I can only assume it is yet another Bahai attempt to attack > > and slander my reputation and character. > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, June 24, 1999 5:16 PM Subject: Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Messages like this one from Bahai fundamentalists continue to suggest to me that Kathy Pascoe may very well be a Bahai troll, pawn, or "useful idiot," to use the Cold War term.... -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:3770E8A8.BF53EAFA@earthlink.net... > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > Kathy, > > > > Neither I nor my publisher is responsible for the apparent > > spamming of his notice of the publication of my book to > > you and others as noted on news.groups. > > > > I can only assume it is yet another Bahai attempt to attack > > and slander my reputation and character. > > > > I think Kathy is smart enough to know where an email > originated. > > -saman > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, June 25, 1999 6:10 AM Subject: Re: The UHJ letter to NSAs about the Internet It's unjust to tread on people's consciences the way the UHJ has and regularly does now. This is why, after observing Bahai "unity" for more than twenty years, I believe it's a fraud. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Steve Marshall wrote in message news:3770caeb.1894582@news.dun.ihug.co.nz... > The purpose of justice is the appearance of unity among men. > (Baha'u'llah: Tablets of Baha'u'llah, Page: 67) > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Alison & Steve Marshall, Aotearoa | "Fanaticism consists in redoubling > forumbahai@es.co.nz (New Zealand) | your efforts when you have forgotten > Try: https://www.rightwords.co.nz/ | your aim." - George Santayana ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, June 25, 1999 6:20 AM Subject: Re: False allegation of email spamming (Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits) Fact number one: Neither I nor my publisher EMAILED anyone. A Bahai emailed people, apparently two news.groupies for the obvious cynical reason of further slandering my name among them, perhaps in preparation of another forthcoming attempt to attack or the charter of talk.religion.bahai. Kathy was asking for a copy of the email in a nasty, accusatory tone. I don't have anything good to say about Kathy and her motives. You're wrong about it being "too subtle for most of the people who might be out to get you." It would be entirely par for the course. They've gone from one stratagem to another for nearly three years now and constantly attacked me in a number of ways since the passing of talk.religion.bahai in January 1999. There's a message that details these attacks on me on talk.religion.bahai: "Deceit: Bahai Attacks." I appreciate your kind words.... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Emma Pease wrote in message news:slrn7n5kof.sk3.emma@hypatia.Stanford.EDU... > In article <930256901.400.46@news.remarQ.com>, Patrick Henry wrote: > >Kathy Pascoe: > > > >The allegation that I or my publisher has sent EMAIL > >to any individuals regarding the publication of one of my > >books and its availability on Amazon.com is false. Neither > >I nor he have sent anyone any email whatsoever. > > > >You've become quite loose with your allegations. > > > > I don't think Kathy claimed you or your publisher had spammed. So far > we have the following facts > > 1. A notice appeared on 3 newsgroups. Since you are active on all > those groups and it was somewhat pertinent to the material at hand, > the notice is neither usenet SPAM nor so far off-topic as to warrant > censure. > > 2. One person is known to have received an email notice. One > incident, by the way, is not email spam which requires both bulk and > unsolicited. In addition many of us have exchanged email with you > over the years so a message from you about your book could fall into > sending acquaintances notes of a big event in your life (much like > announcing a baby). Kathy was merely asking for a copy from that > person or anyone else who received it so as to determine where it came > from. > > Note that it could well have been a third party who saw the notice and > forwarded it to the recipient, thinking that she might be interested. > It may also have been an attempt, though I think it unlikely, to > blacken your name (much like what happened a few weeks ago at Stanford > when someone forged a student's name to some hate email and sent it to > everyone on campus [though it only got to two thirds before the > program was found and killed]). However, this is too subtle for most > of the people who might be out to get you. I'm inclined to think the > whole incident has a completely innocent explanation. > > Emma > > ps. Congrats on the book. A lot of people talk about writing and > being published but relatively few ever do so. > > -- > \---- > |\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster > |_\/ Die Luft der Freiheit weht ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, June 25, 1999 6:24 AM Subject: Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Roger Reini wrote in message news:3777bae5.158716111@news.newsguy.com... > On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 16:48:40 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > wrote: > > > > >Rick Schaut wrote in message > >news:7krlhd$28u2@news1.newsguy.com... > >> First, I've removed talk.religion.misc from the Newsgroups line. > >Continued > >> cross-posting to that newsgroup is no longer necessary for propagation > >> purposes, and is discouraged whenever it's not necessary. > > > >Bahai fundamentalists were the first to recommend, even > >demand, crossposting to talk.religion.misc more than two > >years ago when they thought it would be a good idea for > >propaganda points as a way of suppressing the desire of > >myself and others for the creation of talk.religion.bahai. > > IMHO, it was a reasonable position to take at the time, especially to > help propagate alt.religion.bahai. But circumstances change, and what > may have been reasonable then might be unreasonable today. Now that > t.r.b exists, there's really no need to crosspost to t.r.m. any more. > I don't follow t.r.m much, but when I did, it was a real wasteland. I > think it's better to keep our discussions out of there. After all, > those who are truly interested will find us. More of the same. It's evident that Bahai fundamentalists wish to suppress all knowledge of their censorship and crimes of conscience from reaching the broadly Christian readership of talk.religion.misc, though many others too post there. > > >I.e., they claimed to believe there was really no interest in > >an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai faith and argued > >that people could say anything they wanted on tr.misc. > > > >Most amusing that they now want to suppress any cross > >posts to talk.religion.misc. > > Note that followups have been set to the Baha'i newsgroups only. For > t.r.b should be as well propagated as t.r.m by now. I shall continue to crosspost all my messages to talk.religion.misc and urge others to do so as well. -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, June 25, 1999 6:30 AM Subject: Re: Re Frederick Glaysher's Into the Ruins: Poems Roger Reini wrote in message news:3778bc9d.159156290@news.newsguy.com... > On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 16:52:37 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > wrote: > > >Roger Reini wrote in message > >news:3772e400.38154163@news.newsguy.com... > >> Why would someone who wants to suppress your voice go to the trouble > >> of posting an advertisement for your collection? The logic of this > >> escapes me. > > > >If anyone has email the notice of my book to anyone, I certainly > >believe it's Bahai fanatics that are involved, given their resort to > >every imaginable deceit to smear and discredit me during the > >last three years. > > Believe what you want, though I don't believe it can be supported by > evidence. What we have here, and it has become a typical Bahai fundamentalist ruse, is "there's no evidence!" The clearest EVIDENCE is the well-documented, nearly three year, incessant attack on expression of all opinions but the fundamentalist line of thought. The recent threats of lawsuits against me corroborate this way of thinking as well. > > For the record, I'll say that I have not received any e-mail about the > book. All I've seen is the newsgroup posting and the related > discussion about it. Notice here that K. Paul Johnson, Juan Cole, and the orthodox Bahai publisher Kalimat Press have all posted messages to talk.religion.bahai in the past about forthcoming books or books available for order, through Amazon.com, as mine is, or otherwise. No one has been criticized and condemned and harassed about it but me. Linger on that fact.... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, June 25, 1999 7:31 AM Subject: Re: Re Frederick Glaysher's Into the Ruins: Poems Since Chris pointed out the server problem, I notice this morning Amazon.com's server appears to be back up and running properly for the link to my book: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Or link off my website: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/literary.htm Incidentally, notice the exaggerated complaint about the popups on tripod.com, as though they don't exist now all over the Internet. -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups Patrick Henry wrote in message news:7kvlnn$rda$1@news.laserlink.net... > Roger Reini wrote in message > news:3778bc9d.159156290@news.newsguy.com... > > On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 16:52:37 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > > wrote: > > > > >Roger Reini wrote in message > > >news:3772e400.38154163@news.newsguy.com... > > >> Why would someone who wants to suppress your voice go to the trouble > > >> of posting an advertisement for your collection? The logic of this > > >> escapes me. > > > > > >If anyone has email the notice of my book to anyone, I certainly > > >believe it's Bahai fanatics that are involved, given their resort to > > >every imaginable deceit to smear and discredit me during the > > >last three years. > > > > Believe what you want, though I don't believe it can be supported by > > evidence. > > What we have here, and it has become a typical > Bahai fundamentalist ruse, is "there's no evidence!" > > The clearest EVIDENCE is the well-documented, > nearly three year, incessant attack on expression of > all opinions but the fundamentalist line of thought. The > recent threats of lawsuits against me corroborate this > way of thinking as well. > > > > > For the record, I'll say that I have not received any e-mail about the > > book. All I've seen is the newsgroup posting and the related > > discussion about it. > > Notice here that K. Paul Johnson, Juan Cole, and the > orthodox Bahai publisher Kalimat Press have all posted > messages to talk.religion.bahai in the past about forthcoming > books or books available for order, through Amazon.com, > as mine is, or otherwise. No one has been criticized and > condemned and harassed about it but me. Linger on that > fact.... > > -- > Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, > alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups > > > > > > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, June 26, 1999 6:34 AM Subject: Re: False allegation of email spamming (Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits) [trm added back since further examples of Bahai deceit and cozening are relevant to a general newsgroup given to discussion of religion] You're changing the subject. Neither I nor my publisher emailed anyone. My fellow Bahais were behind it. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:378062a1.72540299@news.newsguy.com... > (talk.religion.misc removed from crosspost) > > On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 16:41:46 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > wrote: > > > The allegation that I or my publisher has sent EMAIL > > to any individuals regarding the publication of one of my > > books and its availability on Amazon.com is false. Neither > > I nor he have sent anyone any email whatsoever. > > > > You've become quite loose with your allegations. > > > > Shame on you. > > When you are capable of following community standards (netiquette), then > and only then will you be in any position to criticize someone else's > behavior in the newsgroups. > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (at home) ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, June 26, 1999 6:36 AM Subject: Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits What's really taking place is my fellow Bahai fundamentalists now desire to limit the knowledge of their continuing censorship and acts of oppression. I urge everyone to continue to crosspost to trm. I certainly intend to do so. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:7l0rqk$133i@drn.newsguy.com... > (talk.religion.misc removed) > > In article <7l0qhp$2bjs@news2.newsguy.com>, "Rick says... > > > (crossposting to trm) > >I don't recall ever suggesting that cross-posting to t.r.m would be a good, > >or a bad, thing to do under the circumstances. > > It was recommended to Fred and others, when both arb and trb were > created, to increase post propagation. As Roger and others have > noted, propagation appears no longer to be a problem. And trm is > unreadable, IMO, and any reduction in its noise level would be a > kindness. > > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (home) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, June 26, 1999 6:39 AM Subject: Re: Hooper Dunbar and Austin Powers How typical. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Juan Cole wrote in message news:7l0h0t$bd7$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > FYI :-) cheers Juan > > P.S. Hooper Dunbar is an American from the West Coast and was a bit > part actor in Hollywood; later he was appointed a counselor in Latin > America and from there was put on the International Teaching Center (the > watchdog of rightwing Baha'i orthodoxy). He was the first ITC member to > be elected to the House, around 1985 I think, in what became a > subsequent pattern of subtle campaigning wherein ITC members, because of > their access to NSA's, have an advantage in the elections to the UHJ > (which also means that incumbents on the UHJ more or less get to appoint > their own successors and future colleagues, which isn't exactly > democratic). In the past he has pretended to be open to the findings of > Baha'i scholars, but I think the evidence is mounting that he is > actually a flaming fundamentalist (like much of the Baha'i power elite). > > I guess I'm glad he's having someone forward to him my messages, but I'd > have been glad to cc him myself if he had just asked. > > > ------------ > Date: Thu, 24 Jun 1999 18:44:19 -0400 > To: dunbar@bwc.org > From: Juan Cole > Subject: Re: Out of Office AutoReply: Contingency, Determinism and Free > Will > In-Reply-To: <5D707433D09BD211966F0090271F66A5A68C29@bwcpo002.bwc.org> > > > jeez, Hooper, it is really annoying to keep getting these messages while > you are on vacation, especially when *I* haven't sent you any. What > kind of inept idiot spies do you employ--all the time you're away we'll > be seeing *exactly* what kind of monitoring you're having done. and you > guys are supposed to be infallible. sheesh, it's like watching an > Austin Powers movie. > > cheers Juan > > > ------------ > At 08:01 PM 6/23/99 +0300, you wrote: > From: dunbar@bwc.org > To: jrcole@umich.edu > Subject: Out of Office AutoReply: Contingency, Determinism and Free Will > Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 20:01:39 +0300 > X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0) > > Your message will be read upon my return to Haifa 12 July. In case of > an emergency message kindly address my secretary > . Thank you. > > > > -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan jrcole@umich.edu > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity & Millennium: Genesis of Baha'i* > https://www.kalimat.com/ > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, June 26, 1999 6:41 AM Subject: Re: The Most Right Scholar I think you're asking some very worthwhile questions. Don't expect toget any answers from the literalists among my fellow Bahais. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7l14pv$j31$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > Mesbah Javid wrote: > >...For this very reason of lack of maturity the Guardian > > advised them not to set rules and regulations while they are > > still immature at this time... > > So the question is, why are they doing it, then? Why crack down on the > intellectuals (Dialogue magazine, Talisman) and set dangerous precedents > for the future? Why cling to such manifestly erroneous policies > and patterns of behavior? Why is the Baha'i community stagnating > worldwide? Why such vehement and adamant outbursts of ignorance as the > April 7th letter? In short, why is the Baha'i administration acting > little different than the akhunds and mollas of Iran? Why does your > vision look and sound eerily like the velayat-e faqih vision of > Khomeini? > > Berekiah Zarco > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, June 26, 1999 6:48 AM Subject: Re: 9 cult indicators K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:3773d95a.0@vlinsvr... > Hey gang. I'm reading a fascinating book by Jeff Walker, The Ayn > Rand Cult. When I was a college Baha'i in the 70s there was a > group of soi-disant "Objectivists" regarding Rand as the > unquestionable authority on everything-- just like we regarded > Baha'u'llah as being. In his critique of Rand's movement, > Walker cites 9 criteria of "destructive cults" that apply in both > cases, IMO: > > 1. Control of communication with the outside world, an attempt to > cut off contact with conflicting ideas and with criticisms. Certainly fits the Bahai faith in my more than 23 years of experience of it, both on and off line. > > 2. Claims of special knowledge by the leader, who is the focal > point for enlightenment and salvation, and to whom members are > expected to pay homage. The leader, says Galanter, "is reputed > to have the potential of bringing a resolution to the problems of > humanity." > > 3. Demands for perfection and purity, and an inordinate number of > rules to follow. Thoughts and actions must be directed > completely toward the purpose of the group and its ideology. The pathetic thing is that so many idiots are involved in surrveilling other Bahais only making matters worse. > > 4. Continual disclosure to group superiors of wrongful thoughts > or actions. While self-criticism is encouraged, not so criticism > of the cult, which is met with shunning. See the typical message Juan Cole has just posted along these lines on talk.religion.bahai. There are several on my website. > > 5. Elitism and separation from family and friends who don't > understand. Members are led to believe they are spearheading a > great effort to save the world. Feeling part of a vnaguard fuels > moral righteousness and emotionally isolates insiders from > outsiders, binding them closer to one another. Isolates is the keyword.... > > 6. A black-and-white view of the world, the notion that the > forces of good and evil and sharply and definitively divided. > Everyone disinclined to favor the cult's views is written off as > evil. The world at large is depicted as evil, violent, decadent, > and as nearing a state of collapse. But thankfully a replacement > utopia is waiting in the wings in the form of the leader's > blueprint for a new order. > > 7. Unquestioning obedience and total commitment, making one's > other concerns secondary, with harsh reproaches or sanctions for > doubt or disobedience. Individual well-being becomes > subordinated to maintaining an ideology that supports the > hierarchy. Seems at the moment to be the essence of the Bahai faith. > > 8. Special, loaded terminology deployed to control communication > and separate members from the outside world via buzzwords and > code terms. Many, many of them in use on trb without some people even understanding them. Incidentally, the news.groupie Kathy Pascoe is a good example of someone missing the boat in this regard. > > 9. Deceptive and manipulative techniques of recruiting. > > Walker concludes by quoting Eric M. Budd, source of these > criteria, on how to determine whether an organization is a > destructive . 1) Ask the leadership tough questions. > 2) Talk to former members and critics, and ask what they like > least about the guru [or leader]. Observe: do members tend to > associate only with other members, act and speak the same, go > through obvious personality changes? Two other authors add: > Observe how gurus treat and refer to those who leave their fold. > Walker comments: In Objectivism, they are excoriated and perhaps > even wished an untimely demise. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 6:19 AM Subject: Re: False allegation of email spamming (Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits) Neither I nor my publisher paid anyone else to send unsolicited email. If anyone paid or encourged someone (i.e., within the Bahai administration) to do it, we did not, do not, and never will approve of it. -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ What's a tuber?! wrote in message news:7l1gvo$b75$1@news.eecs.umich.edu... > In article <930256901.400.46@news.remarQ.com>, > Patrick Henry wrote: > >Kathy Pascoe: > > > >The allegation that I or my publisher has sent EMAIL > >to any individuals regarding the publication of one of my > >books and its availability on Amazon.com is false. Neither > >I nor he have sent anyone any email whatsoever. > > To fully deny responsibility, you should also claim that > neither of you asked or paid anyone else to spam for you. > Because that is how unsolicited bulk email often works. > > The fact that you personally didn't send the email would > not help you if you'd had someone else do it. > > -Dan Damouth > > -- > Joss Whedon: "As far as I'm concerned, the first episode of BUFFY > was the beginning of my career. It was the first time I told a > story from start to finish the way I wanted." ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 6:29 AM Subject: Re: Re Frederick Glaysher's Into the Ruins: Poems Mr Mahdi, The problem is most people in the media are extremely naive when it comes to the Bahai faith. They apparently take at face value all the rhetoric about love and unity and peace without looking deeper behind the facade. I'd be happy to speak with anyone in the media or appear for an interview or whatever. They don't seem sufficiently aware, though, of the story that exists about the way the Bahai faith actually operates. I've tried to bring the realities to their attention many times. Perhaps eventually a media person will come along who will listen and realize why the story is indeed important for others to know. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Mr Mahdi wrote in message news:19990625123715.23147.00006016@ng-bh1.aol.com... > >Notice here that K. Paul Johnson, Juan Cole, and the > >orthodox Bahai publisher Kalimat Press have all posted > >messages to talk.religion.bahai in the past about forthcoming > >books or books available for order, through Amazon.com, > >as mine is, or otherwise. No one has been criticized and > >condemned and harassed about it but me. Linger on that > >fact.... > > Very interesting observation. I noticed that a few days ago when people > started to give you a hard time about the posting of your book. I recall > Juan's book and other books being promoted here but I never heard any > complaints. To me this is not only a double-standard but pure harrassment. > > Fred, I am not sure if you are able to contact any well-known media outlets but > if you want for people in America or the world to know whats goes on with > cult-like censorship in the bahai faith, I suggest that you contact these media > outlets and get your message heard either in papers, TV shows (esp. the TV > magazine shows like 60 Minutes and Primetime), etc. These means are the best > ways in getting your message heard by a lot of people. > Mahdi ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 6:42 AM Subject: Re: Hooper Dunbar and Austin Powers Regarding: Glenford Mitchell, a Jamaican-born journalist > and civil rights campaigner who had emigrated to the US, became > secretary of the US NSA after Ruhe, and was elected to the House from > that position in 1983. His past may not be as unblemished as some would like others to think. I believe he may have actually been a supporter and propagandist for the Malcom X school of racial undestanding. He was apparently the editor of a radical journal along such lines at one point. I have a vivid memory of his cutting a very poor figure at a memorial dinner for Robert Hayden in 1980.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Juan Cole wrote in message news:7l3iqi$8f9$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Dear friend: > > First of all, there is only one way I can think of that I could receive > an out-of-office auto-reply message from Hooper Dunbar. That is if a > message of mine were "bounced" or "redirected" to him. Some email > programs allow you to redirect a message, rather than forwarding it. If > you forward the message, the header is in your own name. If you > redirect it, the header remains that of the original sender. When I > redirect messages in Eudora, the program inserts my name into the header > . But the 'redirect' program used by the person who sent > my message to Hooper omits this information, making the 'bouncer' > anonymous. > > This message was posted on a list to which Hooper Dunbar does not > belong. Several other posters to that list also got these auto-reply > messages. The only logical explanation is that messages are being > systematically bounced from that list to Mr. Dunbar. It is impossible > that he should not know about this and at least implicitly concur that > he wants it done. It is also possible that he just wanted for his own > intellectual reasons to follow my work, which would be a compliment. > > However, he serves on a body that, while it used to praise my work, > more recently has mysteriously taken umbrage at it and issued threats > and denunciations about it. The more likely explanation, given what we > know of how the rightwing Baha'i administrators work, is that he is > having someone spy on me and others. It is just amusing that his spy > 'bounced' the messages to him, since that meant that if anything went > wrong, *we* would get the error messages. It is stupid internet spying > technique. I just thought I'd given them the opportunity to improve it. > > The pattern for election of UHJ members is as follows: > > Most of the early ones were elected off the US NSA, the UK NSA, or were > Iranians serving in the Holy Land or India. David Ruhe, an American > physician and secretary of the US NSA, was elected to the House from > that position in 1968. Glenford Mitchell, a Jamaican-born journalist > and civil rights campaigner who had emigrated to the US, became > secretary of the US NSA after Ruhe, and was elected to the House from > that position in 1983. > > Since 1983 three of the four new House members have been counselors > appointed to the International Teaching Center, beginning with Hooper > Dunbar, who I think must have been elected to the UHJ in 1987, though > I'd be glad to be corrected. > > 1987 - Peter Khan, electrical engineer of Pakistani-Punjabi and > Australian heritage (sometime professor at the University of Michigan) > - elected to succeed Charles Wolcott. - Was counselor at the > International Teaching Center at the time. Had previously been > counselor in Australia and the South Pacific. > > 1993 - Farzam Arbab, Ph.D. in economics from Berkeley; Baha'i > missionary in Peru; had served as counselor in Latin America, then > appointed counselor in the International Teaching Center. As ITC > member, has frequent interactions with NSAs throughout the world, plus > has the support of his Latin American colleagues. Elected to the UHJ > this year from the ITC. Later served on the House subcommittee > responsible for threatening Western Baha'i academics with being declared > covenant breakers, in 1996. > > 1993 - Douglas Martin, journalist and publicist with an M.A. in history > from a small Canadian college. Long-time secretary of the National > Spiritual Assembly of Canada. Promoted by friends on the UHJ into among > the chief heads of the Association of Baha'i Studies from 1980 or so, > despite lack of academic credentials. Runs both the NSA and the ABS in > a narrow-minded and dictatorial manner. Helps make the ABS an > anti-intellectual organization, provoking resignations and protests from > regional ABS boards. Is drafted to co-author the 1985 Peace Statement > from the UHJ. Is brought to Haifa in 1991 by the UHJ and made publicist > for the World Centre as a way of signalling to the NSAs of the world his > electability to the UHJ. Is elected from his Haifa position to the UHJ > in 1993. > > The problem with electing ITC counselors to the UHJ is manifold. First > of all, it is undemocratic, since they are *appointed* to the ITC by the > UHJ incumbents, so you are letting the incumbents choose their > colleagues and successors. It would be like letting Bill Clinton > appoint all the likely presidential candidates. Second of all, they > have unfair electoral advantages, since they are visible to and work > closely with the electorate, i.e. the NSA members, and have the aura > of being close to the UHJ. Third, the Baha'is at large almost never > know anything serious about these people, who are not anyway elected > officials and so have often never had to prove that anyone in the > community actually liked them. At least David Ruhe and Glenford > Mitchell had proven that. Fourth, some of these people have been > "Counselors for Protection," which means they were professional > Inquisitors and have a prosecutorial mindset. To pack the UHJ with such > paranoid and aggressive individuals is clearly a big mistake. > > cheers Juan > > > -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan jrcole@umich.edu > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity & Millennium: Genesis of Baha'i* > https://www.kalimat.com/ > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 6:44 AM Subject: Re: Hooper Dunbar and Austin Powers Bahai fundamentalists regularly spy and report on other Bahais. Rick Schaut is one of the official hacks given such duties here on talk.religion.bahai. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ macleod wrote in message news:930436640.19694.0.nnrp-13.c2de8324@news.demon.co.uk... > > Thanks very much indeed for the information re background to UHJ members. > > Also you could well be right re the software angle. > > I'm still not convinced re the spying. Having someone search the net for > info and send it on is hardly spying. One could call it research or > secretarial duties. Unless the E-mail list was intended to be private and > you would have refused him membership? > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 7:08 AM Subject: Re: Letter of Resignation Could someone post in full the UHJ's April letter? I've read it only embedded in others' comments. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7l1eot$lrh$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Dear friends, > As you are aware there has been much discussion about the recent > letter dated April 7, 1999 from the Universal House of Justice > concerning issues related to the study of the Baha'i Faith. And as you > know, these issues have long been a serious concern of mine and many > others who are engaged in various academic pursuits including the study > of religion. > Over the past weeks, I have read the letter from the House many > times and given it a great deal of consideration, thought and prayer. > When I first read the letter after it appeared on Baha'i Studies, I was > shocked. Considering the dialogue that I thought had begun between the > Administrative Order and Baha'i scholars in February of 1998 at our > meeting in Teaneck, I felt upon reading it, and still do, that this > letter painted with a very broad brush all scholars who are engaged in > the academic study of religion. > I do not think it would serve here to give a detailed statement of > the many points which I find objectionable in the letter. Until now I > have maintained a middle position concerning the use of certain > methodologies in the study of the Baha'i Faith and have been open > regarding the areas in which I agree or disagree with certain > individuals or with the Baha'i Administration regarding the role of > Baha'i scholars. > However, I do think it necessary to say that, as one who is > particularly engaged in the study of New Religious Movements, I find > this letter very disturbing. The very tone of the letter displays an > attitude which I find difficult ot reconcile with my understanding of > the Faith of Baha'u'llah. It states clearly that the methods used in > the academic study of religion are "designed to ignore the truths that > make religion what it is" and that they, and by inference those that > use them, are tainted by the "reigning doctrines of materialism." Apart > from the fact that this appears to me to reveal at least a > misunderstanding of the proper use of methodologies and their purpose > in academic studies, this statement has overtones that can only be > described, in my opinion, as fundamentalist in nature. This appears to > become even more evident as the reference to the emphasis certain > individuals place on academic freedom is demonized as an attempt to > "pervert scholarly discourse," an assertion I find particularly > objectionable. Indeed, it would appear that the proper use of scholarly > discourse, according to the inferences made in the letter, should be > nothing more than an exercise in apologetics for the Baha'i Faith. I > have no quarrel with apologetics and its role in religion. But it has > no place in academic studies where the truth claims of any tradition > are beyond the purview of the academic endeavor to prove or disprove. > These are matters of the spirit and the heart which are beyond the > limitation of any methodology to understand. However, despite that > limitation, methods are developed to help us understand the actualities > of religion in historical and sociological contexts. Without such > understanding, and the vital healthy criticism that can strengthen a > faith community, religion eventually devolves into mere ritual, > superstition, formality and authoritarianism. It may be true that there > are some scholars who, even as people of faith, take what appears to be > an extreme approach in the use of methodologies when studying religion. > I can understand better those of my colleagues who claim no faith as > their own or who even reject faith altogether, where in such cases it > is appropriate to rely on "materialistic" methods. And I believe that > to some extent an understanding is gained through such endeavors. > Contrary to the statement in the April 7 letter, though, I have never > met nor have I ever heard any scholar of religion claim that "religion > itself can be adequately understood only through the use of an academic > methodology." Indeed, it has been my experience that most are still not > agreed on what constitutes a proper definition of religion. Yes, there > are some who may claim to fully understand religion and who take an > adversarial stance against anythng that would reflect an attitude of > faith, but I have found, to the credit of the academy, that this is not > reflective of all scholars. Most simply object to the attempt to inject > ideas such as revelation or spirit into an academic discussion of > religion, an objection with which I concur. It seems that the April 7 > letter reveals a desire within Baha'i Administration to "have ones cake > and eat it, too" for while it rejects these methodologies as "dogmatic > materialism" it seeks to be accepted, on terms of its own making, into > the very arena of discourse it so decries, an arena in which method, > not revelation, is the tool used to understand religion. Yet, it is > true that methods are simply tools which, like scholarship in general, > have a proper and an improper use. Now one may not approve of the way > an individual or individuals use their tools and is free to express > that disapproval. But in doing so, one should not be surprised if they > receive an equal amount of criticism for the manner in which they use > their own tools! In this case, the April 7 letter from the House > criticizes _what they perceive to be_ an improper use of methodologies. > Is it any surprise, then, that some scholars who work with those > methodologies, Baha'i and non-Baha'i, are critical of the application > of something as subjective as revelation and faith in engaged academic > discourse? I think not. Rather than seeking common ground and _on an > active, daily basis, engaging in serious consultation _for the purpose > of understanding each other_ both sides have become polarized, a > situation exacerbated by this letter. It is unfortunate and not a > little frightening to read this letter with its "us against them" tone > so prominently displayed. More than that, it is saddening to see that > the letter did not make any attempt to assure the NSA's to whom it was > sent that this may not be a reference to all Baha'i academics. In light > of the recent events in some parts of the U.S., where some individuals > have been subjected to the indignity of an investigation because of > their beliefs, one would suppose that such assurances would be included > in the letter. While it may be argued that the letter was meant to be > private, only for the NSA's, one should not be surprised that it turned > up on the internet and that it caused such pain. More surprising than > that, I believe, is the publishing of it in the latest edition of > Baha'i Canada without any commentary or contextualization. Imagine the > effect this will no doubt have on those who are already suspicious of > academic methods and those that engage in academic study! More than the > letter itself, I find this action particularly irresponsible. > > As I said above, I was shocked when I first read this letter. I > was also very angry. And I suppose that in some measure I still am. But > over the past few weeks consideration of the contents of this letter > have caused Lisa and I to step back and reconsider some of the issues > which concern us, particularly those with which we have struggled as > members of the Baha'i Faith. The result has been a recognition that, > despite our love for the Baha'i Faith, and for the many friends we have > made as part of the Baha'i community, there are some issues which, if > we are to be honest with ourselves and with the Baha'i Faith, call for > an obedience which we cannot give. > One of these, for me, is the issue of review, a process which I > find repressive and distasteful as a scholar, and one to which I simply > would not submit. Despite the assurances that it is only temporary, it > is still a present reality which shows no sign of being abolished in > the near future. > Another is the ban on living as a practicing homosexual while a > Baha'i. Both Lisa and I have always taken a clear stand on gay and > lesbian rights. For us, that clearly meant that gays and lesbians have > the right to live _completely_ in same-sex relationships, including > marriage and child-rearing. Indeed, we can point to many gay friends > who have marriage relationships which put many heterosexual marriages > to shame and who are raising happy, well-adjusted children. It was not > until after I became a Baha'i that I learned, on my own, of the > teachings on this issue. I was dismayed, but tried to convince myself > that I could live with this and could simply be quiet on the issue. > Lisa became a Baha'i thinking that it would be easy enough to avoid the > issue, and both of us held out hope that the Faith would soon change > its stand on this issue. By the time it became a reality that this > would not happen, we had convinced ourselves, or so we thought, that > the issue wasn't important. Similarly, we had the same feelings > concerning women serving on the House of Justice. > But, over the past weeks, we have come to realize just how > important these and other social matters are to us. We became convinced > that the spiritual reality of the Mashriqu'l-Adkhar has been, for the > most part, forgotten or ignored. Having been raised in a tradition in > which I was, from my earliest years on, engaged in social welfare work, > I find and Lisa doesas well, that I am uncomfortable with the spending > of Baha'i funds for the Arc project while there are so many other ways > in which they could be used to help so many who desperately need it. > While I do not wish to be critical, I must express my doubt that the > completion of the Arc will mean little to the single mother trying to > raise children on her own or the homeless family who have no place to > sleep other than unsafe shelters or cardboard boxes. And while some may > say that we should use "individual initiative" in such matters (which > we do), and while we grant there are many individual Baha'is who do > such vital work, it must be acknowledged that Baha'is are a _community_ > and as such should be addressing these issues as a body of believers on > the local, national and international levels in equal measure to those > of other traditions. > Most distressing, though, has been the growing sense of fear that > can be observed within certain parts of the Baha'i community. As an > assistant, I have grown increasingly uncomfortable with the seeming > need to keep track of and report on the activities of individuals, > something which I initially thought to be necessary to protect the > Covenant and serve the cause. But recent events have convinced Lisa and > me that such practices, and especially the notion that anyone may at > any time be "investigated," are out of keeping with both the teachings > of Baha'u'llah and with who we are and what we believe about the > essence of religion. Having been raised in a tradition in which I was > constantly fearful of "losing my salvation" due to some action or > thought, a notion with which I lived for much of my life, I will not > allow such fear to again stifle the spiritual growth of myself or that > of my family. > Central to the Baha'i Faith is a trust in the institutions of the > Administrative Order and, one would assume, a trust of the individual > by the Administration. I have increasingly come to lose that trust in > the Administrative Order, and especially with the release of this > latest letter. Let me be clear, though, that this does not reflect in > any way on the individual members of those institutions, most of whom I > have never met. I am certain that they are all doing the best they can > in their positions to administer the affairs of the Baha'i Faith in a > faithful and honest manner, even as they are subject to human > frailties, which we believe can indeed interfere with openness to and > understanding of the Divine will, a human predicament with which we all > wrestle. > As a result of this recognition, we believe that it is best for us, > and for the Baha'i Faith, to formally submit our resignation. In doing > so, we recognize that there will be some who will, depsite anything we > may say, accuse us of rejecting Baha'u'llah. However, as one's faith > can be conditioned by no one but one's self, we want to make clear here > that we still believe Baha'u'llah to be the Manifestation of God. Our > relationship to and understanding of Baha'u'llah is something which we > must work out for ourselves apart from "official" involvement within > the Administrative Order. of the Baha'i Faith. I believe it is > necessary to also state for the record, despite our resignation, we > believe that, based on the evidence of the texts, it is clear that the > legitimate authority for the Baha'i community is the Universal House of > Justice whose seat is on Mt. Carmel and the Adminstrative Order in the > various parts of the globe. We reject, simply based on facts, any > pretense to authority of any other alleged "Baha'i" body or > individuals. > Most importantly, we believe that by resigning, we will avoid being > a cause of disunity within the community. For were we to remain, we > could not, in good conscience, remain silent about these and other > issues which are important to us. > Our purpose in writing this letter has been only to explain, > perhaps at greater length than we initially desired, why we are taking > this step. Our decision has been our own. There have been some close > friends with whom we have discussed this matter and who have given us > their honest advice. None of them have advised us to leave, some have > suggested we stay and try to just "go about our business," but all of > them have given their support and love and all will remain our close > friends. We pray that this is true for all of you whom we have had the > great bounty of knowing and still love with all our hearts. > > > With warmest love, > Paul and Lisa Dodenhoff > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 7:14 AM Subject: Re: Letter of Resignation I respect your conscience regarding these matters and the courage displayed in publicly expressing your views. Given the atmosphere of fear and repression you accurately acknowledge as existing in the Bahai faith, I find it amazing even more people don't resign. The UHJ has quite simply abandoned Baha'u'llah's Teachings in favor of its own fundamentalist fantasies. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7l1eot$lrh$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Dear friends, > As you are aware there has been much discussion about the recent > letter dated April 7, 1999 from the Universal House of Justice > concerning issues related to the study of the Baha'i Faith. And as you > know, these issues have long been a serious concern of mine and many > others who are engaged in various academic pursuits including the study > of religion. > Over the past weeks, I have read the letter from the House many > times and given it a great deal of consideration, thought and prayer. > When I first read the letter after it appeared on Baha'i Studies, I was > shocked. Considering the dialogue that I thought had begun between the > Administrative Order and Baha'i scholars in February of 1998 at our > meeting in Teaneck, I felt upon reading it, and still do, that this > letter painted with a very broad brush all scholars who are engaged in > the academic study of religion. > I do not think it would serve here to give a detailed statement of > the many points which I find objectionable in the letter. Until now I > have maintained a middle position concerning the use of certain > methodologies in the study of the Baha'i Faith and have been open > regarding the areas in which I agree or disagree with certain > individuals or with the Baha'i Administration regarding the role of > Baha'i scholars. > However, I do think it necessary to say that, as one who is > particularly engaged in the study of New Religious Movements, I find > this letter very disturbing. The very tone of the letter displays an > attitude which I find difficult ot reconcile with my understanding of > the Faith of Baha'u'llah. It states clearly that the methods used in > the academic study of religion are "designed to ignore the truths that > make religion what it is" and that they, and by inference those that > use them, are tainted by the "reigning doctrines of materialism." Apart > from the fact that this appears to me to reveal at least a > misunderstanding of the proper use of methodologies and their purpose > in academic studies, this statement has overtones that can only be > described, in my opinion, as fundamentalist in nature. This appears to > become even more evident as the reference to the emphasis certain > individuals place on academic freedom is demonized as an attempt to > "pervert scholarly discourse," an assertion I find particularly > objectionable. Indeed, it would appear that the proper use of scholarly > discourse, according to the inferences made in the letter, should be > nothing more than an exercise in apologetics for the Baha'i Faith. I > have no quarrel with apologetics and its role in religion. But it has > no place in academic studies where the truth claims of any tradition > are beyond the purview of the academic endeavor to prove or disprove. > These are matters of the spirit and the heart which are beyond the > limitation of any methodology to understand. However, despite that > limitation, methods are developed to help us understand the actualities > of religion in historical and sociological contexts. Without such > understanding, and the vital healthy criticism that can strengthen a > faith community, religion eventually devolves into mere ritual, > superstition, formality and authoritarianism. It may be true that there > are some scholars who, even as people of faith, take what appears to be > an extreme approach in the use of methodologies when studying religion. > I can understand better those of my colleagues who claim no faith as > their own or who even reject faith altogether, where in such cases it > is appropriate to rely on "materialistic" methods. And I believe that > to some extent an understanding is gained through such endeavors. > Contrary to the statement in the April 7 letter, though, I have never > met nor have I ever heard any scholar of religion claim that "religion > itself can be adequately understood only through the use of an academic > methodology." Indeed, it has been my experience that most are still not > agreed on what constitutes a proper definition of religion. Yes, there > are some who may claim to fully understand religion and who take an > adversarial stance against anythng that would reflect an attitude of > faith, but I have found, to the credit of the academy, that this is not > reflective of all scholars. Most simply object to the attempt to inject > ideas such as revelation or spirit into an academic discussion of > religion, an objection with which I concur. It seems that the April 7 > letter reveals a desire within Baha'i Administration to "have ones cake > and eat it, too" for while it rejects these methodologies as "dogmatic > materialism" it seeks to be accepted, on terms of its own making, into > the very arena of discourse it so decries, an arena in which method, > not revelation, is the tool used to understand religion. Yet, it is > true that methods are simply tools which, like scholarship in general, > have a proper and an improper use. Now one may not approve of the way > an individual or individuals use their tools and is free to express > that disapproval. But in doing so, one should not be surprised if they > receive an equal amount of criticism for the manner in which they use > their own tools! In this case, the April 7 letter from the House > criticizes _what they perceive to be_ an improper use of methodologies. > Is it any surprise, then, that some scholars who work with those > methodologies, Baha'i and non-Baha'i, are critical of the application > of something as subjective as revelation and faith in engaged academic > discourse? I think not. Rather than seeking common ground and _on an > active, daily basis, engaging in serious consultation _for the purpose > of understanding each other_ both sides have become polarized, a > situation exacerbated by this letter. It is unfortunate and not a > little frightening to read this letter with its "us against them" tone > so prominently displayed. More than that, it is saddening to see that > the letter did not make any attempt to assure the NSA's to whom it was > sent that this may not be a reference to all Baha'i academics. In light > of the recent events in some parts of the U.S., where some individuals > have been subjected to the indignity of an investigation because of > their beliefs, one would suppose that such assurances would be included > in the letter. While it may be argued that the letter was meant to be > private, only for the NSA's, one should not be surprised that it turned > up on the internet and that it caused such pain. More surprising than > that, I believe, is the publishing of it in the latest edition of > Baha'i Canada without any commentary or contextualization. Imagine the > effect this will no doubt have on those who are already suspicious of > academic methods and those that engage in academic study! More than the > letter itself, I find this action particularly irresponsible. > > As I said above, I was shocked when I first read this letter. I > was also very angry. And I suppose that in some measure I still am. But > over the past few weeks consideration of the contents of this letter > have caused Lisa and I to step back and reconsider some of the issues > which concern us, particularly those with which we have struggled as > members of the Baha'i Faith. The result has been a recognition that, > despite our love for the Baha'i Faith, and for the many friends we have > made as part of the Baha'i community, there are some issues which, if > we are to be honest with ourselves and with the Baha'i Faith, call for > an obedience which we cannot give. > One of these, for me, is the issue of review, a process which I > find repressive and distasteful as a scholar, and one to which I simply > would not submit. Despite the assurances that it is only temporary, it > is still a present reality which shows no sign of being abolished in > the near future. > Another is the ban on living as a practicing homosexual while a > Baha'i. Both Lisa and I have always taken a clear stand on gay and > lesbian rights. For us, that clearly meant that gays and lesbians have > the right to live _completely_ in same-sex relationships, including > marriage and child-rearing. Indeed, we can point to many gay friends > who have marriage relationships which put many heterosexual marriages > to shame and who are raising happy, well-adjusted children. It was not > until after I became a Baha'i that I learned, on my own, of the > teachings on this issue. I was dismayed, but tried to convince myself > that I could live with this and could simply be quiet on the issue. > Lisa became a Baha'i thinking that it would be easy enough to avoid the > issue, and both of us held out hope that the Faith would soon change > its stand on this issue. By the time it became a reality that this > would not happen, we had convinced ourselves, or so we thought, that > the issue wasn't important. Similarly, we had the same feelings > concerning women serving on the House of Justice. > But, over the past weeks, we have come to realize just how > important these and other social matters are to us. We became convinced > that the spiritual reality of the Mashriqu'l-Adkhar has been, for the > most part, forgotten or ignored. Having been raised in a tradition in > which I was, from my earliest years on, engaged in social welfare work, > I find and Lisa doesas well, that I am uncomfortable with the spending > of Baha'i funds for the Arc project while there are so many other ways > in which they could be used to help so many who desperately need it. > While I do not wish to be critical, I must express my doubt that the > completion of the Arc will mean little to the single mother trying to > raise children on her own or the homeless family who have no place to > sleep other than unsafe shelters or cardboard boxes. And while some may > say that we should use "individual initiative" in such matters (which > we do), and while we grant there are many individual Baha'is who do > such vital work, it must be acknowledged that Baha'is are a _community_ > and as such should be addressing these issues as a body of believers on > the local, national and international levels in equal measure to those > of other traditions. > Most distressing, though, has been the growing sense of fear that > can be observed within certain parts of the Baha'i community. As an > assistant, I have grown increasingly uncomfortable with the seeming > need to keep track of and report on the activities of individuals, > something which I initially thought to be necessary to protect the > Covenant and serve the cause. But recent events have convinced Lisa and > me that such practices, and especially the notion that anyone may at > any time be "investigated," are out of keeping with both the teachings > of Baha'u'llah and with who we are and what we believe about the > essence of religion. Having been raised in a tradition in which I was > constantly fearful of "losing my salvation" due to some action or > thought, a notion with which I lived for much of my life, I will not > allow such fear to again stifle the spiritual growth of myself or that > of my family. > Central to the Baha'i Faith is a trust in the institutions of the > Administrative Order and, one would assume, a trust of the individual > by the Administration. I have increasingly come to lose that trust in > the Administrative Order, and especially with the release of this > latest letter. Let me be clear, though, that this does not reflect in > any way on the individual members of those institutions, most of whom I > have never met. I am certain that they are all doing the best they can > in their positions to administer the affairs of the Baha'i Faith in a > faithful and honest manner, even as they are subject to human > frailties, which we believe can indeed interfere with openness to and > understanding of the Divine will, a human predicament with which we all > wrestle. > As a result of this recognition, we believe that it is best for us, > and for the Baha'i Faith, to formally submit our resignation. In doing > so, we recognize that there will be some who will, depsite anything we > may say, accuse us of rejecting Baha'u'llah. However, as one's faith > can be conditioned by no one but one's self, we want to make clear here > that we still believe Baha'u'llah to be the Manifestation of God. Our > relationship to and understanding of Baha'u'llah is something which we > must work out for ourselves apart from "official" involvement within > the Administrative Order. of the Baha'i Faith. I believe it is > necessary to also state for the record, despite our resignation, we > believe that, based on the evidence of the texts, it is clear that the > legitimate authority for the Baha'i community is the Universal House of > Justice whose seat is on Mt. Carmel and the Adminstrative Order in the > various parts of the globe. We reject, simply based on facts, any > pretense to authority of any other alleged "Baha'i" body or > individuals. > Most importantly, we believe that by resigning, we will avoid being > a cause of disunity within the community. For were we to remain, we > could not, in good conscience, remain silent about these and other > issues which are important to us. > Our purpose in writing this letter has been only to explain, > perhaps at greater length than we initially desired, why we are taking > this step. Our decision has been our own. There have been some close > friends with whom we have discussed this matter and who have given us > their honest advice. None of them have advised us to leave, some have > suggested we stay and try to just "go about our business," but all of > them have given their support and love and all will remain our close > friends. We pray that this is true for all of you whom we have had the > great bounty of knowing and still love with all our hearts. > > > With warmest love, > Paul and Lisa Dodenhoff > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 7:31 AM Subject: Re: Bahai Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 What we have here is yet another attempt by a Bahai to frighten someone into silence. The fundamentalists are indeed a frustrated bunch.... My lawyer has assured me that nothing I have done or am doing is illegal in any way whatsoever. Note once again the desperate desire to malign my name and reputation by casting an aura of illegality around me into a free and unmoderated forum. Unlike fundamentalist Bahais, I have never threatened anyone. I am prepared to defend myself in a court of law and would counter sue any individual or institution who violates my constitutional rights as an American citizen. -- Frederick Glaysher, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:3774DFF7.C83AC17@earthlink.net... > > > This is what I have been able to do so far: > > 1. I have consulted with a lawyer and there is definitely a > viable libel case to be made of Fred Glaysher's calumny against > "Baha'is" and the "Universal House of Justice". > > 2. I have contacted Bigfoot.com and ReMarq (sp?) and I should > hear back from them regarding Fred Glaysher's posting of repetitive > messages and his slanderous comments regarding "Baha'is" and > the "Universal House of Justice". > > Regarding the potential lawsuit, two things will have to be hashed out: > > 1. My legal standing as the person bring the suit. > > 2. Fred Glaysher's fitness to stand trial. > > I'll keep you posted (pun intended), > -saman > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 7:45 AM Subject: Re: Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:378c023e.178975579@news.newsguy.com... > On Sat, 26 Jun 1999 09:13:12 -0500, Saman Ahmadi > wrote: > > > This is what I have been able to do so far: > > > > 1. I have consulted with a lawyer and there is definitely a > > viable libel case to be made of Fred Glaysher's calumny against > > "Baha'is" and the "Universal House of Justice". I've never calumniated against Bahais or the UHJ. I have merely spoken my opinion which the UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" in April only confirms, as does its fascist perverting of Baha'u'llah's Teachings for more than a decade now, all of which is painstakingly documented on my website. > > I'd recommend against a suit; there is really no court of competent > jurisdiction when you're discussing behavior on an international forum. > If you were *personally* libelled, maybe (especially if you were in > England, given their excessive libel laws). > > But you as a member of the class of 'fundie' Baha'is (as defined by > Fred) have been ridiculed; that really is not sufficient cause for a > suit. (I'd certainly suggest you obtain multiple opinions from > attorneys experienced in Internet law; I don't expect a case to get very > far.) > > > 2. I have contacted Bigfoot.com and ReMarq (sp?) and I should > > hear back from them regarding Fred Glaysher's posting of repetitive > > messages and his slanderous comments regarding "Baha'is" and > > the "Universal House of Justice". > > Neither Bigfoot nor Remarq will (or should) do anything regarding Fred's > comments; most ISPs will ignore complaints about trolling, especially > when the troller is kinda mostly on topic. Hopefully both will take > some action on the repetitive posts. I am not a troll. My identiy is not concealed. Everyone here knows I am Patrick Henry, a device Bahai fundamentalists have forced me to. (see Bahai Attacks and Bahais on AOL) > > I'd suggest that you and I and others take the advice frequently > supplied to those dealing with trolls[1] on their groups: ignore them. > Fred's commentary on Dan Jordan's death is pure troll, the rest is > somewhat less so. "Pure troll": I believe Bahais murdered Daniel Jordan. That's my opinion. I have every right to say so. It's a false stratagem to call it slander, etc. I don't know troll has to do with that. I say it openly and publicly and have explained elsewhere in detail why I believe so. > > I would characterize the vast majority of his postings to be contrary to > the spirit of discussion; he's not interested in what anyone has to say, > unless he's given an opportunity to trot out his pet rant. He has > totally poisoned any message he wanted to convey, simply by virtue of > his strident, shrill, repetitive tone. He has no respect for the > 'rights'[2] of communicating on newsgroups (witness the ever-changing > subject lines on the weekly spam run). You're missing the boat, as they say. Bahais have no desire to discuss anything, specifically the many, many incidents of censorship and tyranny that have accumulated over the last decade. I am not going to waste my time and energy with them when they merely change the subject or equivocate. What riles them is that I have created a record and made it as permanent as possible on this ephemeral medium. Rest assured, it's one that is here to stay. Here again I suggest serious consideration should be given to teh possibility that "Kathy Pascoe" herself is a Bahai troll.... > > He wants attention. I suggest since he cannot learn to play well with > others, that he not receive it. I am not interested in attention to myself. I am interested in the freedom of speech and conscience guaranteed, supposedly, in the Writings of Baha'u'llah Himself and utterly perverted by my Bahai fundamantalists and the UHJ. For those new to this discussion, please read the message "Letter of Resignation" and reflect carefully on who's being honest on talk.religion.bahai and who is not.... Another casuality of the Nine Violators of Conscience on Mt. Carmel.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > > [1] If anyone needs a definition, please so advise. > [2] My 'right' to free speech ends where your 'right' to stop listening > begins. Right is in quotes because there's no such thing as a right to > access newsgroups; that is a privilege. > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (at home) > Confused about newsgroups? Visit ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 7:47 AM Subject: Re: Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 I appreciate your acknowledging I've pointed out repeatedly why it is necessary to post regularly and thereby create a historical record, a history, if you will, for the newcomer to talk.religion.bahai and all matters relating to Bahai censorship and oppression and tyranny.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ macleod wrote in message news:930420113.760.0.nnrp-01.c2de8324@news.demon.co.uk... > > What is a troll? > What is 'netiquette' and how does it differ from normal politeness? > I'm relatively new to newsgroups. I find the complaints about repetitive > postings and the like rather strange. The percentage of repetitive stuff > here seems much less than any other media I know. What percentage of a > newspaper is ads quite apart from rehashes of the same story? Perhaps I'm > lucky and everyone else gets much more spam than I do. Or perhaps I just > don't care so much. > By the way, Fred has explained why he does repetitive postings. It is quite > rational if you take into account what he is trying to achieve. Actually I > think everyone on this newsgroup behaves and writes perfectly well if you > take the trouble to see it from their point of view. Perhaps even Raymond K > would make sense if could make the effort to find out what he's on about and > what the AFAB bullies are. > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 2:44 PM Subject: Re: Re Frederick Glaysher's Into the Ruins: Poems Here we a revelation of the fanaticism that actuates many of my fellow Bahais here on talk.religion.bahai. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Roger Borseth wrote in message news:37765bc8@news2.foxinternet.net... > > Mr Mahdi wrote in message > news:19990627121354.15724.00006984@ng-fp1.aol.com... > > > . The level > > of harrassment in a UNMODERATED forum such as this is unbelievable. > > > > > > Mahdi > > In an "UNMODERATED" forum it is up to those that post in a forum to maintain > order in the forum (self moderation by the posters). When decorum breaks > down it is the responsibility of each of us to call for moderation, to bring > the discussion back to the purpose and remind those creating disunity to the > charter of the news group. > > Peace and Unity > > Roger > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 2:55 PM Subject: Re: The Most Right Scholar Thank your for bringing this message by Mesbad Javid to my attention. His blind Bahai fanaticism thoroughly typifies the mentality of many Iranian Bahais who consider the Faith their personal family business, international as it were. Recently we have seen other Iranian Bahai fanatics making threats in various ways here on talk.religion.bahai, revealing quite well what their "Bahai love" really amounts to, ayatollah style. It should be noted that were I or anyone else flooding trb with the HTML stationery that he has and is using there would an absolute uproar from the fundamentalists. It's apparently serving their purposes in some way, perhaps by overloading ISPs and their Usenet setup features for trb and thereby bumping messages off the servers. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7l4cgs$fl3$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > In a recent khutbah (sermon), His Holiness Ayatollah-`Uzma and Marja'- > ye Taqlid Mesbah Javid (many genuflections) wrote: > > > > Many absolutely ignorant individuals who think of > > themselves being scholars, in this NG, most likely would > > have been called by the Guardian: "ghatreh-i-muntinah", a > > name he called notorious Avareh in his Persian > > communications. Prof. Cole properly can translate that > > phrase into English. > > -salavaat- :) > > That maybe so, but Juan Cole is not Avarih. Avarih was an extreme > political opportunist who changed his position many times throughout > his life and personally betrayed `Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi by > stabbing them in the back in print with ridiculous allegations of > wrongdoing and family-corruption before throwing in his lot in with the > Islamic fundamentalists in Iran. Juan Cole, on the other hand, is a > firm believer and devotee of Baha'u'llah, has maintained the same > conviction throughout, without changing his basic assumptions about > what is fundamentally wrong with the system, has been viciously > attacked and maligned by corrupt Baha'i councillors and administrators > in the process during the past three years for doing so, and has held > his head up high and spoken the truth to power without flinching. In my > book the man is a living martyr. > You and people like yourself, who are unbelieving and spineless > defenders of the institutional power-structure of your corrupt > ecclesiastical authorities, do not have the guts to see the truth, let > alone to speak it. That is why you have such gut wrenching reactions to > people like Juan Cole...And you call yourselves believers in > Baha'u'llah??? Hah!!! > > as the saying goes, yek morid-e khar az deh-e sish-tongi behtar ast... > And there are many khar morids in the BF these days, as your example > eloquently demonstrates. Avarih indeed (i.e. the Baha'i admin)! > > morid-e khar nabashid, > > Berekiah Zarco > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 3:03 PM Subject: Re: Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 Let me thank you for your honesty, such a rare virtue on talk.religion.bahai. I'm sure you're not the only one to perceive the double standards used by my fellow Bahais of the fundamentalist point of view. But it takes manly courage to say so publicly. The ayatollah method around here has long been exaggerate, exaggerate, exaggerate. The many people oppressed or run out of the Bahai fiath is no exaggeration.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ macleod wrote in message news:930498262.29847.0.nnrp-01.c2de8324@news.demon.co.uk... > > Kathy Pascoe wrote in message <378d5042.198951245@news.newsguy.com>... > > >A troll is someone who posts something simply to garner a response, > >preferably a highly emotional one. The more responses the better. > > I can make sense of that but the word seems to be being used on this > newsgroup with a different sense. Something related to disguised identity. > > > > > >But every unnecessary post costs other people money, in download time > >and/or storage. Many people, especially those outside of the US, do not > >have free local calling, so every piece of data they download has a > >measurable cost on their phone bill. > Yes, buts its pretty trivial. It would be rare indeed for Fred's posts, > which are short, to make the difference between a minimum and longer length > phone call for me (in the UK) > > > >There is absolutely no reason to post his standard set of diatribes more > >often than twice a month. > That's a reasonable opinion but Fred obviously disagrees. Is he allowed to? > > > >How is the tone of any of those repetitive postings going to attract > >people to his cause? Their language is paranoid, full of inflammatory > >accusations, posted without consideration to other people participating > >in the group, and frequently terribly rude. And I'm *sympathetic* to > >his point of view; what could anyone who is antagonistic possibly get > >out of them? > I don't know. Tabloid journalism is an old technique. Maybe he thinks it > works. > > > > Discussion > >groups are, to abuse a circular reference, about discussion. I think > >those who are interested in discussion find Fred terribly frustrating, > >because he clearly is not. > Is this actually defined as a discussion group? Fred is clearly on topic. > Does he have to be interested in discussion? > > > I don't really know why I find myself defending Fred - maybe it's just my > contrarian nature. Everybody seems to attack him for one reason or another > so somebody should stick up for him. It may be because I think I rather like > him and in my occasional direct exchanges with him he has been an exemplar > of politeness to me. > However, I think there is another point. Most people dislike what Fred is > saying. Some dislike the content, some dislike the style. It is I think > for this reason that we should be especially careful to ensure that he has > the same rights to express himself as anyone else. If Fred does breach the > charter of the newsgroup then of course someone has a right to complain. > But we should be extremely careful that we apply the same standards to him > as to everyone else. We should not leap on him like a ton of bricks for > minor peccadiloes that we would totally ignore from any other poster. > > Sorry, I've never heard of Pee Wee Herman. I suspect it wasn't important. > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 3:29 PM Subject: Re: Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 <> Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:3774DFF7.C83AC17@earthlink.net... > > > This is what I have been able to do so far: > > 1. I have consulted with a lawyer and there is definitely a > viable libel case to be made of Fred Glaysher's calumny against > "Baha'is" and the "Universal House of Justice". Anything I have ever said on talk.religion.bahai is a matter of conscience. Here's the card to prove it. I'll be happy to present it to any judge or jury in the land: -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, June 27, 1999 3:36 PM Subject: Re: Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 <> Let's make it a little bigger so that everyone can read it: -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 28, 1999 1:27 PM Subject: Re: Letter of Resignation Incidentally, you're smart to use deja.com for posting to talk.religion.bahai. Otherwise, you might find yourself soon under attack in a number of ways Bahais have used against me. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Patrick Henry wrote in message news:7l512g$9of$1@news.laserlink.net... > I respect your conscience regarding these matters and > the courage displayed in publicly expressing your views. > > Given the atmosphere of fear and repression you accurately > acknowledge as existing in the Bahai faith, I find it amazing > even more people don't resign. > > The UHJ has quite simply abandoned Baha'u'llah's Teachings > in favor of its own fundamentalist fantasies. > > -- > Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > > wrote in message > news:7l1eot$lrh$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > Dear friends, > > As you are aware there has been much discussion about the recent > > letter dated April 7, 1999 from the Universal House of Justice > > concerning issues related to the study of the Baha'i Faith. And as you > > know, these issues have long been a serious concern of mine and many > > others who are engaged in various academic pursuits including the study > > of religion. > > Over the past weeks, I have read the letter from the House many > > times and given it a great deal of consideration, thought and prayer. > > When I first read the letter after it appeared on Baha'i Studies, I was > > shocked. Considering the dialogue that I thought had begun between the > > Administrative Order and Baha'i scholars in February of 1998 at our > > meeting in Teaneck, I felt upon reading it, and still do, that this > > letter painted with a very broad brush all scholars who are engaged in > > the academic study of religion. > > I do not think it would serve here to give a detailed statement of > > the many points which I find objectionable in the letter. Until now I > > have maintained a middle position concerning the use of certain > > methodologies in the study of the Baha'i Faith and have been open > > regarding the areas in which I agree or disagree with certain > > individuals or with the Baha'i Administration regarding the role of > > Baha'i scholars. > > However, I do think it necessary to say that, as one who is > > particularly engaged in the study of New Religious Movements, I find > > this letter very disturbing. The very tone of the letter displays an > > attitude which I find difficult ot reconcile with my understanding of > > the Faith of Baha'u'llah. It states clearly that the methods used in > > the academic study of religion are "designed to ignore the truths that > > make religion what it is" and that they, and by inference those that > > use them, are tainted by the "reigning doctrines of materialism." Apart > > from the fact that this appears to me to reveal at least a > > misunderstanding of the proper use of methodologies and their purpose > > in academic studies, this statement has overtones that can only be > > described, in my opinion, as fundamentalist in nature. This appears to > > become even more evident as the reference to the emphasis certain > > individuals place on academic freedom is demonized as an attempt to > > "pervert scholarly discourse," an assertion I find particularly > > objectionable. Indeed, it would appear that the proper use of scholarly > > discourse, according to the inferences made in the letter, should be > > nothing more than an exercise in apologetics for the Baha'i Faith. I > > have no quarrel with apologetics and its role in religion. But it has > > no place in academic studies where the truth claims of any tradition > > are beyond the purview of the academic endeavor to prove or disprove. > > These are matters of the spirit and the heart which are beyond the > > limitation of any methodology to understand. However, despite that > > limitation, methods are developed to help us understand the actualities > > of religion in historical and sociological contexts. Without such > > understanding, and the vital healthy criticism that can strengthen a > > faith community, religion eventually devolves into mere ritual, > > superstition, formality and authoritarianism. It may be true that there > > are some scholars who, even as people of faith, take what appears to be > > an extreme approach in the use of methodologies when studying religion. > > I can understand better those of my colleagues who claim no faith as > > their own or who even reject faith altogether, where in such cases it > > is appropriate to rely on "materialistic" methods. And I believe that > > to some extent an understanding is gained through such endeavors. > > Contrary to the statement in the April 7 letter, though, I have never > > met nor have I ever heard any scholar of religion claim that "religion > > itself can be adequately understood only through the use of an academic > > methodology." Indeed, it has been my experience that most are still not > > agreed on what constitutes a proper definition of religion. Yes, there > > are some who may claim to fully understand religion and who take an > > adversarial stance against anythng that would reflect an attitude of > > faith, but I have found, to the credit of the academy, that this is not > > reflective of all scholars. Most simply object to the attempt to inject > > ideas such as revelation or spirit into an academic discussion of > > religion, an objection with which I concur. It seems that the April 7 > > letter reveals a desire within Baha'i Administration to "have ones cake > > and eat it, too" for while it rejects these methodologies as "dogmatic > > materialism" it seeks to be accepted, on terms of its own making, into > > the very arena of discourse it so decries, an arena in which method, > > not revelation, is the tool used to understand religion. Yet, it is > > true that methods are simply tools which, like scholarship in general, > > have a proper and an improper use. Now one may not approve of the way > > an individual or individuals use their tools and is free to express > > that disapproval. But in doing so, one should not be surprised if they > > receive an equal amount of criticism for the manner in which they use > > their own tools! In this case, the April 7 letter from the House > > criticizes _what they perceive to be_ an improper use of methodologies. > > Is it any surprise, then, that some scholars who work with those > > methodologies, Baha'i and non-Baha'i, are critical of the application > > of something as subjective as revelation and faith in engaged academic > > discourse? I think not. Rather than seeking common ground and _on an > > active, daily basis, engaging in serious consultation _for the purpose > > of understanding each other_ both sides have become polarized, a > > situation exacerbated by this letter. It is unfortunate and not a > > little frightening to read this letter with its "us against them" tone > > so prominently displayed. More than that, it is saddening to see that > > the letter did not make any attempt to assure the NSA's to whom it was > > sent that this may not be a reference to all Baha'i academics. In light > > of the recent events in some parts of the U.S., where some individuals > > have been subjected to the indignity of an investigation because of > > their beliefs, one would suppose that such assurances would be included > > in the letter. While it may be argued that the letter was meant to be > > private, only for the NSA's, one should not be surprised that it turned > > up on the internet and that it caused such pain. More surprising than > > that, I believe, is the publishing of it in the latest edition of > > Baha'i Canada without any commentary or contextualization. Imagine the > > effect this will no doubt have on those who are already suspicious of > > academic methods and those that engage in academic study! More than the > > letter itself, I find this action particularly irresponsible. > > > > As I said above, I was shocked when I first read this letter. I > > was also very angry. And I suppose that in some measure I still am. But > > over the past few weeks consideration of the contents of this letter > > have caused Lisa and I to step back and reconsider some of the issues > > which concern us, particularly those with which we have struggled as > > members of the Baha'i Faith. The result has been a recognition that, > > despite our love for the Baha'i Faith, and for the many friends we have > > made as part of the Baha'i community, there are some issues which, if > > we are to be honest with ourselves and with the Baha'i Faith, call for > > an obedience which we cannot give. > > One of these, for me, is the issue of review, a process which I > > find repressive and distasteful as a scholar, and one to which I simply > > would not submit. Despite the assurances that it is only temporary, it > > is still a present reality which shows no sign of being abolished in > > the near future. > > Another is the ban on living as a practicing homosexual while a > > Baha'i. Both Lisa and I have always taken a clear stand on gay and > > lesbian rights. For us, that clearly meant that gays and lesbians have > > the right to live _completely_ in same-sex relationships, including > > marriage and child-rearing. Indeed, we can point to many gay friends > > who have marriage relationships which put many heterosexual marriages > > to shame and who are raising happy, well-adjusted children. It was not > > until after I became a Baha'i that I learned, on my own, of the > > teachings on this issue. I was dismayed, but tried to convince myself > > that I could live with this and could simply be quiet on the issue. > > Lisa became a Baha'i thinking that it would be easy enough to avoid the > > issue, and both of us held out hope that the Faith would soon change > > its stand on this issue. By the time it became a reality that this > > would not happen, we had convinced ourselves, or so we thought, that > > the issue wasn't important. Similarly, we had the same feelings > > concerning women serving on the House of Justice. > > But, over the past weeks, we have come to realize just how > > important these and other social matters are to us. We became convinced > > that the spiritual reality of the Mashriqu'l-Adkhar has been, for the > > most part, forgotten or ignored. Having been raised in a tradition in > > which I was, from my earliest years on, engaged in social welfare work, > > I find and Lisa doesas well, that I am uncomfortable with the spending > > of Baha'i funds for the Arc project while there are so many other ways > > in which they could be used to help so many who desperately need it. > > While I do not wish to be critical, I must express my doubt that the > > completion of the Arc will mean little to the single mother trying to > > raise children on her own or the homeless family who have no place to > > sleep other than unsafe shelters or cardboard boxes. And while some may > > say that we should use "individual initiative" in such matters (which > > we do), and while we grant there are many individual Baha'is who do > > such vital work, it must be acknowledged that Baha'is are a _community_ > > and as such should be addressing these issues as a body of believers on > > the local, national and international levels in equal measure to those > > of other traditions. > > Most distressing, though, has been the growing sense of fear that > > can be observed within certain parts of the Baha'i community. As an > > assistant, I have grown increasingly uncomfortable with the seeming > > need to keep track of and report on the activities of individuals, > > something which I initially thought to be necessary to protect the > > Covenant and serve the cause. But recent events have convinced Lisa and > > me that such practices, and especially the notion that anyone may at > > any time be "investigated," are out of keeping with both the teachings > > of Baha'u'llah and with who we are and what we believe about the > > essence of religion. Having been raised in a tradition in which I was > > constantly fearful of "losing my salvation" due to some action or > > thought, a notion with which I lived for much of my life, I will not > > allow such fear to again stifle the spiritual growth of myself or that > > of my family. > > Central to the Baha'i Faith is a trust in the institutions of the > > Administrative Order and, one would assume, a trust of the individual > > by the Administration. I have increasingly come to lose that trust in > > the Administrative Order, and especially with the release of this > > latest letter. Let me be clear, though, that this does not reflect in > > any way on the individual members of those institutions, most of whom I > > have never met. I am certain that they are all doing the best they can > > in their positions to administer the affairs of the Baha'i Faith in a > > faithful and honest manner, even as they are subject to human > > frailties, which we believe can indeed interfere with openness to and > > understanding of the Divine will, a human predicament with which we all > > wrestle. > > As a result of this recognition, we believe that it is best for us, > > and for the Baha'i Faith, to formally submit our resignation. In doing > > so, we recognize that there will be some who will, depsite anything we > > may say, accuse us of rejecting Baha'u'llah. However, as one's faith > > can be conditioned by no one but one's self, we want to make clear here > > that we still believe Baha'u'llah to be the Manifestation of God. Our > > relationship to and understanding of Baha'u'llah is something which we > > must work out for ourselves apart from "official" involvement within > > the Administrative Order. of the Baha'i Faith. I believe it is > > necessary to also state for the record, despite our resignation, we > > believe that, based on the evidence of the texts, it is clear that the > > legitimate authority for the Baha'i community is the Universal House of > > Justice whose seat is on Mt. Carmel and the Adminstrative Order in the > > various parts of the globe. We reject, simply based on facts, any > > pretense to authority of any other alleged "Baha'i" body or > > individuals. > > Most importantly, we believe that by resigning, we will avoid being > > a cause of disunity within the community. For were we to remain, we > > could not, in good conscience, remain silent about these and other > > issues which are important to us. > > Our purpose in writing this letter has been only to explain, > > perhaps at greater length than we initially desired, why we are taking > > this step. Our decision has been our own. There have been some close > > friends with whom we have discussed this matter and who have given us > > their honest advice. None of them have advised us to leave, some have > > suggested we stay and try to just "go about our business," but all of > > them have given their support and love and all will remain our close > > friends. We pray that this is true for all of you whom we have had the > > great bounty of knowing and still love with all our hearts. > > > > > > With warmest love, > > Paul and Lisa Dodenhoff > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, June 28, 1999 1:29 PM Subject: Re: Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 <> I have every right to speak my mind based on my 23-year observation of how the Bahai faith is run. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:3777857E.94CDFFD5@usa.net... > > > Just so that we have an uncluttered and clear statement > for the record: > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > [snip] > > > > > "Pure troll": I believe Bahais murdered Daniel Jordan. That's my > > opinion. I have every right to say so. It's a false stratagem to call > > it slander, etc. I don't know troll has to do with that. I say it openly > > and publicly and have explained elsewhere in detail why I believe > > so. > > [snip] > > What is the difference between a "false stratagem" and a > "true stratagem"? > > You know, we have dictionaries in Texas too. > > -saman > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 8:18 AM Subject: Re: Limited Bahai Minds and Short Sights This exchange demonstrates quiet well the double standards the Bahai fundamentalists are employing on talk.religion.bahai. If I or anyone else were to post everything in HTML, they'd go absolutely beserk about it but instead are now looking the other way. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:379b5e6d.333670535@news.newsguy.com... > On Mon, 28 Jun 1999 01:09:25 -0600, "Mesbah Javid" <11111174@3web.net> > wrote: > > (in response to my request to stop posting in HTML) > > Due to the fact that you have allowed yourself to tell > > others what to do, you are promted to the status of > > Mullahood. A certificate of Mullahood as well as a free > > turban is mailed to you as symbols of your leadership and > > authority. > > Interesting sense of humor you have there. > > If you would prefer to be inconsiderate to others, don't let me stop > you. > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (at home) > Confused about newsgroups? Visit ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 8:24 AM Subject: Re: Letter of resignation Juan Cole wrote in message news:7l89i8$m3a$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > Shoghi Effendi also warned against "extreme orthodoxy," which is part of > the "mean Baha'i" syndrome we witness in people like Misbah. What nice > thing has he said to anyone on this list? In what way has he emulated > `Abdu'l-Baha in any least attribute? At least he's shown all of us what so many Iranian Bahais are really like when they drop the pretense to "love" and "unity." Anyone with any sensitivity whatsoever will have often detected such "virtues" among the Iranians from their sneers and arrogance at feast and other "community" events. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 8:26 AM Subject: Re: Bahai Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 More Bahai "love" revealed for what it is really worth among Iranian Bahais, arrogant perverters of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:377775FE.229822C@earthlink.net... > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > What we have here is yet another attempt by a Bahai > > to frighten someone into silence. The fundamentalists > > are indeed a frustrated bunch.... > > Please post whatever you like as often as you like. > > University of Houston chemist Paul Chu only wished > his super-conducting materials were as malleable as you. > > -saman > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 8:27 AM Subject: Re: Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 <> Roger Reini wrote in message news:3778122a.15132779@news.newsguy.com... > Did you mean to attach the GIF file of your Baha'i ID card again? If > you did, please stop. As Kathy said, these newsgroups are not > appropriate for binary files. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 8:37 AM Subject: Re: REVISED: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits <> -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 29, 1999 9:14 AM Subject: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits <> ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 8:10 AM Subject: Re: Hooper Dunbar and Austin Powers macleod wrote in message news:930728580.3957.0.nnrp-09.c2de8324@news.demon.co.uk... > Wouldn't this whole controversy be over so much quicker if the Bahai Faith > was even slightly communicative about themselves. Imagine a short statement > from Mr. Dunbar, or his staff, indicating whether he does or does not > monitor various E-mails groups and clarifying which ones he regards as being > public and therefore open to such monitoring. > Another example. As it stands we have a statement from one assistant (Rick) > saying that he is never asked to collect information about an individual > Bahai. Another ex-assistant citing collecting such information as one of > the things he disliked. I, provisionally believe them both, but where does > it get us. Rick? Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha............... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > Why can't the Bahai Faith tell us in simple terms (not in vague quotes from > Shoghi Effendi) how many files it has on people, what kind of information > goes in there, who collects it, and what it is used for. The answers may be > utterly innocent but why aren't we told. > At the moment I think the Bahai Administration is interpreting 'independent > investigation of the truth' to mean 'you will get no help from us'. > I think it was Kathy who suggested that the UHJ should have an official > spokesperson on these newsgroups. Something like that is badly needed. > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 8:14 AM Subject: Re: Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 Are you going to send complaints about the HTML from what's his name too? You're such a nanny at times. You don't own or run Usenet. Wake up. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:7lakcd$13eb@drn.newsguy.com... > In article <7lae3v$kpb$1@news.laserlink.net>, "Patrick says... > > > (posted a .gif file again) > > You know Fred, you're just being a baby now. You wrote the > charter that said no binaries, remember? > > I'm going to be removing this from the Newsguy servers, as they > don't take cancels. I'd suggest you send cancels for all three > copies before a complaint is sent to your providers. > > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (home) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 8:17 AM Subject: Re: Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 You're missing the point. A particular Iraninan Bahai threatened me repeatedly with a lawsuit. My point again is that I am a member of the Bahai faith and anything I've said is a matter of conscience. My lawyer assures me suit would never even make to court given my membership card.... Of course the Nine Fascists could just kick me out of the faith the way they did with McKenny.... That would be a charming demonstration of their love and unity.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:37790624.0@vlinsvr... > Kathy Pascoe (kathy@scconsult.com) wrote: > : In article <7lae3v$kpb$1@news.laserlink.net>, "Patrick says... > : > > : (posted a .gif file again) > : > : You know Fred, you're just being a baby now. You wrote the > : charter that said no binaries, remember? > > I remember. Y'know, sometimes Fred is so amazing that I can't > help coming up with a little conspiracy theory of my own-- a > mirror image to his accusing others of being UHJ plants. What if > the House wanted to make critics of its actions, liberal Baha'is > generally too, look like a bunch of cranks and loonies? If > someone were deliberately setting out to create that impression, > and were paid lots of money to do it, I doubt they could do any > better than Fred is doing with shenanigans like today's. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 8:21 AM Subject: Re: Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 Gyr Falcon is a Bahai troll who periodical shows up when the fundamentalists feel especially frustrated. My advice: Ignore him. He's a non-entity. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Mr Mahdi wrote in message news:19990629201003.25274.00005416@ng-cm1.aol.com... > The Gyros is back!!!! > > > Given the strong mutual support and rapport between he and > >Mr. Mahdi, it seems apparent that that it is possible that Fred might be > >part of a cabal of fringe, fanatical Muslims who wish to discredit > >Baha'i. > > Gyros, before you go off in a trite attempt of a sense of humor rampage, you > need to view you religion in a intellectual fashion instead of a blind faith > I-love-the-bahai-faith for-life type of defense for a refutable religion. I do > not personally know Fred or even tried to contact Fred for anything except to > give him my TOSsed posts in the AOL bahai messages boards. Fred is the only > person here who happens to treat me with respect, something bahais because of > their cult like blind faith tend not to do. Fred treats people with respect, > and in my school of thought he gets respect from me in return. Fred happens to > be a independent thinker, something most bahais shun for some reason. Bahais > have harrassed the hell out of me through cyberspace because that is what > cowards who are too scared to face me in person like to do. You even had a > website mocking me and Fred because that is what cowards with trite and a > pitiful attempt at a sense of humor like to do in their spare time. I am > almost certain that you are a member of AOL, that you have contact with AOL > members, etc. Those are my "opinions," something I learned here to say more > often because I don't want no Scientolgy-like cultish coward threatening me > with some type of lawsuit. > > The bahai faith discredits itself. To me and the person with common sense it > is nothing but a New Age feel-good religion that mainly attracts middle to > upper class white yuppies and people who are extremely emotionally and > spiritually naive and gullible. If you knew anything about textual criticism, > refuting the bahai faith is like taking candy from a handicapped baby who is in > a coma. From the constant inconsistencies to the scientific, historical, and > logical blunders, bahais are nobodys in a world of 6 billion people. So this > notion of Muslims are out to get bahais is absurd. Since 1960 in America, 4 > million people converted to Islam from the streets, to the schools, to the > prison, etc. The bahai faith has been around for over 100 years and yet only > between 25,000 to 60,000 members exist in America. The bahai faith is nothing > but a cut and paste religion that the naive and gullible thinks its from God > because of the flowery catchy slogans and phrases bahais like to throw around. > > Also Gyros you need to ask yourself why bahais are notorious for censorship. I > have been to a lot of NGs and this is the only NGs where I see people > threatening lawsuits against each other. If you go to soc.religion.islam NG, > the moderators allow articles attacking Islam! But in the SRB, even a post > that is a little bit critical in my view is not even allowed! And yet these > threats of lawsuits are coming from a UNMODERATED NG! > > Mahdi > > https://members.aol.com/mrmahdi/opinions/index.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 8:23 AM Subject: Re: Character Assassination It's probably Rick Shaut out there in the bushes.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Michael McKenny wrote in message news:7lbflh$jta@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > > Greetings, Hooper and all. > Uhm, no, Hooper doesn't care about people lurking in your neighbour's > back yard. He cares about what your neighbour happens to be thinking and > saying, and especially whether he has fellows like Juan over to tea. The > fellow lurking with his ear up against the neighbour's house is Hooper, or > rather one of his agants, tape recorder and all. There have been places > and alas some may still linger where the police have time for such tasks, > but, as demonstrated the two who resigned here recently, ethics, morality > and spirituality are to be found elsewhere. > Take Care, Hooper, > Michael > > > "Rick Schaut" (RSSchaut@email.msn.NOSPAMcom) writes: > > If, during > > the normal course of your day, you happen to see a strange person lurking in > > your neighbor's back yard and should choose to report this happenstance to > > the police, you would be guilty of "spying" as Dr. Cole uses the term. > > > > Regards, > > Rick Schaut > > > > > > > -- > "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." > (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 8:25 AM Subject: Re: Letter of resignation Mesbah's response below is really quite revealing of the menatility and many Iranian Bahais harbor behind their facade of brotherly love.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Mesbah Javid <11111174@3web.net> wrote in message news:7lb3ns$asq$1@iceman.tac.net... > > Patrick Henry wrote in message > news:7ladu0$koi$1@news.laserlink.net... > | Anyone with any sensitivity whatsoever will have often > | detected such "virtues" among the Iranians from their > | sneers and arrogance at feast and other "community" > events. > > How is it that Persians as well as other immigrants from > other poor countires have to sustain the load of your > Western absolute arrogance, synicism, power-seeking > attitude, self-centeredness, materisalistic view of life, > superficial knowledge in the Baha'i Writings, boasting > constantly about your trifling achivements, looking down on > the peoples of so-called backward nations and constantly > infusing sense of inferiority in them in order to dominate > and manipulate them, being ready to give up your lives for > short-lived fame and name but not taking one single step in > serving the Cause of God,......; and when one of those > people from other nationalities shows some arrogance in > return to show you how your image look in the mirror of > others minds, then you cannot stand it for one single second > and start to lament and bemoan and complain and write > letters and articles.....? > If arrogance is so bad to you then first thing to do is > for the Westerns Baha'is to abolish it from among > themselves. > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 1:08 PM Subject: Re: Honesty Words that demonstrate how hypocritical the Nine Violators of Conscience have become. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Roger Reini wrote in message news:377a2c34.6830302@news.newsguy.com... > Since the current prefix for the periodic postings is "Dishonest" , > let's see what the Baha'i writings say about honesty: > > "O ye friends of God in His cities and His loved ones in His > lands! This Wronged One enjoineth on you honesty and piety. Blessed > the city that shineth by their light. Through them man is exalted, > and the door of security is unlocked before the face of all creation. > Happy the man that cleaveth fast unto them, and recognizeth their > virtue, and woe betide him that denieth their station." > > (Baha'u'llah: Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, Page: 23) > > Beautify your tongues, O people, with truthfulness, and adorn > your souls with the ornament of honesty. Beware, O people, that ye > deal not treacherously with any one. Be ye the trustees of God > amongst His creatures, and the emblems of His generosity amidst His > people. They that follow their lusts and corrupt inclinations, have > erred and dissipated their efforts. They, indeed, are of the lost. > Strive, O people, that your eyes may be directed towards the mercy of > God, that your hearts may be attuned to His wondrous remembrance, that > your souls may rest confidently upon His grace and bounty, that your > feet may tread the path of His good-pleasure. Such are the counsels > which I bequeath unto you. Would that ye might follow My counsels! > > (Baha'u'llah: Gleanings, Page: 297) > > Say: Honesty, virtue, wisdom and a saintly character redound to the > exaltation of man, while dishonesty, imposture, ignorance and > hypocrisy lead to his abasement. By My life! Man's distinction lieth > not in ornaments or wealth, but rather in virtuous behaviour and true > understanding. > (Baha'u'llah: Tablets of Baha'u'llah, Page: 57) > > Should any one of you enter a city, he should become a centre of > attraction by reason of his sincerity, his faithfulness and love, his > honesty and fidelity, his truthfulness and loving-kindness towards all > the peoples of the world, so that the people of that city may cry out > and say: `This man is unquestionably a Baha'i, for his manners, his > behaviour, his conduct, his morals, his nature, and disposition > reflect the attributes of the Baha'is.' Not until ye attain this > station can ye be said to have been faithful to the Covenant and > Testament of God. > (`Abdu'l-Baha: Selections ... `Abdu'l-Baha, Page: 71) > > If a man were to perform every good work, yet fail in the least > scruple to be entirely trustworthy and honest, his good works would > become as dry tinder and his failure as a soul-consuming fire. If, on > the other hand, he should fall short in all his affairs, yet act with > trustworthiness and honesty, all his defects would ultimately be > righted, all injuries remedied, and all infirmities healed. > (`Abdu'l-Baha: Trustworthiness, Pages: 339-340) > > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 1999 1:12 PM Subject: Re: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:377A15BD.254A91A3@earthlink.net... > > This is going beyond what is wise. It's Bahai wisdom to threaten other Bahais in perfectly good standing with bogus lawsuits? -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 01, 1999 9:07 AM Subject: Re: Dishonest: Bahai Threats of Lawsuit NB: No howls from the fundamentalists now about spam. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Mesbah Javid <11111174@3web.net> wrote in message news:7le5kp$jj3$1@iceman.tac.net... > The schism which their foolish leaders had contrived > so sedulously to produce within the Faith, will soon, to > their utter amazement, come to be regarded as a process of > purification, a cleansing agency, which, far from decimating > the ranks of its followers, reinforces its indestructible > unity, and proclaims anew to a world, skeptical or > indifferent, the cohesive strength of the institutions of > that Faith, the incorruptibility of its purposes and > principles, and the recuperative powers inherent in its > community life. [Shoghi Effendi] > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 01, 1999 9:32 AM Subject: Re: False allegation of email spamming (Re: Deceit: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits) Notice the Bahai troll "Kathy Pascoe" has, after slandering me yet again on news.groups, done nothing about my fellow Bahais once again framing me and casting aspersions on me and my publisher by fraudulently emailing people on news.groups. I expect news.groups will soon witness an attempt by the Bahai fundamentalists to undermine the charter for talk.religion.bahai in some way. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:378062a1.72540299@news.newsguy.com... > (talk.religion.misc removed from crosspost) > > On Thu, 24 Jun 1999 16:41:46 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > wrote: > > > The allegation that I or my publisher has sent EMAIL > > to any individuals regarding the publication of one of my > > books and its availability on Amazon.com is false. Neither > > I nor he have sent anyone any email whatsoever. > > > > You've become quite loose with your allegations. > > > > Shame on you. > > When you are capable of following community standards (netiquette), then > and only then will you be in any position to criticize someone else's > behavior in the newsgroups. > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (at home) ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 01, 1999 9:44 AM Subject: Re: Limited Bahai Minds and Short Sights My previous messages seems to have been lost in cyberspace so I shall repeat: you don't own or run Usenet and you're using a double standard. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:7lak5t$1336@drn.newsguy.com... > In article <7ladir$khh$1@news.laserlink.net>, "Patrick says... > > > >This exchange demonstrates quiet well the double standards > >the Bahai fundamentalists are employing on talk.religion.bahai. > >If I or anyone else were to post everything in HTML, they'd > >go absolutely beserk about it but instead are now looking > >the other way. > > First of all, I'm not a Baha'i fundamentalist, or a Baha'i of > any other stripe. > > Second, I could complain till the cows came home about Mesbah > posting in HTML, but his provider wouldn't do anything about it; > posting in HTML is not usually against AUPs. > > Third, you'll note that while I've complained here, I've not filed > a single complaint with your service providers, or bothered your > personal email box, because I've not found evidence that you have > wandered into the territory of cancellable spam. > > If you would post your set of FAQs with the same subject line every > time, and keep the 'technique' URL to a couple of times a week, you'll > never hear another word out of me. Deal? > > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (home) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 01, 1999 2:03 PM Subject: Re: Limited Bahai Minds and Short Sights My response to the Bahai troll Kathy Pascoe: "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Kathy Pascoe wrote in message news:7lg1dc$1ptd@drn.newsguy.com... > (reordered) > > In article <930836671.351.65@news.remarQ.com>, "Patrick says... > >Kathy Pascoe wrote in message > >news:7lak5t$1336@drn.newsguy.com... > >> Second, I could complain till the cows came home about Mesbah > >> posting in HTML, but his provider wouldn't do anything about it; > >> posting in HTML is not usually against AUPs. > > You seem to have missed this point. > > >> Third, you'll note that while I've complained here, I've not filed > >> a single complaint with your service providers, or bothered your > >> personal email box, because I've not found evidence that you have > >> wandered into the territory of cancellable spam. > > And this one as well. > > >> If you would post your set of FAQs with the same subject line every > >> time, and keep the 'technique' URL to a couple of times a week, you'll > >> never hear another word out of me. Deal? > > >My previous messages seems to have been lost in cyberspace > >so I shall repeat: you don't own or run Usenet and you're using > >a double standard. > > No, I don't own or run Usenet. However, I am capable of calculating > when a set of posts has exceeded the guidelines of cancellable spam. > You don't see it, but I am trying to *help you* avoid losing accounts. > If you would make a small modification to your posting behavior, > there would be nothing to complain about, and you would never > endanger your connectivity. > > -- > Kathy Pascoe ~ kathy@scconsult.com (home) > ---------- From: Juan Cole[SMTP:jrcole@umich.edu] Sent: Thursday, July 01, 1999 5:15 PM To: Fred Glaysher Subject: Re: letter of House THE UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE BAHA'I WORLD CENTRE Department of the Secretariat 7 April 1999 To all National Spiritual Assemblies Dear Baha'i Friends, Issues Related to the Study of the Baha'i Faith In May of 1998, Baha'i Canada reproduced a collection of letters which the Universal House of Justice had written to various individuals on the subject of the academic study of the Baha'i Faith. Copies of this compilation were subsequently mailed by the Canadian National Spiritual Assembly to its sister Assemblies. The reprint has now been made generally available in booklet form by the United States Baha'i Publishing Trust. The House of Justice has asked us to forward you a copy of the latter publication with the following comments. As a number of the friends are aware, a campaign of internal opposition to the Teachings is currently being carried on through the use of the Internet, a communications system that now reaches virtually every part of the world. Differing from attacks familiar in the past, it seeks to recast the entire Faith into a socio-political ideology alien to Baha'u'llah's intent. In the place of the institutional authority established by His Covenant, it promotes a kind of interpretive authority which those behind it attribute to the views of persons technically trained in Middle East studies. Early in 1996, the deliberate nature of the plan was revealed in an accidental posting to an Internet list which Baha'i subscribers had believed was dedicated to scholarly exploration of the Cause. Some of the people responsible resigned from the Faith when Counsellors pointed out to them the direction their activities were taking. A small number of others continue to promote the campaign within the Baha'i community. In the past, in situations of a somewhat similar nature, the patience and compassion shown by 'Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian helped various believers who had been misled by ill-intentioned persons to eventually free themselves from such entanglements. In this same spirit of forbearance the Universal House of Justice has intervened in the current situation only to the extent that has been unavoidable, trusting to the good sense and the goodwill of the believers involved to awaken to the spiritual dangers to which they are exposing themselves. Nevertheless, certain Counsellors and National Spiritual Assemblies are monitoring the problem closely, and the friends can be confident that whatever further steps are needed to protect the integrity of the Cause will be taken. As passages in the enclosed reprint make clear, this campaign of internal opposition -- while purporting to accept the legitimacy of the Guardianship and the Universal House of Justice as twin successors of Baha'u'llah and the Centre of His Covenant -- attempts to cast doubt on the nature and scope of the authority conferred on them in the Writings. When other Baha'is have pointed out that such arguments contradict explicit statements of the Master, persons ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To all National Spiritual Assemblies 7 April 1999 Page 2 behind the scheme have responded by calling into question the soundness of 'Abdu'l-Baha's own judgement and perspective. Gradually, these arguments have exposed the view of those involved that Baha'u'llah Himself was not the voice of God to our age but merely a particularly enlightened moral philosopher, one whose primary concern was to reform existing society. By itself, such opposition would likely stand little chance of influencing reasonably informed Baha'is. As one of the letters in the enclosed reprint (20 July 1997) points out, the scheme relies for effect, therefore, on exploiting the confusion created in modern thought by the reigning doctrines of materialism. Although the reality of God's continuous relationship with His creation and His intervention in human life and history are the very essence of the teachings of the Founders of the revealed religions, dogmatic materialism today insists that even the nature of religion itself can be adequately understood only through the use of an academic methodology designed to ignore the truths that make religion what it is. In general, the strategy being pursued has been to avoid direct attacks on the Faith's Central Figures. The effort, rather, has been to sow the seeds of doubt among believers about the Faith's teachings and institutions by appealing to unexamined prejudices that Baha'is may have unconsciously absorbed from non-Baha'i society. In defiance of the clear interpretation of 'Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian, for example, Baha'u'llah's limiting of membership on the Universal House of Justice to men is misrepresented as merely a "temporary measure" subject to eventual revision if sufficient pressure is brought to bear. Similarly, Shoghi Effendi's explanation of Baha'u'llah's vision of the future Baha'i World Commonwealth that will unite spiritual and civil authority is dismissed in favour of the assertion that the modern political concept of "separation of church and state" is somehow one that Baha'u'llah intended as a basic principle of the World Order He has founded. Particularly subtle is an attempt to suggest that the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar should evolve into a seat of quasi-doctrinal authority, parallel to and essentially independent of the Local House of Justice, which would permit various interests to insinuate themselves into the direction of the life processes of the Cause. Typically, when misrepresentations of the kind described are challenged, the reaction of those behind the campaign has been to claim that their civil rights are being threatened, an assertion that is of course meaningless in the light of the purely voluntary nature of Baha'i membership. Much emphasis is placed by them also on academic freedom, their view of which proves, on examination, to be merely freedom on their part to pervert scholarly discourse to the promotion of their own ideological agenda, while seeking to exclude from discussion features of the Baha'i Faith that are central to the Writings of its Founders. The effect of continued exposure to such insincerity about matters vital to humanity's well-being is spiritually corrosive. When we encounter minds that are closed and hearts that are darkened by evident malice, Baha'u'llah urges that we leave such persons to God and turn our attention to the opportunities which multiply daily for the promotion of the truths which He teaches. In words written at the direction of the Guardian, regarding a situation similar to, though much less serious than, the present one, " ... the friends should be advised to just leave these people alone, for their influence can be nothing but negative and destructive...." ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To all National Spiritual Assemblies 7 April 1999 Page 3 The enclosed material is being sent to your Assembly less out of concern over the immediate situation, which is being systematically addressed, than because of longer-term considerations to which it lends perspective. What we are currently seeing, in a relatively primitive form, is the emergence of a new kind of internal opposition to Baha'u'llah's Mission. While it will no doubt assume other features as time passes, it is a kind of opposition that takes aim directly at Baha'u'llah's assertion of the spiritual nature of reality and of humanity's dependence on the interventions of Divine Revelation. Developments of the kind described will come as no surprise to friends who are familiar with the Guardian's description of the successive waves of "crisis" and "victory" that have marked the history of the Faith ever since its inception. It is precisely this cyclical process, Shoghi Effendi says, that has propelled the steady unfoldment of Baha'u'llah's intent, testing our commitment to His Teachings, purifying His community, and releasing a greater measure of the capacities latent in His Revelation. That resistance to Baha'u'llah should now be emerging in yet a new guise is itself a tribute to the gathering strength of the Cause, offering the friends everywhere new opportunities for the deepening of their faith and the energizing of their work. With loving Baha'i greetings, ... For Department of the Secretariat Enclosure cc: International Teaching Centre ---------- From: MrMahdi@aol.com[SMTP:MrMahdi@aol.com] Sent: Friday, July 02, 1999 8:31 PM To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Newsgroups Hello Fred, I have checked and the Newsgroups (TRB, SRB, AND ARB) are listed. They are listed AFTER YOU took the appropriate actions in seeing justice is served. Fred, I would like to let you know that ultra-fundie Wendy Scott (WendyS9) sent me a letter of "apology." It is interesting to note that although this letter was addressed only to me, it was forwarded to over a dozen people. And on top of that, see blocked all of my e-mail address from AOL and Hotmail. Wendy has done this before only to recant on her promises "to change" on the same exact day! I would like to ask her why would you send me an e-mail, and then block ALL of my e-mail addresses so that I can't reply. To be honest with you, I wrote Wendy a very supporting letter that said I would forgive her completely if she changed. But I can't because like I said she had ALL of my e-mail addresses blocked. Fred, I like to a bit frank with you. You have tried diligently for many years in trying to raise awareness and see justice about your religion and in your religion. But unfortunately I believe that the people who are listening to your message with sincerity are a few whether they be on the NGs or on your very well-documented website. I believe that the help of mass media can really boost awareness of your cause to huge amounts of people from all walks of life. That's why I suggested several times that you should try to contact people in the media esp. from well-known media outlets. I believe your message and cause should be heard not by only few sincere people whom frequent the NGs or your website but by all of America and the world. Then I believe public awareness can make certain things change within the Bahai faith for the better due to public pressure and the trend of "politically correctness" that has been able to make a lot of changes in the world today. I also realize that it is VERY HARD just to get any well-known media outlet and let your message be heard. I realize this. But I believe through trying and having faith that someday maybe even now can be the time that somebody from the media will listen and give you the chance to convey what you need to convery to the public. But trying and trying hard is the key and I hope you decide to embark on such a mission. I am one of the few out of the people I hang around with that actually have a computer and can afford a computer. The reality is that more people have a TV than a computer, and if you direct your attention equally or more towards getting your message heard on TV then I truly believe you have reached a wider audience of people that the Internet could not. So keep up the good work and don't lose faith in what you are trying to achieve. ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Friday, July 02, 1999 5:39 PM To: Mr Mahdi Subject: Newsgroups Mr. Mahdi, Thanks for your recent posts to talk.religion.bahai. I'm wondering if talk.religion.bahai is still listed on AOL under Newsgroups on the main menu and whether or not Foster has dropped my posted messages from the Libraries. I'd appreciate it if you can find a moment to let me know. Thanks again, Fred ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, July 03, 1999 8:06 AM To: MrMahdi@aol.com Subject: Re: Newsgroups Thanks, but I've tried to reach the media a number of times during the polling for trb and they never paid any attention. Some significant development would have to take place for that to happen. I don't really know what it would require but just approaching them and asking them to take an interest in the fanaticism doesn't. Thanks for the update and good luck on AOL, Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: To: Sent: Friday, July 02, 1999 8:31 PM Subject: Re: Newsgroups > Hello Fred, > > I have checked and the Newsgroups (TRB, SRB, AND ARB) are listed. They are > listed AFTER YOU took the appropriate actions in seeing justice is served. > Fred, I would like to let you know that ultra-fundie Wendy Scott (WendyS9) > sent me a letter of "apology." It is interesting to note that although this > letter was addressed only to me, it was forwarded to over a dozen people. > And on top of that, see blocked all of my e-mail address from AOL and > Hotmail. Wendy has done this before only to recant on her promises "to > change" on the same exact day! I would like to ask her why would you send me > an e-mail, and then block ALL of my e-mail addresses so that I can't reply. > To be honest with you, I wrote Wendy a very supporting letter that said I > would forgive her completely if she changed. But I can't because like I said > she had ALL of my e-mail addresses blocked. > > Fred, I like to a bit frank with you. You have tried diligently for many > years in trying to raise awareness and see justice about your religion and in > your religion. But unfortunately I believe that the people who are listening > to your message with sincerity are a few whether they be on the NGs or on > your very well-documented website. I believe that the help of mass media can > really boost awareness of your cause to huge amounts of people from all walks > of life. That's why I suggested several times that you should try to contact > people in the media esp. from well-known media outlets. I believe your > message and cause should be heard not by only few sincere people whom > frequent the NGs or your website but by all of America and the world. Then I > believe public awareness can make certain things change within the Bahai > faith for the better due to public pressure and the trend of "politically > correctness" that has been able to make a lot of changes in the world today. > > I also realize that it is VERY HARD just to get any well-known media outlet > and let your message be heard. I realize this. But I believe through trying > and having faith that someday maybe even now can be the time that somebody > from the media will listen and give you the chance to convey what you need to > convery to the public. But trying and trying hard is the key and I hope you > decide to embark on such a mission. I am one of the few out of the people I > hang around with that actually have a computer and can afford a computer. > The reality is that more people have a TV than a computer, and if you direct > your attention equally or more towards getting your message heard on TV then > I truly believe you have reached a wider audience of people that the Internet > could not. > > So keep up the good work and don't lose faith in what you are trying to > achieve. > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, July 03, 1999 4:37 PM Subject: Re: Two Quotes for Mesbah I enjoyed reading the quotations. They reminded me of things I've read by Paul Tillich and Leszek Kolakowski. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7lliap$amc$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Dear Mesbah, > Since you seem to enjoy tossingout quotes in response to the opinions > of those with whom you disagree and have even called "enemies of the > Faith," here are two for you to ponder. > > "It is customary to blame secular science and anti-religious philosophy > for the eclipse of religion in modern society. It would be more honest > to blame religion for its own defeats. Religion declined not because it > was refuted but because it became irrelevant, dull, oppressive, > insipid. When faith is completely replaced by creed, worship by > discipline,love by habit; when the crisis of today is ignored because > of the splendor of the past; when faith becomes an heirloom rather than > a living fountain; when religion speaks only in the name of authority > rather than with the voice of compassion-its message becomes > meaningless." > -Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel > "What Ecumenism Is" in > "Moral Grandeur and Spiritual Audacity" > > "Nothing is gained to religion or the Church by attempts to cut of > investigation or to stifle honest opinions. Time was when this was > thought to be a Christian duty. There are, doubtless, some who think it > such still, who would shut up minds forever in their own narrow > enclosure, putting a barrier to the inquiry at the precise point which > they have reached, as if wisdom must die with them. To these every new > view of the wants or duties of the church is heresy, and all scrutiny > of an old one presumption. With such, we have no sympathy." > -John McClintock, Theologian > > In the above, substitute "Baha'i Faith" and "Baha'i" for the words > "religion," "Church," and "Christian." > > Paul S. Dodenhoff > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 1999 7:36 AM Subject: Re: Emerging from obscurity? We're not fundamentalists. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ macleod wrote in message news:931199290.9612.2.nnrp-09.c2de8324@news.demon.co.uk... > I may be way behind the times but this is the first version of this standard > joke which I have found in a non-Bahai context which makes mention of the > Faith. It seems to be on a few sites on the net at the moment. Are we > making it into any other popular jokes and if so how are we being portrayed? > > Toy-ism: > * Capitalism--He who dies with the most toys, wins. > * Hari Krishna--He who plays with the most toys, wins. > * Judaism--He who buys toys at the lowest price, wins. > * Catholicism--He who denies himself the most toys, wins. > * Anglican--They were our toys first. > * Greek Orthodox--No, they were OURS first. > * Branch Davidians--He who dies playing with the biggest toys, wins. > * Atheism--There is no toy maker. > * Polytheism--There are many toy makers. > * Evolutionism--The toys made themselves. > * Church of Christ, Scientist--We are the toys. > * Communism--Everyone gets the same number of toys, and you go straight to > the opposite of heaven if we catch you selling yours. > * Baha'i--All toys are just fine with us. > * Amish--Toys with batteries are surely a sin. > * Taoism--The doll is as important as the dump truck. > * Mormonism--Every boy may have as many toys as he wants. > * Voodoo--Let me borrow that doll for a second... > * Hedonsim--Hang the rule book! Let's play! > * 7th Day Adventist--He who plays with his toys on Saturday, loses. > * Church of Christ--He whose toys make music, loses. > * Baptist--Once played always played. > * Jehovah's Witnesses--He who "places" the most toys door-to-door, wins. > * Pentecostalism--He whose toys can talk, wins. > * Existentialism--Toys are a figment of your imagination. > * Confucianism--Once a toy is dipped in water, it is no longer dry. > * Non-denominationalism--We don't care where the toys came from, let's just > play. > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 1999 7:25 AM Subject: Re: (OT) Re: Netabuse - Update 6/26/99 Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Mark A. Foster wrote in message news:19990706134745.14826.00004555@ng-fi1.aol.com... > The April 7th letter from the Secretariat can be found here: > > https://www.markfoster.net/coverletter.html > > The compilation which the letter was written to accompany is here: > > https://www.markfoster.net/scholarship.html > > Mark A. Foster > owner@sociologist.com > RBCF Mark (on AOL only) ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 1999 7:46 AM Subject: Re: Two Quotes for Mesbah Paul Dodenhoff writes: "Most distressing, though, has been the growing sense of fear that can be observed within certain parts of the Baha'i community. As an assistant, I have grown increasingly uncomfortable with the seeming need to keep track of and report on the activities of individuals, something which I initially thought to be necessary to protect the Covenant and serve the cause. But recent events have convinced Lisa and me that such practices, and especially the notion that anyone may at any time be "investigated," are out of keeping with both the teachings of Baha'u'llah and with who we are and what we believe about the essence of religion." I would appreciate your commenting further on the *tracking* and *reporting* on the "activities of individuals." As an outspoken Bahai for more than 23 years, I have during the last three been the object of much slander and intrigue on the part of my fellow Bahais of a fundamentalist mindset, some of whom are members of the adminstration in one position or another. I too do not believe the KGB style of operation that has evolved was intended by Baha'u'llah and can only hope that openness about such matters in the long run will awaken the UHJ to the distortions it is now imposing on His Teachings. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7lmaas$gs2$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Dear Mesbah, > Excellent quotes, both of with which I am very familiar. Sad to say,it > is increasingly being stifled by the fundamentalist attitude that seems > to be growing with the Bahai Faith, and as evidenced by many of your > posts where people do indeed express different opinions. > Paul > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 1999 7:55 AM Subject: Re: Emerging from obscurity? Well, Michael, I think you've hit the nail on the head, as they say. The UHJ has really quite discredited itself in the many in which it has attacked scholars and intellectuals in its shamelessly fanatical April 1999 letter. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm It should not have surprised anyone familiar with the piece of trash it had the poor judgment to promulgate some years ago as a statement on individual rights, i.e., there are none. Religious history, alas, is the story of adherents betraying and falling short of the Founder's vision.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Michael McKenny wrote in message news:7lt6u9$99i@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > > Greetings, Patrick. > I believe that is the issue being decided. Is Baha'u'llah able to give > this and future generations a religion that appeals to those other than the > fundamentalist mindset? Had the leaders of the largest faction of Baha'is > held to the open-minded outlook instead of being so concerned with the > emphasis on being able to command infallibly any unconscienable thing they > could extract from a fundamentalist reading of literal text, then the > religion would be worthy of notice, in a beneficial sense. > Now, due to the old fashioned intolerant sway of fundamentalists in the > religion, it only bears watching, lest it replicate the harm such things > have inflicted upon humans in the past. > Here's a cup of tolerance, understanding and good will that whatsoever > comes to pass today, tomorrow and each day after that will cause people > to be thankful, grateful and appreciative to be alive. > Thrive Ever, > Michael > > "Patrick Henry" (patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com) writes: > > We're not fundamentalists. > > > > -- > "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." > (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, July 09, 1999 8:07 AM Subject: Re: Book recommendation You might want to check the review on Amazon.com below. It seems my fellow Bahais have been at work, perhaps. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Rituals in Babism and Baha'Ism (Pembroke Persian Papers) by Denis MacEoin Shopping with us is 100% safe. Guaranteed. Our Price: $65.00 Availability: This title usually ships within 2-3 days. Hardcover - 192 pages (February 1995) St Martins Pr (Short); ISBN: 1850436541 ; Dimensions (in inches): 0.83 x 9.50 x 6.37 Amazon.com Sales Rank: 527,933 Avg. Customer Review: Number of Reviews: 1 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Write an online review and share your thoughts with other readers! ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Customer Comments Average Customer Review: Number of Reviews: 1 A reader from United States , December 3, 1998 This book is for the student of Iranian Islamic history. This book title, "Rituals in Babism and Baha'ism" doesn't correctly give one a sense of early Babism or Baha'ism, since it main coverage is with Shiah Persian mysticism as it relates to some facets of Babi scripture and to some extent, Baha'i scripture. While this is relevent and intriguing, it is somewhat misleading in the sense that "rituals" as they exist in contemporary Baha'i practice are almost nonexistant. While Persian mystical forms deriving from Shiah Islam do exist in Babism, the religon is virtually extinct. The author does a fascinating job of identifying those elements of Iranian mysticism which are historical and relevent in a historical sense and which have played a role in Babi and Baha'i history, it is somewhat misleading to term these as "rituals". Despite the sociological use of the term, it would be more correct to say that the author describes mystical practices that influenced Iranian Islam and that later influence Babi history and were influential in some Baha'i writings. This book is not for the average reader, since it requires some familiarity with Shiah Islam and Babi and Baha'i history. However, even for those who are familiar with this context, the text is difficult to read. Baha'is may be puzzled by the perspective, Muslims may find the authors work more relevent as work of Shiah commentary, and others in Middle Eastern studies will find the work thought provoking but puzzling without complete know of Babi or Baha'i history A. Duran wrote in message news:378401B6.25646FA5@concentric.net... > Rituals in babism and Bahaism > > MacEoin, Denis > > (British Academic Press: London) 1994 > > ISBN 1-85043-654-1 > > A good review of historical Babi and early Bahai practices, many of > which have been supplanted by contemporary "western" reductionist > positivist practice. > > It is hoped that in future the Bahais will return to a ritual mysticism > practice similar to those of the Babis and early Bahais and grasp the > fuller esoteric content their writings. > > The book of course may be obtained from Amazon.com. > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, July 16, 1999 5:27 PM Subject: Re: Complaints about AOL Further documentation of Bahai censorship on AOL may be found at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ KatLiver9 wrote in message news:19990714140018.17900.00000177@ng-fi1.aol.com... > FYI, > If you complain about AOL on the Baha'i AOL boards the result is simple... > Mark Foster Deletes your post, > And then Mark Foster TOSes you. > It is quite incredible. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, July 17, 1999 8:22 AM Subject: Re: Interesting articles I appreciate the links you've provided on freedom of conscience. I've saved them and look forward to reading them when time allows. Looking quickly at the Bayle essay it reminds me of Roger Williams' writings. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7mkn4v$fg7$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Bayle on the Rights of Conscience > https://www.humanities.mq.edu.au/politics/wbay.html > > The Right to Heresy, by Mario Calderon > https://www.igc.org/csn/199804/heresy.html > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, July 17, 1999 8:24 AM Subject: Re: One area in which Liberty is Limited in the Baha'i Community > "One area in which liberty is limited in the Baha'i > community is that governing methods and channels for the > expression of criticism." > [UHJ] How similar an interpretation to the ayatollahs in Iran, who are busy now murdering people in the streets.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, July 17, 1999 8:30 AM Subject: RemarQ & arb/trb Some people might find the new version of this site useful: https://www.remarq.com/ -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, July 17, 1999 8:40 AM Subject: Re: Saddened Thank you, Michael, for having the patience to say all of this once again clearly for those who may be new here or just peeking in wondering what the Bahai faith is about, having perhaps read on paper the glorious vision, perverted so in reality by the UHJ.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Michael McKenny wrote in message news:7m7hht$jg3@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > > Greetings, Patrick. > When Juan is speaking from within the Baha'i Faith, then your words > will have meaning. These things did happen in the mid 90s. These people, > including Michael McKenny, so I know something about it, were pressured > to leave the Baha'i Faith, because of expressing their personal views on > private e-mail lists. And, it was not only that some prominent Baha'is as > individual list members flamed me and told me to leave this religion. It > was that there was official meeting and exchange of e-mail messages, and > then when I was too thick to get it and shut up, there was, without a > clear, "You must shut up or else," warning a bolt from the blue from the > UHJ saying that I was out of the Baha'i community. That was not quite two > years ago, so it is hardly the remote past I am raising. > The archives of this newsgroup contains references to other people who > were not so thick and who resigned as a result of the pressure brought to > bear on them, because they said what they thought. And, there are those > who have fallen silent. I do not see them posting here. > The threat is held over peoples' heads that the UHJ may call them CBs > and thus (what a wonderful, modern spiritual path is this) all the Baha'is > they've known will shun them as spiritual lepers. Yum. And, you think it is > unappetizing for me to write this. What is more unpalatable, the writing > down of this medieval recipe or the cooking of this stale meal? > I have been very busy doing other spiritual stuff during these past > few days, and only you would think otherwise as it was my holidays so I > could also spend a little more time here. I post here to demonstrate now > opinions may be posted openly, to deny the patriarchs a successful attempt > to silence me, but, as the holidays end it is not possible to maintain an > equal level of participation in what, frankly, I perceive as quite a sad > and oppressive place. There is that charming letter from the UHJ in April > of 1999 showing how the thinking of the UHJ about freedom of thought and > expression has not much changed. There is that holiday message which Juan > posted showing that people posting to a private e-mail list are having > their messages sent to Hooper, a member of the UHJ, whose holiday, if I > recall correctly, is to end on July 12, 1999, so it is not distant history > I am citing. There was the letter of resignation posted here only a month > or two ago, showing the same forces at play. > So, I wish you well, really, and hope that the environment in which > you grow and the food that is placed before your eyes is most worthy of > human beings in this modern age. I will continue to post here, and I will > continue to hope that what has such wonderful principles will soon see > them more closely followed. > And, remember you can hardly argue convincingly to me that things are > rosy within the Baha'i Faith, and these principles are being followed > until you have Juan speaking freely from within a harmonious group which > includes women ruling at the top. Do not be unclear. I write nothing about > my personal spiritual beliefs when I say this. I have been quite adequately > convinced that true spiritual harmony was more closely achieved by our > distant ancestors than by the monotheistic paradigm imposed and maintained > often quite oppressively upon them. This does not prevent any monotheistic > path from producing for those who'd follow it roses of fellowship, rather > than the thorny gruel of closed-minded, exclusivist fundamentalism. > May today find you very well, may tomorrow treat you even more kindly > and may each day after that be better than the one it succeeds. > All the Best, > Michael > > > (patk9018@my-deja.com) writes: > > > > I concur w/ Roger. The message is illogical and even distasteful. Its > > repetition fails to improve it. > > > > -- > "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." > (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, July 17, 1999 9:14 AM Subject: Re: Interesting articles I think too of Einstein's words: "The right to search for truth implies also a duty: one must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true." -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7mkn4v$fg7$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Bayle on the Rights of Conscience > https://www.humanities.mq.edu.au/politics/wbay.html > > The Right to Heresy, by Mario Calderon > https://www.igc.org/csn/199804/heresy.html > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, July 17, 1999 9:25 AM Subject: Re: Interesting articles Another fine quotation that comes to mind: "Almighty God hath created the mind free. All attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burthens . . . are a departure from the plan of the holy author of our religion . . . No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship or ministry or shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but all men shall be free to profess and by argument to maintain, their opinions in matters of religion." --Thomas Jefferson -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Patrick Henry wrote in message news:7mpvik$pi5$1@news.laserlink.net... > I think too of Einstein's words: > > "The right to search for truth implies also a duty: one must > not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true." > > -- > Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > wrote in message > news:7mkn4v$fg7$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > Bayle on the Rights of Conscience > > https://www.humanities.mq.edu.au/politics/wbay.html > > > > The Right to Heresy, by Mario Calderon > > https://www.igc.org/csn/199804/heresy.html > > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. > > ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Saturday, July 17, 1999 6:14 PM To: darricke@hotmail.com Subject: Your site Congratulations. Interesting. You're more technically adept than I am too. Good luck. You may find yourself increasingly attacked if my experience is anything to judge by. Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, July 18, 1999 9:39 AM Subject: Re: Deception: Bahai UHJ "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." --Thomas Jefferson -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ macleod wrote in message news:932242760.15825.0.nnrp-07.c2de8324@news.demon.co.uk... > I notice it is now almost a year since you sent this to the UHJ. Did you > ever get an answer? > > > Patrick Henry wrote in message <931518627.041.76@news.remarQ.com>... > >From: FG > >To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; > >bahai-faith @ makelist.com > >Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 > >Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM > >July 24,1998 > > > >Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: > > > >As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet > > snip > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, July 19, 1999 6:54 AM Subject: Re: Where's the Troops? It's quite revealing too that the "anti-Western rant" comes from an Iranian Bahai. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Michael McKenny wrote in message news:7msj4o$qmm@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > > Greetings, Hooper. > Here is one more anti-Western rant, and it is completely incorrect. > Any unbiased look at North America will see that there is enormous > spiritual vitality on this Continent, if you are not so biased and close- > minded that you equate spirituality with Baha'i. > All the Best, > Michael > > > "Mesbah Javid" (11111174@3web.net) writes: > > > > "Entry by Troops" is to be considered on the level of > > the "planet", and not in the level of a "spirituall dead > > community" like USA and Canada. > > In the worldwide level, "Entry by Troops" is fast > > advancing forward. > > > > > -- > "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." > (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) > ---------- From: Darrick Evenson[SMTP:darricke@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 19, 1999 9:05 AM To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Your site Fred, Thanks. I'm not worried about attacks. I'm not a Baha'i. There's nothing they can do to me. Darrick Evenson >From: "Fred Glaysher" >Reply-To: "Fred Glaysher" >To: >Subject: Your site >Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 18:14:46 -0400 > >Congratulations. Interesting. You're more technically adept than I am too. > >Good luck. You may find yourself increasingly attacked if my experience >is anything to judge by. > >Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm >Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > > _______________________________________________________________ Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit https://www.msn.com ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 6:55 AM Subject: Re: Darrick Evenson reveals his real nature Mesbah Javid <11111174@3web.net> wrote in message news:7mvoof$6vh$1@iceman.tac.net... > Darrick Evenson reveals his real nature Mesbah reveals yet again he's an Iranian Bahai.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 5:44 PM Subject: Re: The Pickering Tape (BAHAI) Can you post a transcript of the tape on talk.religion.bahai? I'd very much like to receive a copy of it so that when my fellow Bahais who are fanatics sue me I might submit portions of it to the judge and jury as further evidence of the corruption rampant in the Bahai faith which I and others are merely using our constitutional guarantee of free speech to expose. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7n3ke8$i6r$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > : > > What is it? Details welcome. > > > > Dear Paul Johnson, > > The Pickering Tape is the taped conversation between a Mr. Pickering > (an owner of a travel agency) and Judge James Nelson and Robert C. > Henderson of the US NSA recorded sometime in 1991. In it James Nelson > and Bob Henderson proceed to threaten Pickering to withdraw a limited > service he had put together for those who could not otherwise afford > the overpriced 1992 NYC Baha'i World Congress package of the US NSA. > The tape is very revealing of the sort of sleazy activity the Baha'i > administration is capable of. And had Pickering taken the taped > conversation to the Justice Department at the time, the US NSA (and > especially Robert Hendrson and James Nelson) could very well have been > prosecuted for conspiracy and commiting monopolistic business practices. > > Berekiah Zarco > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 1999 5:48 PM Subject: Re: Complaints about AOL This is an utterly false characterization of the censorship that indeed exists on AOL and a clear attempt at damage control. See https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm https://209.185.176.10/~fglaysher/AOLcensorship.txt Pure "Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ RMckin6046 wrote in message news:19990720231132.16711.00000408@ng-fw1.aol.com... > I'm sorry. I normally just read / lurk here, but I could not let this one pass > uncommented on. > > Christine [KatLiver] wrote: > > >FYI, > >If you complain about AOL on the Baha'i AOL boards the result is simple... > Mark Foster Deletes your post, And then Mark Foster TOSes you. It is quite > incredible.<< > > This is not true. Christine herself has posted many complaints, diatribes, > insults and attacks on AOL that have not been deleted. She has had posts > deleted for violating TOS rules, but her many other posts attacking and arguing > belie her statements here. I share this since so many of you do not visit AOL > and cannot know for yourselves. > > I don't agree with Mark Foster on some issues. And, I don't think that the TOS > rules have been consistently enforced. Nor do I agree with the stance of AOL > and Foster that Baha'is should be "cut more slack" on AOL's Baha'i Faith Forum > than non-Baha'is are. After all, TOS is TOS. Personal attacks are personal > attacks. Cussin' is cussin'. It doesn't matter who does it. > > However, in all of AOLs Spirituality Forums, the "Host Religion" gets cut more > slack. The terms of service do state that the Forums are for the support of > the religions listed and not for attacking them. Nevertheless, Christine and > Mahdi and others have consistently and openly attacked the Baha'is & the Baha'i > Faith on the Baha'i Forum without being TOSed and without being deleted. They > are not being censored. They are being argumentative. As far as I am > concerned, that is their right. But, it bugs me to see them so mischaracterize > the situation for you. > > Richard > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 6:34 AM Subject: Re: The Pickering Tape (BAHAI) I don't recall ever reading the Pickering Tape in the Talisman archives. Perhaps you could send me the tape through snail mail or email me the copy from Talisman if you know where to find it there. I'd appreciate it. Given the low and dirty tricks my fellow Bahais have so often resorted to in their attempt to suppress free speech and conscience, I'm not as confident as you are that they won't try to sue me and want all the insurance I can get. Besides, I'm genuinely interested in the Pickering Tape as another instance of Bahai deceit and abuse of power. I'd also like to add a copy of it to my website so that others might have access to it and be able to decide for themselves. I'd appreciate anyone's help on this one. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7n6ken$m29$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > Can you post a transcript of the tape on talk.religion.bahai? > > I'd have to sit and listen to the tape and transcribe the entire > conversation word for word. But I'm pretty sure a transcription already > exists of it since I remember someone posting a transcription some years > back on Talisman I. > > > I'd very much like to receive a copy of it so that when my fellow > > Bahais who are fanatics sue me I might submit portions of it to > > the judge and jury as further evidence of the corruption rampant > > in the Bahai faith which I and others are merely using our > > constitutional guarantee of free speech to expose. > > Dear Patrick, no Baha'i administration will be able to sue you as things > stand right now. The last time they tried something like it (i.e. with > Ahmad Sohrab) they lost big time and looked totally foolish in the eyes > of the thinking world, and I'm sure the Baha'i authorities do not want > more bad pr than they've already gotten. Besides they don't even have > the sort of financial muscle that the Church of Scientology regularly > uses against its dissidents - at least not yet. They will probably keep > trying to intimidate you into silence (as they already seem to have > tried). Just keep your chin up, stick to verifiable facts, accounts of > others as well as personal impressions and no one can touch you. I > wouldn't be worried. The internet has changed everything. > > Berekiah Zarco > > > > -- > > Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > > > wrote in message > news:7n3ke8$i6r$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > : > > > > What is it? Details welcome. > > > > > > > > > > Dear Paul Johnson, > > > > > > The Pickering Tape is the taped conversation between a Mr. Pickering > > > (an owner of a travel agency) and Judge James Nelson and Robert C. > > > Henderson of the US NSA recorded sometime in 1991. In it James > Nelson > > > and Bob Henderson proceed to threaten Pickering to withdraw a > limited > > > service he had put together for those who could not otherwise afford > > > the overpriced 1992 NYC Baha'i World Congress package of the US NSA. > > > The tape is very revealing of the sort of sleazy activity the > Baha'i > > > administration is capable of. And had Pickering taken the taped > > > conversation to the Justice Department at the time, the US NSA (and > > > especially Robert Hendrson and James Nelson) could very well have > been > > > prosecuted for conspiracy and commiting monopolistic business > practices. > > > > > > Berekiah Zarco > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > > > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 6:35 AM Subject: Re: The Pickering Tape (BAHAI) I don't recall ever reading the Pickering Tape in the Talisman archives. Perhaps you could send me the tape through snail mail or email me the copy from Talisman if you know where to find it there. I'd appreciate it. Given the low and dirty tricks my fellow Bahais have so often resorted to in their attempt to suppress free speech and conscience, I'm not as confident as you are that they won't try to sue me and want all the insurance I can get. Besides, I'm genuinely interested in the Pickering Tape as another instance of Bahai deceit and abuse of power. I'd also like to add a copy of it to my website so that others might have access to it and be able to decide for themselves. I'd appreciate anyone's help on this one. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7n6ken$m29$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > Can you post a transcript of the tape on talk.religion.bahai? > > I'd have to sit and listen to the tape and transcribe the entire > conversation word for word. But I'm pretty sure a transcription already > exists of it since I remember someone posting a transcription some years > back on Talisman I. > > > I'd very much like to receive a copy of it so that when my fellow > > Bahais who are fanatics sue me I might submit portions of it to > > the judge and jury as further evidence of the corruption rampant > > in the Bahai faith which I and others are merely using our > > constitutional guarantee of free speech to expose. > > Dear Patrick, no Baha'i administration will be able to sue you as things > stand right now. The last time they tried something like it (i.e. with > Ahmad Sohrab) they lost big time and looked totally foolish in the eyes > of the thinking world, and I'm sure the Baha'i authorities do not want > more bad pr than they've already gotten. Besides they don't even have > the sort of financial muscle that the Church of Scientology regularly > uses against its dissidents - at least not yet. They will probably keep > trying to intimidate you into silence (as they already seem to have > tried). Just keep your chin up, stick to verifiable facts, accounts of > others as well as personal impressions and no one can touch you. I > wouldn't be worried. The internet has changed everything. > > Berekiah Zarco > > > > -- > > Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > > > wrote in message > news:7n3ke8$i6r$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > : > > > > What is it? Details welcome. > > > > > > > > > > Dear Paul Johnson, > > > > > > The Pickering Tape is the taped conversation between a Mr. Pickering > > > (an owner of a travel agency) and Judge James Nelson and Robert C. > > > Henderson of the US NSA recorded sometime in 1991. In it James > Nelson > > > and Bob Henderson proceed to threaten Pickering to withdraw a > limited > > > service he had put together for those who could not otherwise afford > > > the overpriced 1992 NYC Baha'i World Congress package of the US NSA. > > > The tape is very revealing of the sort of sleazy activity the > Baha'i > > > administration is capable of. And had Pickering taken the taped > > > conversation to the Justice Department at the time, the US NSA (and > > > especially Robert Hendrson and James Nelson) could very well have > been > > > prosecuted for conspiracy and commiting monopolistic business > practices. > > > > > > Berekiah Zarco > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > > > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 6:47 AM Subject: Re: Deception: Bahai UHJ "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." --Thomas Jefferson -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ macleod wrote in message news:932242760.15825.0.nnrp-07.c2de8324@news.demon.co.uk... > I notice it is now almost a year since you sent this to the UHJ. Did you > ever get an answer? > > > Patrick Henry wrote in message <931518627.041.76@news.remarQ.com>... > >From: FG > >To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; > >bahai-faith @ makelist.com > >Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 > >Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM > >July 24,1998 > > > >Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: > > > >As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet > > snip > > ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 7:13 AM To: Juan Cole Subject: Pickering Tape Juan, Recent discussion has made mention of "The Pickering Tape" and that it's on Talisman somewhere. I'd appreciate your forwarding a copy of it to me if possible. Thanks. Fred ---- I don't recall ever reading the Pickering Tape in the Talisman archives. Perhaps you could send me the tape through snail mail or email me the copy from Talisman if you know where to find it there. I'd appreciate it. Given the low and dirty tricks my fellow Bahais have so often resorted to in their attempt to suppress free speech and conscience, I'm not as confident as you are that they won't try to sue me and want all the insurance I can get. Besides, I'm genuinely interested in the Pickering Tape as another instance of Bahai deceit and abuse of power. I'd also like to add a copy of it to my website so that others might have access to it and be able to decide for themselves. I'd appreciate anyone's help on this one. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7n6ken$m29$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > Can you post a transcript of the tape on talk.religion.bahai? > > I'd have to sit and listen to the tape and transcribe the entire > conversation word for word. But I'm pretty sure a transcription already > exists of it since I remember someone posting a transcription some years > back on Talisman I. > > > I'd very much like to receive a copy of it so that when my fellow > > Bahais who are fanatics sue me I might submit portions of it to > > the judge and jury as further evidence of the corruption rampant > > in the Bahai faith which I and others are merely using our > > constitutional guarantee of free speech to expose. > > Dear Patrick, no Baha'i administration will be able to sue you as things > stand right now. The last time they tried something like it (i.e. with > Ahmad Sohrab) they lost big time and looked totally foolish in the eyes > of the thinking world, and I'm sure the Baha'i authorities do not want > more bad pr than they've already gotten. Besides they don't even have > the sort of financial muscle that the Church of Scientology regularly > uses against its dissidents - at least not yet. They will probably keep > trying to intimidate you into silence (as they already seem to have > tried). Just keep your chin up, stick to verifiable facts, accounts of > others as well as personal impressions and no one can touch you. I > wouldn't be worried. The internet has changed everything. > > Berekiah Zarco > > > > -- > > Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > > > wrote in message > news:7n3ke8$i6r$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > : > > > > What is it? Details welcome. > > > > > > > > > > Dear Paul Johnson, > > > > > > The Pickering Tape is the taped conversation between a Mr. Pickering > > > (an owner of a travel agency) and Judge James Nelson and Robert C. > > > Henderson of the US NSA recorded sometime in 1991. In it James > Nelson > > > and Bob Henderson proceed to threaten Pickering to withdraw a > limited > > > service he had put together for those who could not otherwise afford > > > the overpriced 1992 NYC Baha'i World Congress package of the US NSA. > > > The tape is very revealing of the sort of sleazy activity the > Baha'i > > > administration is capable of. And had Pickering taken the taped > > > conversation to the Justice Department at the time, the US NSA (and > > > especially Robert Hendrson and James Nelson) could very well have > been > > > prosecuted for conspiracy and commiting monopolistic business > practices. > > > > > > Berekiah Zarco > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > > > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 4:15 PM Subject: Re: FRAUD: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Careful, thoughtful observers should consider the tone and attitude of the Iranian Bahai who wrote the message below. How ironic that no more than 15 minutes ago, on National Public Radio, a Bahai on a talk show denounced the Iranian government for its abuse of human rights. The truth is that Iranian Bahais, who own and control the Bahai faith, by and large, for themselves, are indeed no better than the mullahs and other fanatics in Iran. How sad that the universal house of "justice" has utterly perverted the Teachings of Baha'u'llah so much that fanatics believe they're justified in abusing other Bahais and non-Bahais in this manner. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ The message below Mesbah Javid <11111174@3web.net> wrote in message news:7n7gnb$mvr$1@iceman.tac.net... > Patrick Henry wrote in message > news:932641040.885.96@news.remarQ.com... > | Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, > > They found you worthless and are not sueing you anymore. > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 4:27 PM Subject: Re: Deception: Bahai UHJ All of the more than 30 messages on my website to the UHJ were acknowledged as received by their autoresponder, the confirmations from which may be found in my archives for the appropriate dates. The despots on Carmel have chosen to work through their lackies to threaten and intimadate me and others. There are a number of current examples on trb you may have noticed. It is one of the Bahai techniques to pretend to ignore what they don't want to hear. My fellow Bahais then flatter themselves that because they have their heads in the sand their bare asses can't be seen.... This method appears to emanate from the fanatics on the uhj. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ macleod wrote in message news:932666582.4919.0.nnrp-01.c2de8324@news.demon.co.uk... > I was genuinely interested in whether you got an answer or not. There has > been a claim made on srb recently that the UHJ answer all letters they > receive from Bahais. I thought I had read on your Web-site that an earlier > letter of yours was unanswered but I can't find that now. I am not > concerned over the contents of your answer and of course respect your > privacy if you prefer not even to mention if you got one, but if you have no > objection to me knowing I would be interested. > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 22, 1999 4:36 PM Subject: Re: FRAUD: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Let me add I am a Bahai in perfectly good standing but have constantly had my human rights violated by the fundamentalists who have hamstrung Baha'u'llah's Revelation, while the uhj conspires and looks the other way.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Patrick Henry wrote in message news:7n7u4d$eao$1@news.laserlink.net... > Careful, thoughtful observers should consider > the tone and attitude of the Iranian Bahai who > wrote the message below. How ironic that no more > than 15 minutes ago, on National Public Radio, a > Bahai on a talk show denounced the Iranian government for > its abuse of human rights. The truth is that Iranian Bahais, > who own and control the Bahai faith, by and large, for > themselves, are indeed no better than the mullahs and > other fanatics in Iran. > > How sad that the universal house of "justice" has > utterly perverted the Teachings of Baha'u'llah so much > that fanatics believe they're justified in abusing other > Bahais and non-Bahais in this manner. > > -- > Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > > The message below > Mesbah Javid <11111174@3web.net> wrote in message > news:7n7gnb$mvr$1@iceman.tac.net... > > Patrick Henry wrote in message > > news:932641040.885.96@news.remarQ.com... > > | Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, > > > > They found you worthless and are not sueing you anymore. > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, July 23, 1999 8:19 AM Subject: Re: The Pickering Tape (BAHAI) Tell us more about the Pickering Tape. Or can you provide some excerpts? How was it recorded? Any details you can add would be interesting, short of a full transcription. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7n6ken$m29$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > Can you post a transcript of the tape on talk.religion.bahai? > > I'd have to sit and listen to the tape and transcribe the entire > conversation word for word. But I'm pretty sure a transcription already > exists of it since I remember someone posting a transcription some years > back on Talisman I. > > > I'd very much like to receive a copy of it so that when my fellow > > Bahais who are fanatics sue me I might submit portions of it to > > the judge and jury as further evidence of the corruption rampant > > in the Bahai faith which I and others are merely using our > > constitutional guarantee of free speech to expose. > > Dear Patrick, no Baha'i administration will be able to sue you as things > stand right now. The last time they tried something like it (i.e. with > Ahmad Sohrab) they lost big time and looked totally foolish in the eyes > of the thinking world, and I'm sure the Baha'i authorities do not want > more bad pr than they've already gotten. Besides they don't even have > the sort of financial muscle that the Church of Scientology regularly > uses against its dissidents - at least not yet. They will probably keep > trying to intimidate you into silence (as they already seem to have > tried). Just keep your chin up, stick to verifiable facts, accounts of > others as well as personal impressions and no one can touch you. I > wouldn't be worried. The internet has changed everything. > > Berekiah Zarco > > > > -- > > Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > > > wrote in message > news:7n3ke8$i6r$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > : > > > > What is it? Details welcome. > > > > > > > > > > Dear Paul Johnson, > > > > > > The Pickering Tape is the taped conversation between a Mr. Pickering > > > (an owner of a travel agency) and Judge James Nelson and Robert C. > > > Henderson of the US NSA recorded sometime in 1991. In it James > Nelson > > > and Bob Henderson proceed to threaten Pickering to withdraw a > limited > > > service he had put together for those who could not otherwise afford > > > the overpriced 1992 NYC Baha'i World Congress package of the US NSA. > > > The tape is very revealing of the sort of sleazy activity the > Baha'i > > > administration is capable of. And had Pickering taken the taped > > > conversation to the Justice Department at the time, the US NSA (and > > > especially Robert Hendrson and James Nelson) could very well have > been > > > prosecuted for conspiracy and commiting monopolistic business > practices. > > > > > > Berekiah Zarco > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > > > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 6:33 AM Subject: Re: Hooper Dunbar and Austin Powers The real slanders are Bahais like Ms. Maneck. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm Garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Smaneck wrote in message news:19990724222907.28518.00002076@ng-ch1.aol.com... > Kathy writes: > > >. If I were Baha'i and were posting such that someone > >was concerned enough to forward to a Counselor, at a maximum, I would > >expect that person to talk to me about it first. > > Dear Kathy, > > I doubt very much if what was being forwarded was written by a Baha'i. Juan > mentions and slanders members of the House of Justice by name on a regular > basis. I think people have a right to know when they are being talked about > this way. When people mention me on this list, it usually gets forwarded to me > if I'm not participating at the time. > > > Susan Stiles Maneck > History, Stetson University ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 6:43 AM Subject: Re: The Pickering Tape (BAHAI) It appears Ms. Maneck's thinking may be why sue when one can defame, harass, and slander for free? Dispassionate observers won't fail to perceive the animosity behind her postings. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm Garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Smaneck wrote in message news:19990724171528.22474.00001623@ng-cg1.aol.com... > >The last time they tried something like it (i.e. with > >Ahmad Sohrab) they lost big time and looked totally foolish in the eyes > >of the thinking world, and I'm sure the Baha'i authorities do not want > >more bad pr than they've already gotten. > > Not so. A very similiar suit was filed against the Remeyites which the National > Spiirtual Assembly won. But there is no sense in bleeding blood out of a stone > and sense Dr. Glaysher has no academic position, and perhaps no livelihood, > what would be the sense in suiing him? > Susan Stiles Maneck > History, Stetson University ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 6:54 AM Subject: Re: Letter of resignation Those unfamiliar with it might want to note that Juan Cole has written an excellent, detailed response to the uhj's "outburst of vehement ingnorance." Paul Dodenhoff's response is quite eloquent as well. Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Smaneck wrote in message news:19990724162711.22476.00001860@ng-cg1.aol.com... > >Clearly there has been no reaction from the UHJ to the swell of > >criticism here, so they clearly don't care much > > Dear Ron, > > In fact they do care, very much. When they realized that one believer > mistakenly believed that part of this message applied to him they sent him a > letter the very next day, unasked, to assure him this was not the case. As to > the larger issues which have been raised on several e-mail lists regarding the > implications of this letter, these will likely require extensive consultation > on the part of the House of Justice. During the summer months members of that > body are often on vacation and unavailable. Aside from that, they have not yet > received a letter explicitly laying out people's concerns. As you know I am > preparing one at this time. It behooves us to observe patience in this matter > and await their answer. > Susan Stiles Maneck > History, Stetson University ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 7:00 AM To: Juan Cole Subject: Maneck's back on trb, slams you below: Paul writes in regards to the investigation which Terry was subjected to: >what was the House response? To say "Gee, >maybe you should examine the way you say things, Mr. Culhane." I am >paraphrasing here, but you know as well as I that that was their >response to Terry's letter. Paul, you are paraphrasing a single sentence, phrased in the most tentative of terms, of a letter from the House of Justice that spent paragraphs saying that things had been done wrong in Terry's case and would be corrected. >Terry I am sure still has the letter. Indeed he does, as do I. In regards to the ABM you wrote: >This is akin to the moving of a Catholic >priest who abuses children to another parish instead of kicking his >butt out and turning him over to the authorities! No, it is not. The ABM in question believed he was doing what he was supposed to be doing, however misguided his understanding was. Now we can be punitive and kick such people out, but what will we achieve? We will get some other overly-zealous Baha'i in who will make the same mistakes because he hasn't learned the lessons which the previous one has. >You asked >me to write a letter in support of Terry. Indeed, I did. And you know full well all the efforts I went through to put a stop to this. And as you know, by working with the Institutions (instead of making and expose) we did put a stop to it and Terry received an apology from the Counselor and from the Universal House of Justice. Note that Terry is not only still within the Baha'i community today but is filled with more confidence and faith than I have ever seen him. That wasn't easy, because at first Terry was reluctant to accept even an apology from the House. It took literally hours of effort on the part of two Counselors to bring healing into that situation. But the point is that both the Counselors and the Hosue took that effort to do that.For the resources that were expended in this effort it began to look like a project of "Saving Private Ryan." >As I recall, I first >heard about this crisis between academics and the AO at the Irfan >Colloqium in Wilmette a couple of years ago. At that time, you were >irate at the treatment Juan and others were receiving. That anger >continued and was *very* evident in Teaneck at the meeting I helped >arrange between Counselor Abdu'l-Missagh Ghadirian and ABM Gene Andrews By the time the Teaneck meeting rolled around I understood what the problem with Juan & Co. was and why the Institutions had taken the stand they did. I was still concerned about the level of scholar-baiting in the community and still felt that this played a role in creating people like Juan. I still believe that is true and I continue to work with the Institutions to change that climate. >how you >have made a 180 degree turn from what you were saying not so long ago. It was hardly a 180 degree turn from when you saw me at Teaneck or in Chicago. I suppose you could say it was 180 degrees from where I was at immediately following Juan's withdrawal from the Faith. I believe you know that the reason for this change is largely the result of my intensive association with Juan as moderator of H-Bahai and the extent I realized the truth of the House's accusation that he was pursuing an ideological agenda. You met me immediately after I received the July 20 letter from the House. While at that time, I was unhappy with Juan's attempts at politicizing the list, I was egually unsatisfied with the letter of the House and felt they had misread these people's motivations. The House was basically telling me I was being handed a bunch of manure. I had to get my nosed rubbed in it for an additional six months before I believed them. By the time of the Teaneck meeting in Feb. of last year, I had gotten the drift. But there was still the problem of scholar baiting within the community which created academics with attitudes like Juan's. It was towards that that my frustration was aimed. What I found is t hat Counselor Ghadirian and Gene Andrews listened very sympathetically to our problems and were determined to do all in their power to redress these problems. >At that time, you had little respect or love for Steve Birkland and his >shenanigans yourself as I recall. Since you have brought Terry Culhane's name into the picture, I will tell you what happened between Steve Birkland and myself. As you know, Steve Birkland came to Omaha for the purpose of expressing his regret for the manner in which Terry had been interrogated. I asked Terry beforehand to offer me his perceptions of Dr. Birkland and whether or not he was someone we could work with. Terry reported that Dr. Birkland had been very open and not at all dogmatic as he expected. Afterwards, I contacted Dr. Birkland and asked to meet with him when he came to Miami. We did so about a week ago and began to understand one another much better. I think if you contact Terry he will tell you that Counselor Birkland has done wonders in bringing the Omaha community back together again. Last time he visited he spent several hours with Terry, several more hours with the LSA and a couple more with the entire community. Another meeting is planned soon as I understand and the community is eagerly awaiting it. Susan Stiles Maneck History, Stetson University ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 7:15 AM Subject: Re: Letter of resignation wrote in message news:7ngfhj$k0g$1@nnrp1.deja.com... Good God, this kind of > arrogance is exactly what will keep people away from or drive them away > from the Baha'i Faith. > Yours, > Paul This is the way it seems to be me as well. I would argue that this entire approach is quintessential to what has become the "Bahai" way of "community" life--self-righteous judgment of others along exceedingly narrow lines and the harassing of them into conformity. I'd appreciate it, Paul, if you could expand on your experience on the "inside" of the beast, if you will, i.e., as a former Assistant to the Auxiliary Board, since you must have been a witness to many incidents of infringement on the basic rights of others. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Juan Cole[SMTP:jrcole@umich.edu] Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 3:19 PM To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: pickering Dear Fred: My recollection is that the transcript of the browbeating of Pickering, the travel agent, is in the Talisman logs for April, 1996, up on my Web site. NSA member # 1 is Henderson, # 2 is Jim Nelson. cheers Juan ---------- From: Kalimat Press[SMTP:KalimatP@aol.com] Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 8:39 PM To: Kalimat List Subject: Re: Kalimat Press If you do not want these announcements, please click reply and tell us. Please visit our website at: https://www.kalimat.com NEW FROM KALIMAT PRESS !!! PARADISE AND PARADIGM: Key Symbols in Persian Christianity and the Baha'i Faith by Christopher Buck Published by State University of New York Press and Distributed as volume ten of the series Studies in the Babi and Baha'i Religions A thorough and insightful analysis of the symbols and metaphors found in the Writings of Baha'u'llah. Dr. Buck compares the images found in the Baha'i Sacred Texts with those found in Christian scriptures. The results are important and fascinating. The book offers an historical profile of the Baha'i religion, and particularly an analysis of its response to modernity. Dr. Buck demonstrates how Baha'u'llah's Writings infuse the modern world with sacred meaning. The author also outlines a symbolic profile of the Baha'i scriptures, investigating in detail the metaphors of water/wine, mirror/gems, Lote Tree, Journey, Paradise, etc. A vital book for anyone interested in the serious study of Baha'i scriptures. "This book is a model of comparison, an eye-opener . . . and quite a useful and revealing account of the Baha'i [Faith]."---William Paden, University of Vermont Retail price: $28.00, paperback only MODERNITY AND THE MILLENNIUM: The Genesis of the Baha'i Faith in the Nineteenth-Century Middle East by Juan R. I. Cole Published by Columbia University Press Distributed as volume nine of the series Studies in the Babi and Baha'i Religions This is the first academic volume published on the life and teachings of Baha'u'llah. Dr. Cole presents a brilliant analysis of the beginnings of the Baha'i Faith and its response to the new demands of the modern world. An indispensable book for any serious student of Baha'i history. Retail price: $45.00 hardcover; $19.50 paperback The other volumes of the STUDIES series are listed at our website: https://www.kalimat.com AVAILABLE AGAIN !!!! BLACK PEARLS: Servants in the Households of the Bab and Baha'u'llah by Abu'l-Qasim Afnan SECOND EDITION Discover the little-known stories of the early black believers who served the Faith in its early years. Now available again after ten years, this short volume gives new insights into the Heroic Era of Baha'i history. A new foreword places these stories in historical perspective. Retail price: $14.95, hardcover only THE WISDOM OF THE MASTER: The Spiritual Teachings of 'Abdu'l-Baha This treasury of 'Abdu'l-Baha's words and spiritual insight offers true healing to the soul and can be used as a guidebook to personal transformation. Retail price: $17.00, hardcover only WRITTEN IN LIGHT: 'Abdu'l-Baha and the American Baha'i Community, 1989-1921 New photos of 'Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi! This is a pictoral history of the early Baha'i community in the United States. Retail price: $35.00, hardcover only TWO BOOKS FOR BAHA'I CHILDREN ______________________________ PRAYERS FOR YOUNG BAHA'IS An illustrated prayerbook for children. Retail price: $14.95 SHINING STAR: Prayers and Tablets for Children Readings from the Writings in Persian and English. Retail price: $9.95 HOW TO ORDER THESE BOOKS: There are many ways to order . . . 1. Simply click reply and let us know which books you want and how you will pay for them. (We accept Visa and Mastercard.) Or, 2. Visit our website at: https://www.kalimat.com, or 3. Call us at: 1-800-788 4067, or 4. Fax us at: 415-883-4280, or 5. Send your order by regular mail to: Publishers Services Kalimat Press P.O. Box 2510 Novato, CA 94948 Thank you for your order. We look forward to hearing from you soon. 7/26/99 ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 1999 8:39 AM Subject: TRANSCRIPT: The Pickering Tape (BAHAI) From the talisman archive for April 1996. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ From jrcole@umich.eduFri Apr 12 14:50:37 1996 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 18:32:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Juan R Cole To: Rick Schaut Cc: "'talisman@indiana.edu'" Subject: RE: criticism of NSA policies Rick: I appreciate your measured response, and find myself in agreement with much of what you say. I brought the matter up only as an example. But for the record I have evidence that at least two NSA members were very intimately involved in supporting the Travel Agency monopoly that they set up. Moreover, if they did in fact step over the line and break the law by using threats of spiritual sanctions to reduce business competition, this would be a serious matter. People have gone to jail for analogous infractions, and public officials have resigned or been forced to resign over them. The NSA actions also may have cost Baha'i travel agents and their customers money, and subjected them to spiritual duress, which would be an arbitrary use of power. I enclose, so that others can judge for themselves, some passages from a transcript of a taped conversation between two NSA members and a Baha'i travel agent that took place the summer before the World Congress. Since I am only interested in the rights and wrongs in an abstract way, I have not included the names of the principals. Cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan NSA Member #1: We're calling, Mr. X, about your package offered for the World Congress. We have some concerns about it. The National Spiritual Assembly has asked X and me to consult with you-- Baha'i Travel Agent: --O.K. NSA Member # 1: --about it and tell you what we think and make a few suggestions. Baha'i Travel Agent: Sure. NSA Member # 1: First of all, we're concerned that there were some misrepresentations made in your brochure or what looks like from the copy I've got-- Baha'i TA: The recent one we sent out about our package? Hm hm. NSA Member # 1: And there are some incomplete and inaccuracies stated in yours compared to what you will be able to deliver at a guaranteed price . . . [expresses concern about Baha'i Travel Agent's past refusal to accept credit cards when arranging pilgrimages to Haifa, which has sometimes left Baha'is unable actually to go, and left the NSA to pay for their tickets) . . . We have a bit of concern that people are going to go for price only and neglect the essentials that you don't mention that they're going to get if they take the Logistics Office package. We are concerned that you are not going to be in a position to deliver them the airfares at the rate that you say. We will be, because we're locked into a no-lose situation. That is, if the fares go down, we get the down, if they go up, we get the guarantee. And . . . Baha'i Travel Agent: The same thing is true here. NSA Member # 1: We--You can do that? Baha'i Travel Agent: I work directly through US Air. Uh huh. NSA Member # 1: All right, then: I want you not to say, then, and you are directed not to say that if airfare prices increase substantially we will have to pass on the increase to the clients. Baha'i Travel Agent: All right--we've sent out a second letter. This was done while I was in Europe . . . I've made some corrections because of that. And we do not say--we say we do guarantee it . . . NSA Member # 1: Then we want you to spell out completely in your brochure that you do not offer transportation from the airport to the airport or between Jacob Javits Center and the hotel. Baha'i Travel Agent: O.k. . . . It does say that . . . [reads new brochure, which mentions that taxis can be taken to the Jacob Javitz center and that it is walking distance in good weather] NSA Member # 1: We want you to list the current price from the hotels to Javits and back . . . Baha'i Travel Agent: I'm not through, yet, sir . . . NSA Member # 1: I'm doing this as we go through, because I tell you this, when we get through we are going to publish in the American Baha'i a direct comparison-- Baha'i Travel Agent: Hm, hm. NSA Member # 1: And I want your comparison to agree with ours. Baha'i Travel Agent: How can you do that with a business? NSA Member # 1: We are not getting you out of business. We are simply comparing-- Baha'i Travel Agent: Oh, I know that sir. I didn't say that. I said, how can you require that of a business? We're just, like, representing, any other business. NSA Member # 1: You don't have to do it, sir. Baha'i Travel Agent: Oh, O.K. NSA Member # 1: But I tell you, you will be in some peril if you don't. [What is going on here is that the NSA has discovered that its Logistics Office prices are very high and can be easily undercut by Baha'i travel agents. This puts in doubt whether they can arrange enough reservations to receive the $50,000 in free suites from the official travel agency. The first tack it takes is that these are fly by night operations that don't guarantee the airfares. But this does not prove true. Then they want to push the idea that the competing packages are not full service, and don't include taxi fare (as if that could account for a $300 difference). At this point, the travel agent begins to realize that the NSA Logistics Office is trying to *compete* with him and trying to put conditions on how he can compete with it. He realizes that this is an anti-Trust violation, and questions how the NSA can place conditions on economic competitors. The NSA member, aware of the fine line he is treading, denies he is trying to prevent a competitor from doing business. The travel agent presses the point that NSA actions could nevertheless be perceived as attempting to place conditions on an economic competitor, which is still illegal. The NSA member realizes where this is going, and backs down. "You don't have to do it, sir." The travel agent is relieved. Then the NSA member appears to lose his temper. "But I tell you you will be in some peril if you don't," he adds. At this point I think he has stepped over the line into an illegal anti-trust violation. He is attempting to browbeat a competitor with the NSA Logistics Office, and to put conditions on the nature of the competition between them.) Baha'i Travel Agent: . . . We've had a number of people contact us and all we've tried to do is provide people who say they just cannot go with a way they can go. And we're not trying in any way to cut into your program, because we only have space for 550 . . . And all we're trying to do is help those like the ones in South Carolina, whole assemblies, that just say they could not go unless they had the less price. NSA Member # 1: You don't think our package includes the lesser price? Baha'i Travel Agent: No, sir. [NSA member # 2 alleges that the only safe way to have the World Congress travel accommodations taken care of is to have one Travel Agency handle everyone; and he intimates that the Universal House of Justice wanted the NSA to do it that way, though he says this in an ambiguous manner). NSA Member # 2: . . . One of our urgent concerns is that your material creates the impression you can provide a lower price. That is false. As you know, our materials indicate that the friends are guaranteed the lowest available price from any source at they time they travel . . . Your materials suggest that you can beat our prices. In fact, that is not true. One of the things the National Assembly wants you to address is the perception that you have created deliberately through your materials that you provide a lower cost. This suggests that the Institution has cheated the friends . . . [In fact, virtually any travel agent could have gotten a Baha'i a better price than than most Logistics Office packages afforded. This NSA member is either wholly uninformed or is being, uh, disingenuous. His suggestion that offering a lower price is forbidden because it makes the NSA look like it is cheating the friends is outrageous; it is an attempt to bully this individual into not offering competing, lower packages. Again, I think these statements border on illegality under anti-trust laws.) [This conversation went on for some time more, with much browbeating of the poor travel agent, and a final plea for him to withdraw his competing package, on the grounds that he could simply not provide a better price than did the Logistics Office. It is hard not to conclude that all parties here knew that the travel agent could in fact substantially undercut Logistics Office prices, but that putting things this way was a polite cover for bullying a competitor.\} Please note that I don't think the NSA members were personally profiting from the arrangements that had been made. I think their concerns are as they repeatedly stated them. They liked the idea of a centralized Travel Agency with a standardized package that cut down on the likelihood of out-of-town Baha'is wandering around New York (one caller inquired about camping facilities in New Jersey from the Logistics Office or their Travel Agent, and were told that there *were none!* When a complaint was lodged, Wilmette replied that they hadn't wanted people camping out). The official Travel Agency was offering the sweetener of $50,000 in free rooms if a certain number of Baha'is used them, and the NSA for some reason was fixated on getting this bonus (which, it is true, benefitted the Fund in a small way, not individuals). And since the NSA had made this unwise and untrue claim that their package was guaranteed the cheapest, they minded that being demonstrated to be untrue (were they afraid they might become responsible for the difference, themselves? Or just that someone would think they were taking profits or a kickback? There is no evidence of the latter). The fact remains that their solution to these problems, of bullying Baha'i Travel Agents (there were others) into cancelling competing reservations was at the least unethical and an arbitrary use of the spiritual authority they have; and was possibly even illegal. Along with their earlier bullying of the Dialogue editors, and their recent attempt to coerce the speech of one of our Talismanians, all this amounts to a worrisome *pattern* of behavior which I myself have difficulty seeing as very Baha'i-like. The naivete of the general run of Baha'is and their refusal to accept that any irregularities could occur in Wilmette by virtue of divine grace have perhaps deprived the NSA of useful community feedback on these sorts of problem. ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 1999 8:49 AM To: Juan Cole Subject: Re: pickering Juan, Thanks. Found it. By the way, Dodenhoff has posted some messages in response to Maneck that might interest you. Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: Juan Cole To: Sent: Monday, July 26, 1999 3:19 PM Subject: pickering > > Dear Fred: > > My recollection is that the transcript of the browbeating of Pickering, the > travel agent, is in the Talisman logs for April, 1996, up on my Web site. > NSA member # 1 is Henderson, # 2 is Jim Nelson. > > cheers Juan ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 1999 8:52 AM Subject: Re: TRANSCRIPT: The Pickering Tape (BAHAI) By the way: #1 is Henderson #2 is Jim Nelson (apparently releaved of his duties this spring for stealing from a dead widow) Patrick Henry wrote in message news:7nk998$k6e$1@news.laserlink.net... > From the talisman archive for April 1996. > > -- > Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > > > From jrcole@umich.eduFri Apr 12 14:50:37 1996 > Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 18:32:19 -0400 (EDT) > From: Juan R Cole > To: Rick Schaut > Cc: "'talisman@indiana.edu'" > Subject: RE: criticism of NSA policies > > Rick: > > I appreciate your measured response, and find myself in agreement with > much of what you say. > > I brought the matter up only as an example. But for the record I have > evidence that at least two NSA members were very intimately involved in > supporting the Travel Agency monopoly that they set up. Moreover, if > they did in fact step over the line and break the law by using threats of > spiritual sanctions to reduce business competition, this would be a > serious matter. People have gone to jail for analogous infractions, and > public officials have resigned or been forced to resign over them. The > NSA actions also may have cost Baha'i travel agents and their customers > money, and subjected them to spiritual duress, which would be an arbitrary > use of power. > > I enclose, so that others can judge for themselves, some passages from a > transcript of a taped conversation between two NSA members and a Baha'i > travel agent that took place the summer before the World Congress. Since > I am only interested in the rights and wrongs in an abstract way, I have > not included the names of the principals. > > Cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan > > NSA Member #1: We're calling, Mr. X, about your package offered for the > World Congress. We have some concerns about it. The National Spiritual > Assembly has asked X and me to consult with you-- > > Baha'i Travel Agent: --O.K. > > NSA Member # 1: --about it and tell you what we think and make a few > suggestions. > > Baha'i Travel Agent: Sure. > > NSA Member # 1: First of all, we're concerned that there were some > misrepresentations made in your brochure or what looks like from the copy > I've got-- > > Baha'i TA: The recent one we sent out about our package? Hm hm. > > NSA Member # 1: And there are some incomplete and inaccuracies stated in > yours compared to what you will be able to deliver at a guaranteed > price . . . [expresses concern about Baha'i Travel Agent's past refusal to > accept credit cards when arranging pilgrimages to Haifa, which has > sometimes left Baha'is unable actually to go, and left the NSA to pay for > their tickets) . . . We have a bit of concern that people are going to go > for price only and neglect the essentials that you don't mention that > they're going to get if they take the Logistics Office package. We are > concerned that you are not going to be in a position to deliver them the > airfares at the rate that you say. We will be, because we're locked into > a no-lose situation. That is, if the fares go down, we get the down, if > they go up, we get the guarantee. And . . . > > Baha'i Travel Agent: The same thing is true here. > > NSA Member # 1: We--You can do that? > > Baha'i Travel Agent: I work directly through US Air. Uh huh. > > NSA Member # 1: All right, then: I want you not to say, then, and you > are directed not to say that if airfare prices increase substantially we > will have to pass on the increase to the clients. > > Baha'i Travel Agent: All right--we've sent out a second letter. This > was done while I was in Europe . . . I've made some corrections because > of that. And we do not say--we say we do guarantee it . . . > > NSA Member # 1: Then we want you to spell out completely in your > brochure that you do not offer transportation from the airport to the > airport or between Jacob Javits Center and the hotel. > > Baha'i Travel Agent: O.k. . . . It does say that . . . [reads new > brochure, which mentions that taxis can be taken to the Jacob Javitz > center and that it is walking distance in good weather] > > NSA Member # 1: We want you to list the current price from the hotels to > Javits and back . . . > > Baha'i Travel Agent: I'm not through, yet, sir . . . > > NSA Member # 1: I'm doing this as we go through, because I tell you > this, when we get through we are going to publish in the American Baha'i > a direct comparison-- > > Baha'i Travel Agent: Hm, hm. > > NSA Member # 1: And I want your comparison to agree with ours. > > Baha'i Travel Agent: How can you do that with a business? > > NSA Member # 1: We are not getting you out of business. We are simply > comparing-- > > Baha'i Travel Agent: Oh, I know that sir. I didn't say that. I said, > how can you require that of a business? We're just, like, representing, > any other business. > > NSA Member # 1: You don't have to do it, sir. > > Baha'i Travel Agent: Oh, O.K. > > NSA Member # 1: But I tell you, you will be in some peril if you don't. > > [What is going on here is that the NSA has discovered that its Logistics > Office prices are very high and can be easily undercut by Baha'i travel > agents. This puts in doubt whether they can arrange enough reservations > to receive the $50,000 in free suites from the official travel agency. The > first tack it takes is that these are fly by night > operations that don't guarantee the airfares. But this does not prove > true. Then they want to push the idea that the competing packages are > not full service, and don't include taxi fare (as if that could account > for a $300 difference). At this point, the travel agent begins to > realize that the NSA Logistics Office is trying to *compete* with him and > trying to put conditions on how he can compete with it. He realizes that > this is an anti-Trust violation, and questions how the NSA can place > conditions on economic competitors. The NSA member, aware of the fine > line he is treading, denies he is trying to prevent a competitor from > doing business. The travel agent presses the point that NSA actions > could nevertheless be perceived as attempting to place conditions on an > economic competitor, which is still illegal. The NSA member realizes > where this is going, and backs down. "You don't have to do it, sir." > The travel agent is relieved. Then the NSA member appears to lose his > temper. "But I tell you you will be in some peril if you don't," he > adds. At this point I think he has stepped over the line into an illegal > anti-trust violation. He is attempting to browbeat a competitor with the > NSA Logistics Office, and to put conditions on the nature of the > competition between them.) > > Baha'i Travel Agent: . . . We've had a number of people contact us and > all we've tried to do is provide people who say they just cannot go with > a way they can go. And we're not trying in any way to cut into your > program, because we only have space for 550 . . . And all we're trying to > do is help those like the ones in South Carolina, whole assemblies, that > just say they could not go unless they had the less price. > > NSA Member # 1: You don't think our package includes the lesser price? > > Baha'i Travel Agent: No, sir. > > [NSA member # 2 alleges that the only safe way to have the World Congress > travel accommodations taken care of is to have one Travel Agency handle > everyone; and he intimates that the Universal House of Justice wanted the > NSA to do it that way, though he says this in an ambiguous manner). > > NSA Member # 2: . . . One of our urgent concerns is that your material > creates the impression you can provide a lower price. That is false. As > you know, our materials indicate that the friends are guaranteed the > lowest available price from any source at they time they travel . . . > Your materials suggest that you can beat our prices. In fact, that is > not true. One of the things the National Assembly wants you to address > is the perception that you have created deliberately through your > materials that you provide a lower cost. This suggests that the > Institution has cheated the friends . . . > > [In fact, virtually any travel agent could have gotten a Baha'i a better > price than than most Logistics Office packages afforded. This NSA member > is either wholly uninformed or is being, uh, disingenuous. His > suggestion that offering a lower price is forbidden because it makes the > NSA look like it is cheating the friends is outrageous; it is an attempt > to bully this individual into not offering competing, lower packages. > Again, I think these statements border on illegality under anti-trust > laws.) > > [This conversation went on for some time more, with much browbeating of > the poor travel agent, and a final plea for him to withdraw his competing > package, on the grounds that he could simply not provide a better price > than did the Logistics Office. It is hard not to conclude that all > parties here knew that the travel agent could in fact substantially > undercut Logistics Office prices, but that putting things this way was a > polite cover for bullying a competitor.\} > > Please note that I don't think the NSA members were personally profiting > from the arrangements that had been made. I think their concerns are as > they repeatedly stated them. They liked the idea of a centralized Travel > Agency with a standardized package that cut down on the likelihood of > out-of-town Baha'is wandering around New York (one caller inquired about > camping facilities in New Jersey from the Logistics Office or their > Travel Agent, and were told that there *were none!* When a complaint was > lodged, Wilmette replied that they hadn't wanted people camping out). > The official Travel Agency was offering the sweetener of $50,000 in free > rooms if a certain number of Baha'is used them, and the NSA for some > reason was fixated on getting this bonus (which, it is true, benefitted > the Fund in a small way, not individuals). And since the NSA had > made this unwise and untrue claim that their package was guaranteed the > cheapest, they minded that being demonstrated to be untrue (were they > afraid they might become responsible for the difference, themselves? Or > just that someone would think they were taking profits or a kickback? > There is no evidence of the latter). > > The fact remains that their solution to these problems, of bullying > Baha'i Travel Agents (there were others) into cancelling competing > reservations was at the least unethical and an arbitrary use of the > spiritual authority they have; and was possibly even illegal. Along with > their earlier bullying of the Dialogue editors, and their recent attempt > to coerce the speech of one of our Talismanians, all this amounts to a > worrisome *pattern* of behavior which I myself have difficulty seeing as > very Baha'i-like. The naivete of the general run of Baha'is and their > refusal to accept that any irregularities could occur in Wilmette by > virtue of divine grace have perhaps deprived the NSA of useful community > feedback on these sorts of problem. > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 1999 10:54 AM Subject: Re: Letter of resignation In my opinion, there are no proper balances of power in the Bahai faith, despite the limp claims made to that effect. The administrative Gestapo is not capable of providing balance to the fanatics within its own tight control. I don't expect this fact to change. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ macleod wrote in message news:933027099.7522.0.nnrp-02.c2de8324@news.demon.co.uk... > To me this is probably the crunch issue in this whole debate. I know > nothing about the personalities or cases involved but if you agree that > there have been cases of misuse of authority it is vital to know what the > administrative order does about them. I don't think anybody needs to know > names involved (unless they know them already) but how many people in, say, > the last ten years have been > reprimanded > undergone compulsory retraining > been dismissed or downgraded > lost their administrative rights > for misuse of authority? > > Your argument that there is no point in dismissing them because 'We will get > some other overly-zealous Baha'i in who will make the same mistakes because > he hasn't > learned the lessons which the previous one has' assumes either that the > Bahai Faith is incapable of conducting a selection process or that they > deliberately seek overly-zealous candidates. > If the Faith really can't appoint people who aren't overly-zealous, I > suggest we write a job description of what we want and ask any competent > Human Resources firm to appoint people for us. > Like most Baha'is I have known quite a number of people over the years who > have lost their administrative rights. Usually for marrying without touching > all the Baha'i bases. As a consequence of this I think most Baha'is are > very aware that marrying outside the rules is very much frowned upon in the > Faith. > It would be nice to have some real evidence that abuse of authority is also > frowned upon in the Faith. > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 1999 5:42 PM Subject: Re: TRANSCRIPT: The Pickering Tape (BAHAI) Also available at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Pickering.htm Patrick Henry wrote in message news:7nka0l$kg5$1@news.laserlink.net... > By the way: > > #1 is Henderson > #2 is Jim Nelson (apparently releaved of his duties this spring for > stealing from a dead widow) > > > Patrick Henry wrote in message > news:7nk998$k6e$1@news.laserlink.net... > > From the talisman archive for April 1996. > > > > -- > > Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > > > > > > > From jrcole@umich.eduFri Apr 12 14:50:37 1996 > > Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 18:32:19 -0400 (EDT) > > From: Juan R Cole > > To: Rick Schaut > > Cc: "'talisman@indiana.edu'" > > Subject: RE: criticism of NSA policies > > > > Rick: > > > > I appreciate your measured response, and find myself in agreement with > > much of what you say. > > > > I brought the matter up only as an example. But for the record I have > > evidence that at least two NSA members were very intimately involved in > > supporting the Travel Agency monopoly that they set up. Moreover, if > > they did in fact step over the line and break the law by using threats of > > spiritual sanctions to reduce business competition, this would be a > > serious matter. People have gone to jail for analogous infractions, and > > public officials have resigned or been forced to resign over them. The > > NSA actions also may have cost Baha'i travel agents and their customers > > money, and subjected them to spiritual duress, which would be an arbitrary > > use of power. > > > > I enclose, so that others can judge for themselves, some passages from a > > transcript of a taped conversation between two NSA members and a Baha'i > > travel agent that took place the summer before the World Congress. Since > > I am only interested in the rights and wrongs in an abstract way, I have > > not included the names of the principals. > > > > Cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan > > > > NSA Member #1: We're calling, Mr. X, about your package offered for the > > World Congress. We have some concerns about it. The National Spiritual > > Assembly has asked X and me to consult with you-- > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: --O.K. > > > > NSA Member # 1: --about it and tell you what we think and make a few > > suggestions. > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: Sure. > > > > NSA Member # 1: First of all, we're concerned that there were some > > misrepresentations made in your brochure or what looks like from the copy > > I've got-- > > > > Baha'i TA: The recent one we sent out about our package? Hm hm. > > > > NSA Member # 1: And there are some incomplete and inaccuracies stated in > > yours compared to what you will be able to deliver at a guaranteed > > price . . . [expresses concern about Baha'i Travel Agent's past refusal to > > accept credit cards when arranging pilgrimages to Haifa, which has > > sometimes left Baha'is unable actually to go, and left the NSA to pay for > > their tickets) . . . We have a bit of concern that people are going to go > > for price only and neglect the essentials that you don't mention that > > they're going to get if they take the Logistics Office package. We are > > concerned that you are not going to be in a position to deliver them the > > airfares at the rate that you say. We will be, because we're locked into > > a no-lose situation. That is, if the fares go down, we get the down, if > > they go up, we get the guarantee. And . . . > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: The same thing is true here. > > > > NSA Member # 1: We--You can do that? > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: I work directly through US Air. Uh huh. > > > > NSA Member # 1: All right, then: I want you not to say, then, and you > > are directed not to say that if airfare prices increase substantially we > > will have to pass on the increase to the clients. > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: All right--we've sent out a second letter. This > > was done while I was in Europe . . . I've made some corrections because > > of that. And we do not say--we say we do guarantee it . . . > > > > NSA Member # 1: Then we want you to spell out completely in your > > brochure that you do not offer transportation from the airport to the > > airport or between Jacob Javits Center and the hotel. > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: O.k. . . . It does say that . . . [reads new > > brochure, which mentions that taxis can be taken to the Jacob Javitz > > center and that it is walking distance in good weather] > > > > NSA Member # 1: We want you to list the current price from the hotels to > > Javits and back . . . > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: I'm not through, yet, sir . . . > > > > NSA Member # 1: I'm doing this as we go through, because I tell you > > this, when we get through we are going to publish in the American Baha'i > > a direct comparison-- > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: Hm, hm. > > > > NSA Member # 1: And I want your comparison to agree with ours. > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: How can you do that with a business? > > > > NSA Member # 1: We are not getting you out of business. We are simply > > comparing-- > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: Oh, I know that sir. I didn't say that. I said, > > how can you require that of a business? We're just, like, representing, > > any other business. > > > > NSA Member # 1: You don't have to do it, sir. > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: Oh, O.K. > > > > NSA Member # 1: But I tell you, you will be in some peril if you don't. > > > > [What is going on here is that the NSA has discovered that its Logistics > > Office prices are very high and can be easily undercut by Baha'i travel > > agents. This puts in doubt whether they can arrange enough reservations > > to receive the $50,000 in free suites from the official travel agency. The > > first tack it takes is that these are fly by night > > operations that don't guarantee the airfares. But this does not prove > > true. Then they want to push the idea that the competing packages are > > not full service, and don't include taxi fare (as if that could account > > for a $300 difference). At this point, the travel agent begins to > > realize that the NSA Logistics Office is trying to *compete* with him and > > trying to put conditions on how he can compete with it. He realizes that > > this is an anti-Trust violation, and questions how the NSA can place > > conditions on economic competitors. The NSA member, aware of the fine > > line he is treading, denies he is trying to prevent a competitor from > > doing business. The travel agent presses the point that NSA actions > > could nevertheless be perceived as attempting to place conditions on an > > economic competitor, which is still illegal. The NSA member realizes > > where this is going, and backs down. "You don't have to do it, sir." > > The travel agent is relieved. Then the NSA member appears to lose his > > temper. "But I tell you you will be in some peril if you don't," he > > adds. At this point I think he has stepped over the line into an illegal > > anti-trust violation. He is attempting to browbeat a competitor with the > > NSA Logistics Office, and to put conditions on the nature of the > > competition between them.) > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: . . . We've had a number of people contact us and > > all we've tried to do is provide people who say they just cannot go with > > a way they can go. And we're not trying in any way to cut into your > > program, because we only have space for 550 . . . And all we're trying to > > do is help those like the ones in South Carolina, whole assemblies, that > > just say they could not go unless they had the less price. > > > > NSA Member # 1: You don't think our package includes the lesser price? > > > > Baha'i Travel Agent: No, sir. > > > > [NSA member # 2 alleges that the only safe way to have the World Congress > > travel accommodations taken care of is to have one Travel Agency handle > > everyone; and he intimates that the Universal House of Justice wanted the > > NSA to do it that way, though he says this in an ambiguous manner). > > > > NSA Member # 2: . . . One of our urgent concerns is that your material > > creates the impression you can provide a lower price. That is false. As > > you know, our materials indicate that the friends are guaranteed the > > lowest available price from any source at they time they travel . . . > > Your materials suggest that you can beat our prices. In fact, that is > > not true. One of the things the National Assembly wants you to address > > is the perception that you have created deliberately through your > > materials that you provide a lower cost. This suggests that the > > Institution has cheated the friends . . . > > > > [In fact, virtually any travel agent could have gotten a Baha'i a better > > price than than most Logistics Office packages afforded. This NSA member > > is either wholly uninformed or is being, uh, disingenuous. His > > suggestion that offering a lower price is forbidden because it makes the > > NSA look like it is cheating the friends is outrageous; it is an attempt > > to bully this individual into not offering competing, lower packages. > > Again, I think these statements border on illegality under anti-trust > > laws.) > > > > [This conversation went on for some time more, with much browbeating of > > the poor travel agent, and a final plea for him to withdraw his competing > > package, on the grounds that he could simply not provide a better price > > than did the Logistics Office. It is hard not to conclude that all > > parties here knew that the travel agent could in fact substantially > > undercut Logistics Office prices, but that putting things this way was a > > polite cover for bullying a competitor.\} > > > > Please note that I don't think the NSA members were personally profiting > > from the arrangements that had been made. I think their concerns are as > > they repeatedly stated them. They liked the idea of a centralized Travel > > Agency with a standardized package that cut down on the likelihood of > > out-of-town Baha'is wandering around New York (one caller inquired about > > camping facilities in New Jersey from the Logistics Office or their > > Travel Agent, and were told that there *were none!* When a complaint was > > lodged, Wilmette replied that they hadn't wanted people camping out). > > The official Travel Agency was offering the sweetener of $50,000 in free > > rooms if a certain number of Baha'is used them, and the NSA for some > > reason was fixated on getting this bonus (which, it is true, benefitted > > the Fund in a small way, not individuals). And since the NSA had > > made this unwise and untrue claim that their package was guaranteed the > > cheapest, they minded that being demonstrated to be untrue (were they > > afraid they might become responsible for the difference, themselves? Or > > just that someone would think they were taking profits or a kickback? > > There is no evidence of the latter). > > > > The fact remains that their solution to these problems, of bullying > > Baha'i Travel Agents (there were others) into cancelling competing > > reservations was at the least unethical and an arbitrary use of the > > spiritual authority they have; and was possibly even illegal. Along with > > their earlier bullying of the Dialogue editors, and their recent attempt > > to coerce the speech of one of our Talismanians, all this amounts to a > > worrisome *pattern* of behavior which I myself have difficulty seeing as > > very Baha'i-like. The naivete of the general run of Baha'is and their > > refusal to accept that any irregularities could occur in Wilmette by > > virtue of divine grace have perhaps deprived the NSA of useful community > > feedback on these sorts of problem. > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 27, 1999 5:53 PM Subject: Re: The Most Right Scholar https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm https://209.185.176.10/~fglaysher/AOLcensorship.txt https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm Garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Smaneck wrote in message news:19990727005130.15887.00003378@ng-fi1.aol.com... > >PS For someone who opposed the creation of TRB you sure can post alot... > > I didn't oppose TRB itself. What I opposed was the use of slander on AOL to > promote the list. But I don't come by here a lot and won't remain here long. > Those who want to see more of me will have to subscribe to Baha'i Studies > > (send the following command to major@jccc.net in the message body > subscribe bahai-st) > > And those who don't can continue to hang out here. I'll be going soon. > > Susan Stiles Maneck > History, Stetson University ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 2:49 PM Subject: CULHANE - Bahai heresy trial (Re: My case - a letter to my friends ) I find your case quite unpersuasive. The "evidence" you present is only one case versus many, many individuals. Your own temperament affects, perhaps, your understanding of what has happened as well. In the context of the "jerks" in the administrative order, during the last decade, repeatedly terrorizing and attacking people, your one incident, or your interpretation of it, counts for very little.... The only EVIDENCE that would mean anything to me whatsoever would be the termination of REVIEW by the UHJ and the end of heresy trials such as your own. They also owe a number of people unambiguous apologies and should investigate a number of Bahai fundamentalists "jerks" both on and off line, publically rectifying and reprimanding them for their misdeeds. -- Frederick Glaysher, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ TLCULHANE wrote in message news:19990728141251.04802.00003841@ng-bk1.aol.com... > > Dear Friends, > > I had hoped my case would not be a topic of public conversation and > especially an uninformed topic of conversation. One of the dangers of lack of > knowledge is sheer speculation that allows for the assertion of preformed > ideological templates to dominate discourse. > > Please consider this an open letter to my friends. It will be the only > public response I will make. If anyone wishes to continue to speak with me > about it I will do that in a private conversation as among friends. > > In February I had a meeting with two ABm's. The original purpose of the > meeting was to gather information about a workshop I had presented at Bosch > Bahai school. Two people (out of 62 attendees) had written to the House of > Justice protesting what they understood about my comments. > > The House of Justice passed the 'protest message' to the NSA and the > Continental Counselors for follow up. The Counselors in turn authorized two > ABm's to meet with me to gather information about what had taken place at > Bosch. So far so good. > > One of the ABm's concluded that this was an opportunity to do more than > inquire after information. This person effectively conducted the meeting as > though it was an interrogation of my theological views among them my views of > the station of Baha u llah, my interest in the Maiden writings of Baha u llah > and ,of course, my discussion of the Mashriqu l Adhkar . That was the problem > as well as how the meeting was arranged and conducted by the ABm. > > I was not informed two ABm's would be present, nor who authorized the meeting > or to whom the ABm's would be reporting. > > Friends I am quite human and cycled through a series of emotions from anger > to betrayal,to disgust, to bewilderment and frustration and relief. I went > thorugh this twice, once in February and again in May after the April 7 letter > became public. > > How did I handle this 'test' of my faith and why have I *chosen* to remain a > Bahai? The simple explanation is I love Baha u llah. As many of you know I am a > mystic by temperament which explains my attraction to the spiritual and social > reality of the Mashriqu l Adhkar and the "Maiden " writings of Baha u llah. > Both times during my "emotional cycle" S/He came to me and I was draped in that > "silken Robe of Light." As best I can describe in words we "talked" about my > pain and anguish and " My distress and banishment in this remote prison." This > is the personal God who reached in and touched my soul and said I understand > and shared with me that "perfume of a grace which to tongue can describe." I > was reminded that "this not a field for the foolish and faint of heart." If I > thought the vision of Baha u llah was easily realized, that all the hope and > redemption that His message represents was attainable without effort or without > transformation I learned better. The course of human history in general and > religious history in particular will change but it will be through > multigenerational blood sweat and spirtual tears. > > In the midst of this struggle I wrote to the Counselors and the House of > Justice , the latter on March 30. I have met with Counselor Birkland twice and > we have spoken fro several hours about my case and what I called in my letter > to the House the "far too widespread culture of fear and suspicion in the > community. > > The Counselor extened me an apology for what happened and he assumed > responsibility for it. There was no passing the buck or kicking the proverbial > dog in his response to me. Our conversations were honest ,open and reflective > on both our parts. He was gracious and loving in his conversations with me. he > also clearly said to me that as Counselor he has no problem with my theological > views and they were not at issue. This saga has also affected my community and > he has been most supportive of the LSA and its goals and has publically > expressed that support. I have greast respect for anyone who is capable of > admitting mistakes,assuming responsibility for them and looking for ways to > move forward and heal divisions and misunderstandings. This is exactly how > Counselor Birkland responded to me and therfore it can be stated I have great > respect for his character as a man. > In the course of my conversations with the Counselor and my observation of > his interaction with the LSA and the community I have been able to observe in > action what I write about as the *ethic* of consultation and its requirements > of mutual recognition and reciprocity. I understand consultation to be a *non > adversarial* form of communicative action and the recognition and reciprocity > involved is fundamentally about the recognition (the irfan) tha we are all made > in the image and likeness of God. That is the starting point of Bahai discourse > in my view. I have observed the Counselor engage what I write about. I had > similar conversations with Counselor Ghadirian, and Paul Dodenhoff will > understand my reference here, whom I found to be an example of Abraham Heschels > "analysis of piety." > > In late May the famous April 7 letter became public.I was very concerned > about its reference to the Mashriqu l Adhkar as I had raised this question > directly with the House in my March 30 letter to them. This letter , which I > have said before and wil state again is one of the more poorly written letters > to come from the World Centre. Poor writing style is somethging which can be > clarified and improved upon.Iit is not *proof" of dictatorial behavior. On may > 26 I wrote a summary of my views of the Mashriqul Adhkar and sent a copy of > it,with reference to my March 30 letter to the House of Justice. On May 31 I > received a letter from the House of Justice which stated: > " The House of Justice very much appreciates the clarity and candor of your > expression in regard to the issues troubling you. It wishes, first of all, for > you to be assured that it did not say or feel that you had violated any of its > policies or had been disobedient to it in relation to your discussions about > the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar." > > The response of the House of Justice ia hardly a case of "Plausibility > structures and denial. I am perfectly capable of discussing "plausability" as > it is used in the sociology of knowledge especially as formulated by Berger and > Luchmann.The ideological twist to it is innacurate on theoertical grounds and > inapplicable to the coments of the House of Justice. Their letter was a > response to my questions two months earlier before anything related to the > April 7 letter becamea public issue. The disingenious combination of the > sociologocal concept of plausability structuresd with the ideological concept > of "plausible denial" is an example of a preformed template that will generate > conclusions even in the absence of substantive knowledge of a case. In this > situation the facts of my case. > > My conversations with the Counseolrs have reinforced my convivtion that > this comm ent in the April 7 letter did not and was not intended to refer to my > actions. As early as March 20 Counselor Birklnad reiterated that point to me in > our conversation. I aslo know for a *fact* that the Counselor had been in > communication with the World Centre about my case and that the House wanted the > Counselor to meet with me and resolve this problem. > Furthermore the House of Justice wrote: > > "That the meeting to which you were invited by the Auxiliary Board members > became a cause of distress to you is deeply regretted by the House of Justice. > But it was glad to learn from your email that Counsellor Stephen Birkland met > with you subsequently in a sympathetic attempt to remedy the difficulties of > your experience. You should therefore feel assured that your concern has been > taken seriously and an earnest attempt made to deal with it. The House of > Justice trusts that the burden of your heart has thus been relieved and that > you can now refocus your energies on continuing your dedicated service to the > Cause." > > Friends, dictators and totalitarians do not express deep regret that a > soul was disressed or estranged by certian actions. They most assuredly do not > take steps or direct that steps be taken to resolve the anguish or distess of > *one human being. yet that is exactly what the House of Justice did in my case. > They intervened on my behalf because of the mistakes that were made in my case > by Institutional representatives. > > For anyone who is unable to distinguish bettwen acts of love and care and > hypocritical PR damage control I have compassion. This kind of cynical linkage > is an example Orwellian newspeak where love becomes hate. Are we really so long > gone and so far from Baha u llah that acts of love, kindness,magnanimity cannot > be perceived for what they are?Iis the world truly that barren ? > > I am many things but pollyanna is not one of them. I am Jamesian twice born > soul who has hope. And that hope involves believing in spite of the evidence > and watching the evidence change. It is easy to be cynical. In a world that > needs the hope and promise that life can be lived at a higher level and that > needs to know human history canchange,however slowly or haltingly cynicism and > prolonged despair is a betrayal of the centuries long aspirations of human > beings. I believe with all my heart that anyone,of whatever background or > religious tradition who indulges such despair has not simply forgotten God but > has forgotten humanity. My challenge to my friends is to forego the temptation > of cynicism and despair because the "wondrous system" of Baha u llah has not > attained perfection. Perfection and transformation do not happen in the > abstract they happen with real human beings. The "system" of Baha u llah will > only function as well as the people who comprise it. Their is much work to be > done and it is the spiritual obligation of each of us to engage the struggle of > hope and redemption in both it smeaning of overcoming 'sin' and imperfection > and as the fulfillment of a promise. > I dont say this inognorance. I say this as one who has had his faith severely > tested in ways that are only meaningful to me. in the past year both my > daughters bran surgery and stroke and my threological interogation have been > major spurituakl battles. They have rocked me at the core of me being. Baha u > llah uppoed the ante for terry Culhane. I want to "see": my beloeved and She > sais "howmany Husayns greater thanthee have professed their love. I hope my > willingness to engage the struggle and keep turning to Baha ullah is some > measure of my love. I often said that if ones wants Paradise, Baghdad the abode > of peace,the road to that *place* passes through Tehren and the Siyah Chal. > Each of us has our Siyah Chal our secret place of feasr and despair of dreans > lost and hopes dashed. yet I can say that we are never alne , the odder of > that silken Robe of Light is there. Our response is a matter of "learning the > art of loves ways and the secret of heart surrender." My dear friends go head > and learn that art and surrender. Give yourself permission! I am a nobody, a > garden level mystic who Baha u llah did not abandon and who the House of > Justice did not abandon. > > The House is keenly aware of the limitations and imperfections of the > community ,including the functioning of its administrative bodies And they did > not ask me to preten all was yet paradise, there was no denial nor attempt to > stiffle me ot shut me up. They acknowledge reality but hey refuse to sink into > a cynical despair. > They offered me the same challenge Baha u llah has offered me to believe and > do the work in spite of any evidence and to watch and make the evidence change. > > In response to my concerns about problems "mistakes" and the culture of fear > and suspicion that I noted they wrote" > > " A perspective that may assist in your review of the experience is that > the institutions of the Faith operating throughout the world, like individual > believers, are struggling to achieve the high ideals set for them in the > Writings, and they inevitably make some mistakes even with the best of motives. > Fortunately, the consequences of such mistakes often provide them with the > empirical bases for shaping their evolution towards maturity. To the extent > that the individuals affected are able to deal successfully, both spiritually > and practically, with the tests involved, the institutions and individuals > derive mutual benefits. The believers and their God-given institutions are > intimately joined in a common endeavor to advance the development of a new > World Order. A significant degree of magnanimity on the part of each is > essential." > > The House of Justice openly acknowledges mistakes were made and have been > made. Please be fair in your judgement. Do dictators openly acknowledge > mistakes on the part of governing bodies and express *hope* that both those > governing bodies and the individuals harmed will learn from them and move > forward? > > They express the recognition that mistakes are trying and can cause > "distress" to souls. They also expres the *Hope* that individuals such as > myself will 'hang in there.' And most important they recognize that ';hanging > inther ' requires 'magnanimity". Even a dictoinary can provide us with the > richness and challenge of the concept of magnanimity. Yet in the midst of all > that and inthe recognition of mistakes they asked me to consider the > struggles of the Institutions in our common enterprise. In other words they > asked me to consult, to put *my money where my mouth is about consultation as > mutual recognition and reciprocity. That recognition is that we are in this > together. Not withstanding that request they close that section of my letter > with the following comment. > " This does not mean, of course, that mistakenactions on their part should be > ignored." > > Again be fair in your judgement. Do those bent on dictatorial control suggest > that mistakes should not be ignored.? > There is no monolithic system around the Bahai world bent on crushing > people. There are folks everywhere with varying perceptins of what is important > about the Faith of Baha u llah. We all have to face the struggle to engage the > standards of Baha u llah and not succumb to cynicism and despair when the > inevitable imperfections and "mistakes" appear. That is even more true when we > encounter the bonna fide jerks within the community. Baha u llah promised many > things in His redemptive message. He did not promise that jerks would not > become Bahais. How do we respond to mistakes -- with magnanimity and with the > expectation that consultation must and will take place to address mistakes. > That consultation is a non adversarial communicative ethic that recognizes and > reciprocates the spiritual dignity and humanity, the likeness of God present in > each participant. > > What message do *I* see in my recent situation? I do not see evidence o fa > monolithic power structure. I see abundant evidence of people willing to work > to overcome divisns and heal hearts and minds. I see people watching my > response without my knowing it. Far from frivinga wedge between people , betwen > beleivers and governing bodes it apears my experience and my response are doing > something else. I know of three people who have enrolled as Bahai's because of > my experience. I know of at least a dozen more, previously unknown to me who > have been uninvolved or marginally involved in the community but who have come > out of the wood work and want to engage the spiritual struggle to transform > themsleves and offer hope and redemption to the world. That is the message of > my case. If it were in my power that is the message I would offer to you my > friends in your journey to the land of the Most Holy. > > warmest regards, > Terry Culhane ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 5:25 PM Subject: Re: Deception: Bahai UHJ You're ignoring my real point: the uhj incessant censorship and suppression of the freedom of conscience Baha'u'llah promised his followers and their seduction of prominent people in the media and government. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Mike Missaghi wrote in message news:7mae0p$h51$1@news1.tc.umn.edu... > If you have read even one Baha'i history, you know that the chronicles of > the Faith are filled with stories of oppression, persecution, unprovoked > violence, and murder on a scale equal to or surpassing that early Christian > history. There has been so much animosity against Baha'is in Iran that the > major Baha'i institutions only respond formally in cases such as the > senseless and groundless hanging of Mr. Rowhani. They speak as a > representative organization, which they are. They were elected by Baha'is > to serve as our voices in national and international affairs, such as this. > Your remarks seem inflammatory--and somewhat unresearched. > > Patrick Henry wrote in message > news:931518627.041.76@news.remarQ.com... > > From: FG > > To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; > > bahai-faith @ makelist.com > > Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 > > Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM > > July 24,1998 > > > > Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: > > > > As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet > > another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements > > made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly > > of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in > > The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally > > lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President > > Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran > > would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international > > community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek > > justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." > > > > The tragic loss of Bahai lives in Iran and the subsequent exploitation > > of their deaths by Bahai spokesmen, often in the American media, > > always courting the President and other members of the government, > > has become a predictable pattern rendered intolerable in the context > > of continuing and pervasive Bahai censorship and denial of human > > and civil rights in the United States and elsewhere. Such incidents as > > I queried you about in my unanswered email of March 31, 1997, > > available on my Web site, regarding the crushing of the magazine > > Dialogue, the resignations of a number of scholars from the Bahai > > Encyclopedia, the attacks on the listserv known as Talisman I at > > Indiana University, the harassing and blacklisting of many individuals, > > Bahai and non-Bahai, suggest profoundly deep-seated problems within > > the Bahai community and administration. > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/To-UHJ1.htm > > > > To these incidents must now be added the apparent conspiracy for more > > than a year and a half of the Bahai Computer and Communications > > Committee (BCCA), under the chairmanship of Mark Towfiq, to defeat > > twice now, along with the collusion of other Bahais, the creation of an > > unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith which would be known as > > talk.religion.bahai. You may find extensive documentation for all of > > these violations of the basic human rights of many Bahais and > > non-Bahais on my Web site, "The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom > > of Conscience": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm > > > > Because the third interest poll for talk.religion.bahai on Usenet is > > approaching, after August 28th, I ask you again to investigate the > > BCCA and its depriving me of access last November from all private > > Bahai-only mailing lists at a crucial moment just when the tide of > > discussion was going very much in favor of the newsgroup, noted by > > many observers. I also ask whether you supported or were involved in > > that decision? The relevant files can be found on my Web site under > > Bahai-Discuss Archives. > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm > > > > Similarly, I would like to know whether your institution or the BCCA has > > approved of or advocated the recent ban of my email signature file by > > the moderators of soc.religion.bahai, as well as their complete ban for > > more than a year and a half now on all discussion regarding > > talk.religion.bahai. > > > > The prevailing atmosphere of suppression of free speech and > > religious conscience that now characterizes the Bahai Faith cannot > > but call into question the honesty of many members of the Bahai > > administration and perhaps the institutions themselves. > > > > I ask once more whether censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith and > > what passages of the Bahai Writings support it, what are the "rules," if > > you will, of Bahai censorship? > > > > Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, > > alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups > > ------ > > > > Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, > > discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i > > Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": > > > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > > > Also see: > > > > Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm > > > > Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm > > > > Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary > Board > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 5:31 PM Subject: Re: Bahai Fireside,response and rebuttal Thanks for posting this. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Dale Grider wrote in message news:379CC120.CE77839C@bellsouth.net... > The Fireside Letters website is a Christian Based response to Baha'i > religion dealing with specifically how Baha'i religion relates to the > Bible and Jesus Christ. The url is > > https://personal.sdf.bellsouth.net/~howdybud > > It demsonstrates an exhaustive and rational defense of the historic > Christian faith and is somewhat an expose' on Baha'i theology. As > polemic a stance as it admittedly takes, The Fireside Letters is a well > reasoned perspective that the Baha'i adherent cannot legitimately ignore > if he or she is to conduct the truly "independent search after truth" > they are supposed to. > > Now one Daniel Grolin, a Baha'i, really studied much of the material > there and has posted a lengthy response to it from a Baha'i viewpoint. > He addresses many important issues in the Christian Baha'i dialogue from > a Baha'i point of view. However, in my rebuttal tothat response, the > seeker has access to three generations of in depth discussion comparing > Christian and Baha'i outlooks. This, I think, is an invaluable portal > through which some striking revelations and conclusions will > objectively come to the surface for one who takes the time to read it. > > For a compelling, challenging, and enlightening read visit the Fireside > Letters website and read the essays there. (Be patient if it seems very > controversial. For you have to consider the critique before Mr. Grolin's > Baha'i response makes sense.) Then log on to the Australian website for > Baha'i/Christian Dialogue at > > https://www.ozemail.com.au/~cdibdin/index.htm > > Where you will find (in the resources section) both Mr. Grolin's > response and my rebuttal to Mr Grolin's paper. > > Again, my rebuttal will undoubtedly be difficult to read for those > committed to Baha'i religion. But in the spirit of an independent search > for truth that needs to leave no stone unturned, no perspective ignored > and unconsidered, it raises and re-raises problematic issues that are > absolutely critical for getting to the truth of things. > > With the hope that through the controversial matters that exist between > us, that shared with grace, long suffering, patience, and in love, Truth > may be found, for Truth is beautiful and of God. > > Dale:) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 5:32 PM Subject: Re: Bahai Fireside, CHRISTIAN response and rebuttal For those interested. Dale Grider wrote in message news:379CC120.CE77839C@bellsouth.net... > The Fireside Letters website is a Christian Based response to Baha'i > religion dealing with specifically how Baha'i religion relates to the > Bible and Jesus Christ. The url is > > https://personal.sdf.bellsouth.net/~howdybud > > It demsonstrates an exhaustive and rational defense of the historic > Christian faith and is somewhat an expose' on Baha'i theology. As > polemic a stance as it admittedly takes, The Fireside Letters is a well > reasoned perspective that the Baha'i adherent cannot legitimately ignore > if he or she is to conduct the truly "independent search after truth" > they are supposed to. > > Now one Daniel Grolin, a Baha'i, really studied much of the material > there and has posted a lengthy response to it from a Baha'i viewpoint. > He addresses many important issues in the Christian Baha'i dialogue from > a Baha'i point of view. However, in my rebuttal tothat response, the > seeker has access to three generations of in depth discussion comparing > Christian and Baha'i outlooks. This, I think, is an invaluable portal > through which some striking revelations and conclusions will > objectively come to the surface for one who takes the time to read it. > > For a compelling, challenging, and enlightening read visit the Fireside > Letters website and read the essays there. (Be patient if it seems very > controversial. For you have to consider the critique before Mr. Grolin's > Baha'i response makes sense.) Then log on to the Australian website for > Baha'i/Christian Dialogue at > > https://www.ozemail.com.au/~cdibdin/index.htm > > Where you will find (in the resources section) both Mr. Grolin's > response and my rebuttal to Mr Grolin's paper. > > Again, my rebuttal will undoubtedly be difficult to read for those > committed to Baha'i religion. But in the spirit of an independent search > for truth that needs to leave no stone unturned, no perspective ignored > and unconsidered, it raises and re-raises problematic issues that are > absolutely critical for getting to the truth of things. > > With the hope that through the controversial matters that exist between > us, that shared with grace, long suffering, patience, and in love, Truth > may be found, for Truth is beautiful and of God. > > Dale:) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 28, 1999 5:47 PM Subject: Re: My case - a letter to my friends Paul, Sorry to see you go. I'll miss you and your candid views on so many issues. I hope you'll somehow find the strength to check in once in a while. The cause of truth needs more voices like you. Perhaps you'll reconsider allowing yourself to be driven away before long. (It's precisely what the fundamentalists are attempting to do. It will only fill them with glee and encourage them.) May the Divine Being bless you and restore peace that surpasses understanding.... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ K. Paul Johnson wrote in message news:379f7363.0@vlinsvr... > Dear Friends and non-friends, > > The Baha'i tradition of writing dismissively, angrily, > contemptuously about people without naming them continues. > Since I'm the target in this case and some factual inaccuracies > are included, I'll respond. But it is with regret that I find myself > made the center of attention here (no--being demonized in fact), > when I simply commented on the dispute between Susan and Paul > about this case and what it reveals about Baha'i administration. > I understand Terry's unwillingness to discuss this further in > public, but also know that we are not friends and thus cannot > discuss it in private. Herewith some reflections: > > : especially an uninformed topic of conversation. One of the dangers of lack of > : knowledge is sheer speculation that allows for the assertion of preformed > : ideological templates to dominate discourse. > > Lack of knowledge isn't total in this case, and the speculation > isn't sheer. Nor are ideological templates the issue. > Considerable but not total (who has that?) knowledge of how Baha'i > administration has been operating in recent years, and what Susan > and Paul revealed about this particular case, inspired my > speculation. It wasn't any ideological template but specific > real recent history that made and makes me suspicious of the AO. > A few years ago I had no such suspicions, even though I was not a > believer. > > snip > : > : The response of the House of Justice ia hardly a case of "Plausibility > : structures and denial. > > Terry seems to have read in great haste my remarks on this. They were > *entirely* directed to the issue of the relative persuasiveness of > Susan and Paul on the Baha'i Administrative Order. He has > nothing to gain by taking his stance; she has a lot to gain by > taking hers. > snip > > Their letter was a > : response to my questions two months earlier before anything related to the > : April 7 letter becamea public issue. The disingenious > combination of the > : sociologocal concept of plausability structuresd > > they were combined only in being mentioned in the same post, and > had no connection otherwise. > > with the ideological concept > : of "plausible denial" is an example of a preformed template that will generate > : conclusions even in the absence of substantive knowledge of a case. In this > : situation the facts of my case. > > I think the preformed template here is being imposed on my words, > totally misunderstood. > > snip > : > : Friends, dictators and totalitarians do not express deep regret that a > : soul was disressed or estranged by certian actions. > > Sure they do, if it is in their interest to do so. I bet you > could find plenty of such letters from Stalin or Hitler. > > They most assuredly do not > : take steps or direct that steps be taken to resolve the anguish or distess of > : *one human being. > > If a situation has gotten out of hand and threatens to undermine > public confidence; if it turns a firm supporter of the AO like > Susan into a crusader for a persecuted person's case; if the > facts of the matter are on the side of the victim-- why not do > precisely what they did? It was in their interest. > > yet that is exactly what the House of Justice did in my case. > : They intervened on my behalf because of the mistakes that were made in my case > : by Institutional representatives. > : > : For anyone who is unable to distinguish bettwen acts of love and care and > : hypocritical PR damage control I have compassion. > > I don't think Terry feels anything but pure hostility for me, > based on serious misrepresentation of my remarks. I NEVER > said that any regrets expressed to him were insincere. I said > that the denial that he had been targeted was insincere. *Someone* > was threatened by his theology; *someone* attacked it in the > April 7 letter without naming him; we will never know the total facts > of who was thinking what about whom when it was written. I don't > believe their denials. Guess that makes me Satan. > > This kind of cynical linkage > : is an example Orwellian newspeak where love becomes hate. > > I'll switch to the second person here. > You have misunderstood me, and reacted based on misunderstanding. > I forgive that, and apologize for commenting on the basis of > limited information. I am very sorry about your trials and > torments. If at present you need to turn all your blame and > anger and hostility on me, demonizing me as an example of > everything wrong with humanity, I won't blame you for it. I'll > blame the ordeal you've been through, and the fact that you don't > choose to attribute responsibility for that ordeal to the system > that produced it. > : > snip > : There is no monolithic system around the Bahai world bent on crushing > : people. > > That's a straw man. There is a system bent on "protecting the > Faith" and if crushing people is part of the process, so be it. > I'm sorry that you were temporarily one of its victims. > > This will be my final contribution to any Baha'i discussion on > the Net. It is pretty shocking to find oneself demonized so > dramatically by someone for whom one feels only sympathy and > sorrow. I take it (ideological template or no) as further > evidence of the toxicity of the whole Baha'i system, > something I personally must avoid for reasons of spiritual > health. That business about contagious spiritual disease really > does have some merit. No organization I belong to, no individual > I know has the kind of problems Baha'is are experiencing daily > with their system. It's not my problem, and no one is benefited > by my taking it on as a burden. You will have to work it out for > yourselves. But my heart bleeds for you all. > > Best wishes to you all, friend and foe > > Paul ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 6:40 AM Subject: Re: Complaints to the UHJ Macleod, I couldn't agree more. It seems, however, that the totalitarian-minded among our fellow Bahais have decidedly different views on the matter, especially Bahais of Iranian extraction who bring that kind of thing with them out of their culture, which they have made the dominant culture of the Bahai faith. I have seen no EVIDENCE that the situation will ever change. The uhj's April 1999 letter suggests only that the purges will continue for many years to come. As a result, the only alternative Bahais of conscience have is to boycott the summer schools and other functions, which of course has been done now by many for decades. Those who do so are pejoratively dubbed "inactive" by the fundamentalists, imagining they hold the high ground, when they're actually undermining the ground beneath their feet. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ macleod wrote in message news:933205975.8060.0.nnrp-08.c2de8324@news.demon.co.uk... > A recent heartfelt and at times quite beautiful posting must surely have > touched us all. > As the author clearly wished no further discussion of his involvement in the > matter I would respect that. > > However before he was involved there was the incident that kicked it all > off. Two individuals complained to the UHJ about the content of a workshop. > I can't help feeling that in most organisations the result would have been a > polite letter signed by someone other than the UHJ telling the complainers > that the UHJ does not directly concern itself with the content of workshops > in Bahai schools and referring them to the school authorities. I can't help > feeling that that would have been a very good thing. > Sooner or later the logistics of a growing Faith will force us to abandon > the idea that the UHJ/NSA etc. are there to answer every little thought we > may have. > I believe the sooner the better. > > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 6:55 AM Subject: Re: CULHANE - Bahai heresy trial (Re: My case - a letter to my friends ) One instance, possibly a ruse, can not serve as a precedent, given the tyranny the uhj has viciously displayed against so many people. The only EVIDENCE that could possibly mean anything is ending REVIEW and dealing justly with the fundamentalist "jerks" who have badgered and beaten to their knees so many of their fellow Bahais. "The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice." Ignoring and sweeping such incidents under the carpet will not restore confidence in the possibility of the uhj actually ever being able now to live up to its name. After ending REVIEW, if the uhj is sincere, it can begin, among other incidents, by restoring my right to the Bahai-only email lists and investigating the BCCA for suspending my rights during a crucial period of the 2nd vote for talk.religion.bahai, including the role of Mark Towfiq in depriving myself and others of our free speech rights guaranteed by the Writings and Baha'u'llah. There are other such incidents too of which justice requires a full account be made. For documentation on BCCA complicity see https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm I doubt any true change of heart has taken place with the uhj and the administrative "jerks." -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7noc62$q45$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Dear Patrick: > > For the most part I agree with you - things are not as fine and dandy as > some are saying - but to be fair some of the frank admissions made by > the UHJ quoted by Culhane in his missive give one cause to pause and > reflect as to what exactly is going on within the Baha'i administration. > There's the April 7th letter and now this which contradicts key points > of what the letter stands for. Given this, one either has to conclude > that the administration is either schizoprenic or that consensus is far > from unified. Have they finally read the message? I'm not holding my > breath but it does seem that the manner in which Culhane was dealt with > was uncharacteristic of how similar cases were handled in the past > several years. Is this going to set a positive precedent for the future? > We'll have to wait and see. > > Puzzled but hopeful, > Berekiah Zarco > > > > I find your case quite unpersuasive. The "evidence" you > > present is only one case versus many, many individuals. > > Your own temperament affects, perhaps, your understanding > > of what has happened as well. > > > > In the context of the "jerks" in the administrative order, during > > the last decade, repeatedly terrorizing and attacking people, > > your one incident, or your interpretation of it, counts for very > > little.... > > > > The only EVIDENCE that would mean anything to me whatsoever > > would be the termination of REVIEW by the UHJ and the end of > > heresy trials such as your own. > > > > They also owe a number of people unambiguous apologies and > > should investigate a number of Bahai fundamentalists "jerks" both on > > and off line, publically rectifying and reprimanding them for their > > misdeeds. > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher, "Give me liberty or give me death!" > > The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > > Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > > > TLCULHANE wrote in message > > news:19990728141251.04802.00003841@ng-bk1.aol.com... > > > > > > Dear Friends, > > > > > > I had hoped my case would not be a topic of public conversation > and > > > especially an uninformed topic of conversation. One of the dangers > of lack > > of > > > knowledge is sheer speculation that allows for the assertion of > preformed > > > ideological templates to dominate discourse. > > > > > > Please consider this an open letter to my friends. It will be the > only > > > public response I will make. If anyone wishes to continue to speak > with me > > > about it I will do that in a private conversation as among friends. > > > > > > In February I had a meeting with two ABm's. The original purpose > of > > the > > > meeting was to gather information about a workshop I had presented > at > > Bosch > > > Bahai school. Two people (out of 62 attendees) had written to the > House of > > > Justice protesting what they understood about my comments. > > > > > > The House of Justice passed the 'protest message' to the NSA and > the > > > Continental Counselors for follow up. The Counselors in turn > authorized > > two > > > ABm's to meet with me to gather information about what had taken > place at > > > Bosch. So far so good. > > > > > > One of the ABm's concluded that this was an opportunity to do > more > > than > > > inquire after information. This person effectively conducted the > meeting > > as > > > though it was an interrogation of my theological views among them my > views > > of > > > the station of Baha u llah, my interest in the Maiden writings of > Baha u > > llah > > > and ,of course, my discussion of the Mashriqu l Adhkar . That was > the > > problem > > > as well as how the meeting was arranged and conducted by the ABm. > > > > > > I was not informed two ABm's would be present, nor who authorized > the > > meeting > > > or to whom the ABm's would be reporting. > > > > > > Friends I am quite human and cycled through a series of emotions > from > > anger > > > to betrayal,to disgust, to bewilderment and frustration and relief. > I went > > > thorugh this twice, once in February and again in May after the > April 7 > > letter > > > became public. > > > > > > How did I handle this 'test' of my faith and why have I *chosen* > to > > remain a > > > Bahai? The simple explanation is I love Baha u llah. As many of you > know I > > am a > > > mystic by temperament which explains my attraction to the spiritual > and > > social > > > reality of the Mashriqu l Adhkar and the "Maiden " writings of Baha > u > > llah. > > > Both times during my "emotional cycle" S/He came to me and I was > draped in > > that > > > "silken Robe of Light." As best I can describe in words we "talked" > about > > my > > > pain and anguish and " My distress and banishment in this remote > prison." > > This > > > is the personal God who reached in and touched my soul and said I > > understand > > > and shared with me that "perfume of a grace which to tongue can > describe." > > I > > > was reminded that "this not a field for the foolish and faint of > heart." > > If I > > > thought the vision of Baha u llah was easily realized, that all the > hope > > and > > > redemption that His message represents was attainable without effort > or > > without > > > transformation I learned better. The course of human history in > general > > and > > > religious history in particular will change but it will be through > > > multigenerational blood sweat and spirtual tears. > > > > > > In the midst of this struggle I wrote to the Counselors and the > House of > > > Justice , the latter on March 30. I have met with Counselor Birkland > twice > > and > > > we have spoken fro several hours about my case and what I called in > my > > letter > > > to the House the "far too widespread culture of fear and suspicion > in the > > > community. > > > > > > The Counselor extened me an apology for what happened and he > assumed > > > responsibility for it. There was no passing the buck or kicking the > > proverbial > > > dog in his response to me. Our conversations were honest ,open and > > reflective > > > on both our parts. He was gracious and loving in his conversations > with > > me. he > > > also clearly said to me that as Counselor he has no problem with my > > theological > > > views and they were not at issue. This saga has also affected my > > community and > > > he has been most supportive of the LSA and its goals and has > publically > > > expressed that support. I have greast respect for anyone who is > capable of > > > admitting mistakes,assuming responsibility for them and looking for > ways > > to > > > move forward and heal divisions and misunderstandings. This is > exactly how > > > Counselor Birkland responded to me and therfore it can be stated I > have > > great > > > respect for his character as a man. > > > In the course of my conversations with the Counselor and my > observation > > of > > > his interaction with the LSA and the community I have been able to > observe > > in > > > action what I write about as the *ethic* of consultation and its > > requirements > > > of mutual recognition and reciprocity. I understand consultation to > be a > > *non > > > adversarial* form of communicative action and the recognition and > > reciprocity > > > involved is fundamentally about the recognition (the irfan) tha we > are all > > made > > > in the image and likeness of God. That is the starting point of > Bahai > > discourse > > > in my view. I have observed the Counselor engage what I write about. > I > > had > > > similar conversations with Counselor Ghadirian, and Paul Dodenhoff > will > > > understand my reference here, whom I found to be an example of > Abraham > > Heschels > > > "analysis of piety." > > > > > > In late May the famous April 7 letter became public.I was very > concerned > > > about its reference to the Mashriqu l Adhkar as I had raised this > question > > > directly with the House in my March 30 letter to them. This letter , > which > > I > > > have said before and wil state again is one of the more poorly > written > > letters > > > to come from the World Centre. Poor writing style is somethging > which can > > be > > > clarified and improved upon.Iit is not *proof" of dictatorial > behavior. On > > may > > > 26 I wrote a summary of my views of the Mashriqul Adhkar and sent a > copy > > of > > > it,with reference to my March 30 letter to the House of Justice. On > May 31 > > I > > > received a letter from the House of Justice which stated: > > > " The House of Justice very much appreciates the clarity and > candor of > > your > > > expression in regard to the issues troubling you. It wishes, first > of > > all, for > > > you to be assured that it did not say or feel that you had violated > any of > > its > > > policies or had been disobedient to it in relation to your > discussions > > about > > > the Mashriqu'l-Adhkar." > > > > > > The response of the House of Justice ia hardly a case of > "Plausibility > > > structures and denial. I am perfectly capable of discussing > "plausability" > > as > > > it is used in the sociology of knowledge especially as formulated by > > Berger and > > > Luchmann.The ideological twist to it is innacurate on theoertical > grounds > > and > > > inapplicable to the coments of the House of Justice. Their letter > was a > > > response to my questions two months earlier before anything related > to the > > > April 7 letter becamea public issue. The disingenious combination of > the > > > sociologocal concept of plausability structuresd with the > ideological > > concept > > > of "plausible denial" is an example of a preformed template that > will > > generate > > > conclusions even in the absence of substantive knowledge of a case. > In > > this > > > situation the facts of my case. > > > > > > My conversations with the Counseolrs have reinforced my > convivtion > > that > > > this comm ent in the April 7 letter did not and was not intended to > refer > > to my > > > actions. As early as March 20 Counselor Birklnad reiterated that > point to > > me in > > > our conversation. I aslo know for a *fact* that the Counselor had > been in > > > communication with the World Centre about my case and that the House > > wanted the > > > Counselor to meet with me and resolve this problem. > > > Furthermore the House of Justice wrote: > > > > > > "That the meeting to which you were invited by the Auxiliary Board > > members > > > became a cause of distress to you is deeply regretted by the House > of > > Justice. > > > But it was glad to learn from your email that Counsellor Stephen > Birkland > > met > > > with you subsequently in a sympathetic attempt to remedy the > difficulties > > of > > > your experience. You should therefore feel assured that your > concern has > > been > > > taken seriously and an earnest attempt made to deal with it. The > House of > > > Justice trusts that the burden of your heart has thus been relieved > and > > that > > > you can now refocus your energies on continuing your dedicated > service to > > the > > > Cause." > > > > > > Friends, dictators and totalitarians do not express deep regret > that > > a > > > soul was disressed or estranged by certian actions. They most > assuredly do > > not > > > take steps or direct that steps be taken to resolve the anguish or > distess > > of > > > *one human being. yet that is exactly what the House of Justice did > in my > > case. > > > They intervened on my behalf because of the mistakes that were made > in my > > case > > > by Institutional representatives. > > > > > > For anyone who is unable to distinguish bettwen acts of love and > care > > and > > > hypocritical PR damage control I have compassion. This kind of > cynical > > linkage > > > is an example Orwellian newspeak where love becomes hate. Are we > really so > > long > > > gone and so far from Baha u llah that acts of love, > kindness,magnanimity > > cannot > > > be perceived for what they are?Iis the world truly that barren ? > > > > > > I am many things but pollyanna is not one of them. I am Jamesian > twice > > born > > > soul who has hope. And that hope involves believing in spite of the > > evidence > > > and watching the evidence change. It is easy to be cynical. In a > world > > that > > > needs the hope and promise that life can be lived at a higher level > and > > that > > > needs to know human history canchange,however slowly or haltingly > cynicism > > and > > > prolonged despair is a betrayal of the centuries long aspirations of > human > > > beings. I believe with all my heart that anyone,of whatever > background or > > > religious tradition who indulges such despair has not simply > forgotten God > > but > > > has forgotten humanity. My challenge to my friends is to forego the > > temptation > > > of cynicism and despair because the "wondrous system" of Baha u llah > has > > not > > > attained perfection. Perfection and transformation do not happen in > the > > > abstract they happen with real human beings. The "system" of Baha u > llah > > will > > > only function as well as the people who comprise it. Their is much > work to > > be > > > done and it is the spiritual obligation of each of us to engage the > > struggle of > > > hope and redemption in both it smeaning of overcoming 'sin' and > > imperfection > > > and as the fulfillment of a promise. > > > I dont say this inognorance. I say this as one who has had his > faith > > severely > > > tested in ways that are only meaningful to me. in the past year > both my > > > daughters bran surgery and stroke and my threological interogation > have > > been > > > major spurituakl battles. They have rocked me at the core of me > being. > > Baha u > > > llah uppoed the ante for terry Culhane. I want to "see": my beloeved > and > > She > > > sais "howmany Husayns greater thanthee have professed their love. I > hope > > my > > > willingness to engage the struggle and keep turning to Baha ullah is > some > > > measure of my love. I often said that if ones wants Paradise, > Baghdad the > > abode > > > of peace,the road to that *place* passes through Tehren and the > Siyah > > Chal. > > > Each of us has our Siyah Chal our secret place of feasr and despair > of > > dreans > > > lost and hopes dashed. yet I can say that we are never alne , the > odder > > of > > > that silken Robe of Light is there. Our response is a matter of > "learning > > the > > > art of loves ways and the secret of heart surrender." My dear > friends go > > head > > > and learn that art and surrender. Give yourself permission! I am a > nobody, > > a > > > garden level mystic who Baha u llah did not abandon and who the > House of > > > Justice did not abandon. > > > > > > The House is keenly aware of the limitations and imperfections of > the > > > community ,including the functioning of its administrative bodies > And they > > did > > > not ask me to preten all was yet paradise, there was no denial nor > attempt > > to > > > stiffle me ot shut me up. They acknowledge reality but hey refuse > to sink > > into > > > a cynical despair. > > > They offered me the same challenge Baha u llah has offered me to > believe > > and > > > do the work in spite of any evidence and to watch and make the > evidence > > change. > > > > > > In response to my concerns about problems "mistakes" and the > culture of > > fear > > > and suspicion that I noted they wrote" > > > > > > " A perspective that may assist in your review of the experience > is that > > > the institutions of the Faith operating throughout the world, like > > individual > > > believers, are struggling to achieve the high ideals set for them in > the > > > Writings, and they inevitably make some mistakes even with the best > of > > motives. > > > Fortunately, the consequences of such mistakes often provide them > with the > > > empirical bases for shaping their evolution towards maturity. To > the > > extent > > > that the individuals affected are able to deal successfully, both > > spiritually > > > and practically, with the tests involved, the institutions and > individuals > > > derive mutual benefits. The believers and their God-given > institutions > > are > > > intimately joined in a common endeavor to advance the development of > a new > > > World Order. A significant degree of magnanimity on the part of > each is > > > essential." > > > > > > The House of Justice openly acknowledges mistakes were made and > have > > been > > > made. Please be fair in your judgement. Do dictators openly > acknowledge > > > mistakes on the part of governing bodies and express *hope* that > both > > those > > > governing bodies and the individuals harmed will learn from them and > move > > > forward? > > > > > > They express the recognition that mistakes are trying and can > cause > > > "distress" to souls. They also expres the *Hope* that individuals > such as > > > myself will 'hang in there.' And most important they recognize that > > ';hanging > > > inther ' requires 'magnanimity". Even a dictoinary can provide us > with the > > > richness and challenge of the concept of magnanimity. Yet in the > midst of > > all > > > that and inthe recognition of mistakes they asked me to consider > the > > > struggles of the Institutions in our common enterprise. In other > words > > they > > > asked me to consult, to put *my money where my mouth is about > consultation > > as > > > mutual recognition and reciprocity. That recognition is that we are > in > > this > > > together. Not withstanding that request they close that section of > my > > letter > > > with the following comment. > > > " This does not mean, of course, that mistakenactions on their part > > should be > > > ignored." > > > > > > Again be fair in your judgement. Do those bent on dictatorial > control > > suggest > > > that mistakes should not be ignored.? > > > There is no monolithic system around the Bahai world bent on > crushing > > > people. There are folks everywhere with varying perceptins of what > is > > important > > > about the Faith of Baha u llah. We all have to face the struggle to > > engage the > > > standards of Baha u llah and not succumb to cynicism and despair > when the > > > inevitable imperfections and "mistakes" appear. That is even more > true > > when we > > > encounter the bonna fide jerks within the community. Baha u llah > promised > > many > > > things in His redemptive message. He did not promise that jerks > would not > > > become Bahais. How do we respond to mistakes -- with magnanimity > and with > > the > > > expectation that consultation must and will take place to address > > mistakes. > > > That consultation is a non adversarial communicative ethic that > recognizes > > and > > > reciprocates the spiritual dignity and humanity, the likeness of God > > present in > > > each participant. > > > > > > What message do *I* see in my recent situation? I do not see > evidence > > o fa > > > monolithic power structure. I see abundant evidence of people > willing to > > work > > > to overcome divisns and heal hearts and minds. I see people watching > my > > > response without my knowing it. Far from frivinga wedge between > people , > > betwen > > > beleivers and governing bodes it apears my experience and my > response are > > doing > > > something else. I know of three people who have enrolled as Bahai's > > because of > > > my experience. I know of at least a dozen more, previously unknown > to me > > who > > > have been uninvolved or marginally involved in the community but who > have > > come > > > out of the wood work and want to engage the spiritual struggle to > > transform > > > themsleves and offer hope and redemption to the world. That is the > message > > of > > > my case. If it were in my power that is the message I would offer to > you > > my > > > friends in your journey to the land of the Most Holy. > > > > > > warmest regards, > > > Terry Culhane > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 7:00 AM Subject: Re: censorship on Baha'i Studies Juan isn't perfect. I've caught him at more than one gaff in the past. However, Maneck is the biggest hypocrit in the Bahai world as far as I'm concerned..... Notice here she's changed the subject once again. For more on this TECHNIQUE of hers see the end of The Bahai Technique: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Smaneck wrote in message news:19990728203517.28518.00005132@ng-ch1.aol.com... > Dear friends, > > One detail that Juan is neglecting to mention in this affair is that Juan had > been told his posts were not welcome on Baha'i Studies *after* he had informed > me that I was not to post on Talisman. Furthermore It was *because* of the fact > that certain persons and perspectives were being excluded from Juan's list in > order to further his agenda that the management of Baha'i Studies came to take > the form it did. > > As for the issue of our talking about Juan on the list, it should be recalled > thatf various members of the Baha'i Institutions have been slandered on H-Bahai > who would not be allowed to post there. When this issue was raised on Talisman > Juan attempted to cloud the issue by asserting that any 'author' whose work was > discussed on the list would be welcome to respond. Needless to say most of the > persons who were subject to this kind of calmuny (I need not go into specifics > because it is basically the same stuff you are reading here) are not authors > whose books are being critiqued. It is their character, actions and motives > that are being assaulted. Indeed most of the forums in which Juan has slandered > members of the Institutions (H-Bahai, JSSR, etc.) are ones in which they would > not have access. For him to complain about not getting egual time in precisely > those areas where he is not willing to give it is sheer hypocrisy. > > > Susan Stiles Maneck > History, Stetson University ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 7:16 AM Subject: Re: Letter of resignation Smaneck wrote in message news:19990727215007.15885.00004166@ng-fi1.aol.com... But I expect Terry will be explaining what happened > for himself presently which will end the need for me to do this myself Notice the setup for Culhane's entrance.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, July 30, 1999 6:48 AM Subject: Re: CULHANE - Bahai heresy trial (Re: My case - a letter to my friends ) While there is wisdom to your reading of other tyrants, there is no EVIDENCE that it truly applies to the nine on Mt. Carmel. Linger for a moment on the emotive nature of Mr. Culhane's naive message. It is precisely such personalities that are given to credulity. The only EVIDENCE that would mean anything whatsoever to me would be the lifting of the Iron Curtain of "review" and the administrative "jerks" receiving justice. I'm confident that's not going to happen. It will all simply have to be knocked down like the Berlin Wall by the masses using the Internet and other means. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7nr3b2$k9g$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Dear Patrick: > > It's not a matter of a "change of heart" or "sincerity." After all > fundamentalists and authoritarian types just don't change overnight. But > maybe they've finally realized the polarizing effect that their overt > clinging to rigid policies has produced - especially how much bad PR > this can generate for the BF outside of the community - and so are > therefore taking pragmatic steps, for expediency's sake, using the > Culhane episode as a test-case to set a public precedent. This can in > the long run be a good thing. Don't underestimate it. The move to reform > always begins with such gestures (look at the Soviet Union in the > Andropov and early Gorbachev years). > Another possibility (that could be a factor working in tandem > with the above) could be that the Baha'i administration is wanting to > extract itself in an ostensibly honorable manner out of the predicament > it created for itself in 1996 with the demise of Talisman One and > following aftermath. They could be diffusing tensions, so to speak. This > can also be a good thing because it is a concession in many respects and > could move the administration to make further concessions in the future > (it would have to if it's seeking to be known in a positive light or at > least attempting to neutralize the criticism directed against it), which > again if not producing outright reform, is at least a move towards it. > Who knows? > My assumption here is predicated upon the important lesson of > history that dictatorships do not last forever and sometimes those very > dictators are forced to democratise to save their own skins (look at > what's been happening in Iran for the past two years). > > Berekiah Zarco > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, July 30, 1999 6:54 AM Subject: Re: CULHANE - Bahai heresy trial (Re: My case - a letter to my friends ) "Consulting" with people who have proven themselves liars and tyrants is risible. A Most Great Purge needs to take place, and a very basic Reformation of the means of procedure, enacted in full public view, with true justice dispensed to the administrative "jerks" who have perverted the Teachings of Baha'u'llah and terrorized absolutely huge numbers of people right out of the Bahai faith. Anything else would be the machinations of liars and thieves attempting to hold on to their fascist abuse of power. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Smaneck wrote in message news:19990730011329.07007.00000861@ng-ch1.aol.com... > Berekiah wrote: > > > My assumption here is predicated upon the important lesson of > >history that dictatorships do not last forever and sometimes those very > >dictators are forced to democratise to save their own skins (look at > >what's been happening in Iran for the past two years). > > Dear Berekiah, > > You are missing entirely the most important lesson in all of this; namely that > if we utilize consultation they way 'Abdu'l-Baha expects we should then these > problems can be resolved. Otherwise, the polarization just gets worse. It is as > a member of the Baha'i Studies list remarked today " The > only answer is for institutions and individuals to regularly consult and > keep at it for years if necessary, because that method is pretty much > guarranteed to get at the truth, if it is followed faithfully and morally > and emotionally and intellectually honestly... really" > > > > Susan Stiles Maneck > History, Stetson University ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, July 30, 1999 7:14 AM Subject: Re: TRANSCRIPT: The Pickering Tape (BAHAI) From the talisman archive for April 1996. #1 is Henderson #2 is the Most Honorable Judge James Nelson. I believe a full transcript of this tape is still much needed for the Bahais and others to understand what truly took place. I would be happy to transcribe and post the entire tape if someone would like to send it to me, anonymously or otherwise, at PO Box 81842 Rochester, Michigan 48308 -- Frederick Glaysher, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ From jrcole@umich.eduFri Apr 12 14:50:37 1996 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 18:32:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Juan R Cole To: Rick Schaut Cc: "'talisman@indiana.edu'" Subject: RE: criticism of NSA policies Rick: I appreciate your measured response, and find myself in agreement with much of what you say. I brought the matter up only as an example. But for the record I have evidence that at least two NSA members were very intimately involved in supporting the Travel Agency monopoly that they set up. Moreover, if they did in fact step over the line and break the law by using threats of spiritual sanctions to reduce business competition, this would be a serious matter. People have gone to jail for analogous infractions, and public officials have resigned or been forced to resign over them. The NSA actions also may have cost Baha'i travel agents and their customers money, and subjected them to spiritual duress, which would be an arbitrary use of power. I enclose, so that others can judge for themselves, some passages from a transcript of a taped conversation between two NSA members and a Baha'i travel agent that took place the summer before the World Congress. Since I am only interested in the rights and wrongs in an abstract way, I have not included the names of the principals. Cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan NSA Member #1: We're calling, Mr. X, about your package offered for the World Congress. We have some concerns about it. The National Spiritual Assembly has asked X and me to consult with you-- Baha'i Travel Agent: --O.K. NSA Member # 1: --about it and tell you what we think and make a few suggestions. Baha'i Travel Agent: Sure. NSA Member # 1: First of all, we're concerned that there were some misrepresentations made in your brochure or what looks like from the copy I've got-- Baha'i TA: The recent one we sent out about our package? Hm hm. NSA Member # 1: And there are some incomplete and inaccuracies stated in yours compared to what you will be able to deliver at a guaranteed price . . . [expresses concern about Baha'i Travel Agent's past refusal to accept credit cards when arranging pilgrimages to Haifa, which has sometimes left Baha'is unable actually to go, and left the NSA to pay for their tickets) . . . We have a bit of concern that people are going to go for price only and neglect the essentials that you don't mention that they're going to get if they take the Logistics Office package. We are concerned that you are not going to be in a position to deliver them the airfares at the rate that you say. We will be, because we're locked into a no-lose situation. That is, if the fares go down, we get the down, if they go up, we get the guarantee. And . . . Baha'i Travel Agent: The same thing is true here. NSA Member # 1: We--You can do that? Baha'i Travel Agent: I work directly through US Air. Uh huh. NSA Member # 1: All right, then: I want you not to say, then, and you are directed not to say that if airfare prices increase substantially we will have to pass on the increase to the clients. Baha'i Travel Agent: All right--we've sent out a second letter. This was done while I was in Europe . . . I've made some corrections because of that. And we do not say--we say we do guarantee it . . . NSA Member # 1: Then we want you to spell out completely in your brochure that you do not offer transportation from the airport to the airport or between Jacob Javits Center and the hotel. Baha'i Travel Agent: O.k. . . . It does say that . . . [reads new brochure, which mentions that taxis can be taken to the Jacob Javitz center and that it is walking distance in good weather] NSA Member # 1: We want you to list the current price from the hotels to Javits and back . . . Baha'i Travel Agent: I'm not through, yet, sir . . . NSA Member # 1: I'm doing this as we go through, because I tell you this, when we get through we are going to publish in the American Baha'i a direct comparison-- Baha'i Travel Agent: Hm, hm. NSA Member # 1: And I want your comparison to agree with ours. Baha'i Travel Agent: How can you do that with a business? NSA Member # 1: We are not getting you out of business. We are simply comparing-- Baha'i Travel Agent: Oh, I know that sir. I didn't say that. I said, how can you require that of a business? We're just, like, representing, any other business. NSA Member # 1: You don't have to do it, sir. Baha'i Travel Agent: Oh, O.K. NSA Member # 1: But I tell you, you will be in some peril if you don't. [What is going on here is that the NSA has discovered that its Logistics Office prices are very high and can be easily undercut by Baha'i travel agents. This puts in doubt whether they can arrange enough reservations to receive the $50,000 in free suites from the official travel agency. The first tack it takes is that these are fly by night operations that don't guarantee the airfares. But this does not prove true. Then they want to push the idea that the competing packages are not full service, and don't include taxi fare (as if that could account for a $300 difference). At this point, the travel agent begins to realize that the NSA Logistics Office is trying to *compete* with him and trying to put conditions on how he can compete with it. He realizes that this is an anti-Trust violation, and questions how the NSA can place conditions on economic competitors. The NSA member, aware of the fine line he is treading, denies he is trying to prevent a competitor from doing business. The travel agent presses the point that NSA actions could nevertheless be perceived as attempting to place conditions on an economic competitor, which is still illegal. The NSA member realizes where this is going, and backs down. "You don't have to do it, sir." The travel agent is relieved. Then the NSA member appears to lose his temper. "But I tell you you will be in some peril if you don't," he adds. At this point I think he has stepped over the line into an illegal anti-trust violation. He is attempting to browbeat a competitor with the NSA Logistics Office, and to put conditions on the nature of the competition between them.) Baha'i Travel Agent: . . . We've had a number of people contact us and all we've tried to do is provide people who say they just cannot go with a way they can go. And we're not trying in any way to cut into your program, because we only have space for 550 . . . And all we're trying to do is help those like the ones in South Carolina, whole assemblies, that just say they could not go unless they had the less price. NSA Member # 1: You don't think our package includes the lesser price? Baha'i Travel Agent: No, sir. [NSA member # 2 alleges that the only safe way to have the World Congress travel accommodations taken care of is to have one Travel Agency handle everyone; and he intimates that the Universal House of Justice wanted the NSA to do it that way, though he says this in an ambiguous manner). NSA Member # 2: . . . One of our urgent concerns is that your material creates the impression you can provide a lower price. That is false. As you know, our materials indicate that the friends are guaranteed the lowest available price from any source at they time they travel . . . Your materials suggest that you can beat our prices. In fact, that is not true. One of the things the National Assembly wants you to address is the perception that you have created deliberately through your materials that you provide a lower cost. This suggests that the Institution has cheated the friends . . . [In fact, virtually any travel agent could have gotten a Baha'i a better price than than most Logistics Office packages afforded. This NSA member is either wholly uninformed or is being, uh, disingenuous. His suggestion that offering a lower price is forbidden because it makes the NSA look like it is cheating the friends is outrageous; it is an attempt to bully this individual into not offering competing, lower packages. Again, I think these statements border on illegality under anti-trust laws.) [This conversation went on for some time more, with much browbeating of the poor travel agent, and a final plea for him to withdraw his competing package, on the grounds that he could simply not provide a better price than did the Logistics Office. It is hard not to conclude that all parties here knew that the travel agent could in fact substantially undercut Logistics Office prices, but that putting things this way was a polite cover for bullying a competitor.\} Please note that I don't think the NSA members were personally profiting from the arrangements that had been made. I think their concerns are as they repeatedly stated them. They liked the idea of a centralized Travel Agency with a standardized package that cut down on the likelihood of out-of-town Baha'is wandering around New York (one caller inquired about camping facilities in New Jersey from the Logistics Office or their Travel Agent, and were told that there *were none!* When a complaint was lodged, Wilmette replied that they hadn't wanted people camping out). The official Travel Agency was offering the sweetener of $50,000 in free rooms if a certain number of Baha'is used them, and the NSA for some reason was fixated on getting this bonus (which, it is true, benefitted the Fund in a small way, not individuals). And since the NSA had made this unwise and untrue claim that their package was guaranteed the cheapest, they minded that being demonstrated to be untrue (were they afraid they might become responsible for the difference, themselves? Or just that someone would think they were taking profits or a kickback? There is no evidence of the latter). The fact remains that their solution to these problems, of bullying Baha'i Travel Agents (there were others) into cancelling competing reservations was at the least unethical and an arbitrary use of the spiritual authority they have; and was possibly even illegal. Along with their earlier bullying of the Dialogue editors, and their recent attempt to coerce the speech of one of our Talismanians, all this amounts to a worrisome *pattern* of behavior which I myself have difficulty seeing as very Baha'i-like. The naivete of the general run of Baha'is and their refusal to accept that any irregularities could occur in Wilmette by virtue of divine grace have perhaps deprived the NSA of useful community feedback on these sorts of problem. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, August 06, 1999 5:53 PM Subject: Re: Techniques for saving Iranian Baha'is: and for saving the Baha'i community I would say Step I has already been implemented. The uhj and the fundamentalist "jerks" have long been informed by the numerous victims of its pogroms. Step II has been in process for sometime and continues. I'd be interested in discussing how Step II might be accelerated or augmented. I would be happy to appear in court or any other public forum to educate leaders of opinion, the government, or social or humanitarian organizations, regarding the true nature of what the Bahai faith has become in practice, versus theory, including those members of the UN who are regularly seduced into believing the bahai faith lives up to its writings and the vision of its Founder. I'm no longer sure the bahai faith can be saved from the machinations of the literal-minded. I do believe the Bahai thing to do is to save the innocent, Bahais and non-Bahais, from the misrepresentations of the fanatics on the uhj. -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Juan Cole wrote in message news:7oa8sp$t$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > I'd like to raise the question of whether we don't see an implicit model > for social action in the way the Universal House of Justice and the > External Affairs Office of the National Spiritual Assembly of the U.S. > has dealt with the issue of the persecution of the Iranian Baha'is. > > Let us consider the problem. Under Khomeinism, Iranian Baha'is have > been persecuted ruthlessly, though Khomeini's successors prefered > jailings, harassment and exclusion from universities and good jobs > rather than the more brutal and explicit technique of simple execution, > used extensively in the 1980s. > > Baha'is are pledged to obey the government in power. So they had to > disband their institutions at the command of the Islamic Republic. What > could be done? > > Well, first, secret contacts were made by leading members of the Baha'i > community with the more moderate ayatollahs, pleading for an end to the > pogrom. However, many of those moderates, like Shariatmadari, > themselves fell out of favor, and these pleadings were decisively > rebuffed by Khomeini. > > In the second stage, the Baha'i institutions began providing information > on persecution to Amnesty International, the European Parliament, the > United Nations High Commission on Human Rights, and the US congress. > This information, provided as part of a concerted lobbying campaign > orchestrated by a hired Public Relations firm working for the US NSA, > resulted in widespread and frequent condemnations of the Iranian > government for its treatment of the Baha'is in the late 1980s. These > condemnations were among the reasons for which Rafsanjani, on becoming > President after Khomeini's death, backed off the executions. I think > only one Baha'i was executed in all the time he was President, > 1989-1997. > > Of course, Baha'is continued to face discrimination in the 1990s, and > the Baha'i institutions have publicized these facts. Note that they do > so in direct defiance of the Iranian state, which has repeatedly > condemned Iranian Baha'is for sharing information with UN investigators, > and the execution of one in 1992 appears to have been largely for this > "crime." The Baha'is are actively if peacefully disobeying the > government in this regard. > > So the model of social action I see being endorsed here by the Universal > House of Justice and the US NSA is something like this: > > When a group of persons encounters significant long-term injustice at > the hands of duly constituted authorities, their first response should > be privately to contact those authorities, lay out the facts, and make a > formal complaint. If the complaint succeeds, then no need for further > action. > > But what if the complaint fails? The extreme-orthodox faction in the > Baha'i community would have us believe that there is no recourse if the > duly constituted authorities, governmental or religious, decline to > offer redress for injustice. > > But that isn't what our dear brothers on the House of Justice did, in > the face of the recalcitrance of Supreme Jurisprudent Ali Khamenei, who > in 1991 worked out a scheme to prevent Iranian Baha'is from going to > university or ever having good jobs. > > They *continued* to defy the Iranian government, holding press > conferences, assiduously lobbying the UN, the European Parliament, and > the US Congress, simply by politely making information available. When > newly-elected President Muhammad Khatam in 1997 spoke of guaranteeing > the rights of all Iranians, the US NSA wrote him a cheeky open letter > asking him if he would include the Baha'is. They knew very well such a > letter would be unwelcome and would put Khatami on the spot. They were > defying him. > > This model of social action has been relatively successful in curbing > the worst abuses, though our dear friends among the Iranian Baha'is > still suffer many outrageous disabilities. > > But it seems to me that this model of social action has implications > within the Baha'i community, as well. If Baha'is feel deprived of > fundamental rights by the Baha'i institutions, I think their first duty > is to seek contact with those institutions, to explain themselves, and > to seek redress. But if the institutions insist on continuing to act in > a flagrantly unjust manner, then I think that should be publicized to > the outside world and within the community. This is the only way to > prevent the faith from ratcheting further and further toward being > similar to Scientology in its treatment of adherents, given the absence > of a Guardian. > > It seems to me sheer and unmitigated hypocrisy to say that this model of > social action cannot be applied to the Baha'i community. If it is > applied *by* the Baha'i community to an *elected* and duly constituted > government in Iran, then it is being put forward as a legitimate form of > social action. And it is one of which I approve. > > cheers Juan > > -- > Juan Cole, https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity & Millennium: Genesis of Baha'i* > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0231110812/qid=933798168/sr=1-1/0 > 02-1144549-0047403 > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, August 06, 1999 5:59 PM Subject: McKenny: Re: CULHANE - Bahai heresy trial (Re: My case - a letter to my friends ) Michael, Could you repost your messages of August 6, 1999 on this thread? They're all showing up on my server as no longer available. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, August 06, 1999 6:06 PM Subject: Re: Majnun (Re: Letter of resignation) Thanks. I'll do that as soon as I can find the time. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7ob1u3$ho0$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Just for the record I might also add that there was never an attempt to > create an organization by anyone on Majnun, and there definitely was no > conspiracy (this is a figmet of the paranoid minds within the Baha'i > administration which demonstrates the Nixonian manner in which these > people think). In the vetting process one person insinuated its > consideration - which prompted John Walbridge to respond to the group - > but that person was certainly not me and it was not an option anyone > took very seriously, anyway. Yes, indeed, I was a hothead but a hothead > who called for going public about the apparent misdeeds of certain > individuals within the US administration rather than circulating the > conversation among a small group of people. > Fred/Patrick feel free to post this and my preceding post on this > thread on your website on the truth about Majnun. > > Berekiah > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, August 06, 1999 6:18 PM Subject: Re: censorship on Baha'i Studies I'm afraid I too have come to realize that the Bahai faith has become captive to a very sick system of oppression on the part of the uhj and its ao "jerks," as Culhane has of late aptly dubbed them. Given the accuracy of Professor Cole's description of the way bahai life actually is, I think the question is how to proceed to make these facts widely, WIDELY, known about the cult-workings of its "leaders." Let them hear it from every prominent leader in the media and government, and see what the response is to their equivocations and dissimulations. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Juan Cole wrote in message news:7nprtp$o8f$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > Everyone is welcome on talisman@umich.edu and H-Bahai; two of the > Bahai-St. listowners are *on* the latter and one is on the former. All > they have to do is meet the subscriber requirements. I'll let you > decide who is being fair and inclusive, and who is being exclusive and > bigotted, given that the lists with which I am associated have welcomed > persons who in turn exclude me. > > In the case of talisman@umich.edu these requirements are that you not > inform on fellow posters, not flame them, and not accuse them of > contravening the covenant. Anyone willing to abide by those rules is > welcome (including Maneck if she will give such pledges and act > accordingly), and a very wide range of perspectives is present on the > list, including those of persons to the *right* of many of the Bahai-St. > folks. > > The point is that it is *behavior* that determines whether you are on > talisman@umich.edu or on H-Bahai (in the latter case, past behavior in > the form of getting to graduate school in the social sciences or > humanities and acting in an upright way with regard to academic ethics). > > In the case of Bahai-St., it is *who* you are that matters. I am not > being excluded from the list because I defended my interpretation of > Arabic and Persian terms (from someone who barely knows any Arabic and > has never so much as read a 19th century book in the language!). It is > because I am viewed as a dissident Baha'i. It is ascriptive, not > achieved. And it is therefore a form of bigotry. The statement > "Bahai-St. will not allow any 'dissident Baha'is' to belong to the list > or post there" is no different in kind from the statement "Bahai-St. > will not allow any Jews to belong to the list or post there." It is the > exclusion of a whole class of persons on prejudicial grounds, based not > on present behavior but upon their membership in a (perceived!) > category. > > I reiterate that anyone who feels an unfair remark was made about him or > her on H-Bahai (or Talisman) would be welcome to respond. But, > apparently, I am to be beaten up weekly on Bahai-St. with no opportunity > to defend myself there. This is the typical cult-like behavior of the > extreme-orthodox party within the Baha'i faith, demonizing people by > refusing to allow them a voice or the opportunity to represent > themselves to others. The same tactic was used by the National > Socialists in Germany against the Jews; Neo-Nazis also have email lists > from which persons are excluded because of who they are. > > As for my journal articles, I actually suggested to the editor of an > academic journal the names of Rob Stockman and Mike McMullen as > respondents to my forthcoming piece on the dissolution of the LA > assembly. I know that Stockman works for the NSA, but I thought this > would be an indirect way of allowing them to reply to my piece, which is > critical of them. The editor asked *me* for respondents. I could have > recommended someone more independent. In fact, I also recommended they > get a response from Firuz Kazemzadeh, but unfortunately he declined. So > I think I have a pretty good track record in seeking to be fair. As for > JSSR, it doesn't allow rebuttals; but any Baha'i academic could write a > fresh article presenting an alternative view and, if it were a good > article, get it published there. That is the way *Liberal* society > works--you allow a diversity of opinions and let the public make up its > mind. The extreme-orthodox Baha'is work by suppressing opinions they > don't like, being careful what books the Baha'i Publishing Trust > distributes, censoring the American Baha'i and *World Order*, and > generally creating a seamless web in which no dissenting voice can be > heard. When they can't suppress such a voice, they smear the person > speaking, mainly behind the scenes but publicly if they feel it > necessary. It is a very sick system. > > cheers Juan Cole > > -- > Juan Cole, History, U of Michigan jrcole@umich.edu > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity & Millennium: Genesis of Baha'i* > https://www.kalimat.com/ > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 07, 1999 8:38 AM Subject: Re: CULHANE - Bahai heresy trial (Re: My case - a letter to my friends ) I used, if you will, a figure of speech. I'm not in disagreement here with your views. I do, however, highly doubt the ao and uhj are now capable of reform. Like most reactionary factions, they have merely dug in deeper and deeper as knowledge has spread of their tyranny. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7nur9o$546$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > > The only EVIDENCE that would mean anything > > whatsoever to me would be the lifting of the Iron Curtain > > of "review" and the administrative "jerks" receiving justice. > > I'm confident that's not going to happen. It will all simply > > have to be knocked down like the Berlin Wall by the > > masses using the Internet and other means. > > Dear Patrick: > > Pragmaticaly speaking storming the proverbial Bastille in the case of > the BF will simply not happen. It's bad politics for one thing, not to > mention wishful thinking, so I wouldn't hold my breath. Besides what > would it accomplish but yet another insignificant, inconsequential > Baha'i sect like the Remeyites or BUPC and push all the good people into > the bossom of the fundamentalists? Look at Maneck. She's a perfect > embodiment of what I'm talking about. > The Baha'i Faith is at base ok. The problem is with the unhealthy > political culture and fundamentalism that has dominated its collective > mentality and administration for the past 40 years. This is where the > dictatorship and authoritarianism arises imv. Move towards > constitutional reform, implement checks, balances and allow genuine > democratic and consultative discourse to occur, which will bugger the > jerks on its own merits, and you fix most of the problem. Everything > usually follows from that. But for its full implimentation, this will > probably take a couple of generations, and I'm not that confident to > think we'll be around to see it full flowering in our lifetimes. That's > why the existence of such internet networks as trb, arb, Talisman, > H-Bahai and the like are so worthwhile. They are the seeds for a future > healthy Baha'i polity by accelarating the dialectic and unmasking the > inherent contradictions within the community and letting them be > addressed one by one. We are all, like it or not, actors in a historical > unfolding of sorts. And let us just say that the proverbial genie has > already been let out of the bottle...so let the fundamentalist Baha'is > kick and scream all they like. > Yet all in all reform is the way to go, not full scale revolution > (internet or otherwise). Besides revolutions don't work and usually end > up betraying their initial motives (look at Russia and Iran). > > Berekiah Zarco > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 07, 1999 12:12 PM Subject: Re: Please informative Bahai Site The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm John wrote in message news:7o7sst$h2q$1@zonnetje.nl.uu.net... > Dear Grp, > > Would someone please direct me (by URL or otherwise) to an informative site > about the Bahai Faith, two recent friends are of the faith and I would like > to know more about it. Very nice people BTW, very educated and dedicated to > science and classical music in knowledge and in deeds. > > Many tks in advnce. > > John. > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 09, 1999 5:07 PM Subject: Re: cmsg cancel <7oa8sp$t$1@nnrp1.deja.com> Given all the other extreme measures used in the past, it's quite possible that fundamentalist Bahais may be behind this wave of cancelled messages. They have many times gone to great lengths to suppress others' views. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Juan Cole wrote in message news:7okuoo$8li$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > The Extreme-Orthodox Baha'is have now found a technological way to > censor even talk.religion.bahai! These people will stop ant nothing. > Stalin was a bleeding heart liberal compared to them. > > cheers Juan > > In article <0ce3ty$p$8@nnrp1.deja.com>, > Juan Cole wrote: > > This message was cancelled from within Mozilla. > > > > > > -- > Juan Cole, https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm > Buy *Modernity & Millennium: Genesis of Baha'i* > https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0231110812/qid=933798168/sr=1-1/0 > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 1999 12:33 PM Subject: Re: More on cancellations I wouldn't be too hasty to rule out the possibility that Bahai fundamentalists were behind it in some way. They've gone to great lengths at times. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7opeih$dq3$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > More threads on news.admin.net-abuse.usenet: > > telstra.net - source of illegal cancels and forged postings > > cmsg cancel <7o43el$gut$1@nnrp1.deja.com> > in this thread, the third message includes the news "the net cops e- > mailed me, and they'e looking for the guy who did it, since he > cancelled 100,000 posts." > > > > > > > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 6:44 AM Subject: LIARS: Bahais on AOL In August of 1998 I took out an account on AOL. It quickly became apparent that my fellow Bahais were using AOL in such a way as to further withhold knowledge and information from AOL's more than 14 million members. It appeared to me that there were four main issues. Alt.religion.bahai, which had been created in April of 1997 and which had had more than 20,000 messages posted to it, was not even offered in the list of AOL newsgroups. AOL personnel with which I spoke over the phone were very puzzled why it wasn't and even implied that some action would have had to have been taken to keep it from automatically being picked up and added to their newsgroups. It took more than a month of strenuous effort to get AOL to add alt.religion.bahai. On the AOL Bahai Forums it became apparent that Bahais were manipulating and controlling information by NOT making it available, by essentially preserving the frozen, non-functioning state of affairs or the status quo: 1. The Libraries were not accepting new uploads for others then to download and read. 2. The list of Newsgroups on the Main Menu for Bahai offered only soc.religion.bahai with no mention of alt.religion.bahai, or talk.religion.bahai once it was created in January of 1999. Coupled with soc.religion.bahai's suppression of all mention of alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai, this prevents people from even hearing of their existence. 3. The available links for Web Sites on the Main Menu for Bahai did not offered my website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience, though it has to be one of the most visited sites on the Bahai Faith with more than 7,000 hits since May 1998. As the months went by, my repeated attempts to improve these deficiencies met with greater and greater opposition from the Bahai fundamentalists on AOL. Similiarly, my requests, beginning in August of 1998, that the Forum Leader, Mark Foster, who no one had seen for months, resign, for derilection of duty, were increasingly opposed while various excuses were offered for his absence. Not until talk.religion.bahai was passed five months later in January 1999 did he suddenly reappear only to begin immediately reporting absolutely EVERY message I posted to AOL as a TOS. It quickly became clear to me that he was back in order to target and build a case against me to have me suspended from AOL. My account was then temporarily suspended on three different occasions and finally terminated March 6, 1999. Of the four issues, only two have partially been remedied. 1. Alt.religion.bahai and now talk.religion.bahai are available under AOL's Keyword Newsgroups, Expert Add. 2. The Libraries are accepting some uploads, though Foster banned the 15+ megabytes I uploaded in late February of my entire archive of discussion for talk.religion.bahai and which is at least available on my website. It's obvious Foster is finding pretexts for suppressing further uploads. While Foster has claimed since mid-January that alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai would be added to the Main Menu under Newsgroups, he continued to make excuses for it not happening. As of March 9, 1999 they were not yet listed under Newsgroups along with soc.religion.bahai. All of these factors, coupled with Mark Foster's abuse of his position as Forum Leader and his harassing and targetting of dissenting voices, not only mine, leaves no doubt that he and other Bahais, including some among the Bahai Administration, are involved in censoring discourse on AOL. For an instance of "back-channel" email coercion on AOL see https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm For an instance of Foster's double standard handling fundamentalist Bahais see Susan Maneck's accusations on AOL against me of "slander" and references to my views as "garbage": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm The immediate pretext for terminating my account, according to the AOL official with whom I spoke on the phone, was that I had pointed out in a newly created Folder called Censorship that I and other AOL members had requested a Folder entitled Bahai Censorship and thereby undermined the authority of the Forum Leader.... In closing let me add that AOL personnel are extremely uninformed about the Bahai Faith, especially its practice of censorship, and its ability to exploit the TOS system.... Half a megabyte of messages documenting Bahai censorship on AOL may be found at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 6:47 AM Subject: trb/arb (FAQ) Frequently ASKED Questions ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Alt.Religion.Bahai, Talk.Religion.Bahai This FAQ will be reposted approximately every two weeks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- People with only web access might want to use www.deja.com www.reference.com or www.newsguy.com or https://www.remarq.com/ They all offer reading and posting capabilities for people who can't directly access alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai and filter out spam. Alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai are available on America Online (AOL) Keyword, Newsgroups, then search for alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai If your ISP does not offer talk.religion.bahai, follow this news.groupie advice: "If your ISP doesn't have the group shortly, I suggest that you ask the newsmaster there to add it (Try news@isp.net, or newsmaster@isp.net) Ask politely. Include the msg ID of the results posting, and of the newgroup msg." Dave Cornejo's RESULT posting: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=431106082&CONTEXT=918305125.781648012&hi tnum=0 David Lawrence's newgroup msg creating talk.religion.bahai: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=434026333&CONTEXT=918304600.713490686&hi tnum=3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: Not all people agree on the interpretations given below. Question #1 "Why create arb or t.r.b.?" ANSWER #1: Because many people believe they experienced or are continuing to experience censorship when attempting to post to soc.religion.bahai. See the quotations from Abdu'l-Baha: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #2: Because the Bahai writings support free speech and religious conscience. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #3: [fill in the blank according to your own opinion.] Question #2: "Why do the srb moderators oppose trb?" ANSWER: Perhaps they'll supply an answer to place here. (Two years later their NO votes are their only answer.) Question #3: "Are Bahais opposed to freedom of speech and conscience?" ANSWER: Despite glowing words of love and support for other people's opinions, despite the Universal House of Justice stating at least publicly it is not opposed to an unmoderated forum, the record of actual behavior by Bahais and on soc.religion.bahai and the experience of many Bahais and people who have left the Bahai Faith give serious reason for concern. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chronology of major events: talk.religion.bahai ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- January 17, 1997: The 1st proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted to news.announce.newgroups. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRFD.htm Early March 1997: Mark Towfiq, chairman of the BCCA, the Bahai Computer and Communication Association, posts to three Bahai-only mailing lists a call for Bahais to vote NO against talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Towfiq.htm March 1997: soc.religion.bahai bans all discussion of talk.religion.bahai from its newsgroup. This ban is still in effect more than a year and a half later. March 31, 1997: The 1st proposal was defeated 157 YES to 691 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRESULT.htm April 3, 1997: Jonathan Grobe, a non-Bahai, creates alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/arb.htm October 14, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message stating it has no objection to unmoderated newsgroups: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ1.htm November 1997: At a time when discussion was highly favorable in support of talk.religion.bahai, the BCCA deprives Frederick Glaysher of access to the private Bahai-only mailing list bahai-discuss and all of its other lists, inflaming Bahai passions against trb. See bahai-discuss archived files and correspondence between Frederick Glaysher and the BCCA committee: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm December 19, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message that suggests it does not understand the nature of Usenet interest polling: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ2.htm January 12, 1998: The 2nd proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRFD.htm February 22, 1998: The 2nd proposal was defeated 109 YES to 65 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRESULT.htm May 25, 1998: srb bans all messages from Frederick Glaysher that contain his signature file: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb23.htm September 9,1998: America Online (AOL) places a Bahai-inspired TOS against Frederick Glaysher; AOL removes the TOS after considering both sides of the issue, i.e., Bahai messages attacking and threatening him and the experience of others: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm September 14, 1998: soc.religion.bahai extends its ban on Frederick Glaysher's signature file to include all signature files and URLs from all posters, allowing only email addresses and the name of the poster: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srbban.htm October 14, 1998: Soc.religion.bahai moderator Bill Hyman backbites and casts aspersions on proponent Ron House and attempts to undermine the new support for the "neutral" RFD: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb67.htm December 3, 1998: The Call For Votes (CFV) was posted to news.announce.newgroups and news.groups for the 3rd interest poll for talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRFD.htm December 7, 1998: Bahai scholar Susan Maneck begins her NO vote campaign on AOL and alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm January 10, 1999: Talk.religion.bahai passes 218: 63. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRESULT.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- For past discussion of censorship on soc.religion.bahai and other issues, including censorship within the Bahai community, see the website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/FAQ.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 6:48 AM Subject: LIARS: The Bahai Technique During the last several years or more a number of observers have noted the common methods many Bahais use to avoid various issues or discredit people who hold opinions other than their own: Frederick Glaysher, May 12, 1992: "The Baha'i Faith has become very oppressive and manipulative of the individual. That to me is merely a statement of fact, as I have experienced it, for nearly sixteen years now [over 22]. The usual stratagem in dealing with anyone who would express his conscience in good faith is to pretend the Cause is above any kind of criticism whatsoever while intimating that anyone who would speak honestly must have something wrong with him, i.e., his spiritual life isn't what it should be, he doesn't understand the nature of unity, or he's accused of trying to obtain power for himself, which at times seems merely a calculated way of discrediting the person, and so on. Another common strategy used to acquire control over the individual is to humor the person by letting him pour himself out, etc., and then self-righteously giving him the Truth." Ron House, November 14, 1997: "I know what you mean. I've found over the years that there is a technique used by traditional Baha'is and others to squash dissension: harry the dissenter so much he says something intemperate, then point out how 'loving' and 'compassionate' they are and how nasty the dissenter is. The trouble is that this technique works, so I've been making a conscious effort not to fall for it. Also, when they get the dissenter discouraged and miserable enough, he invariably makes a slip-up sooner or later that they can REALLY let loose the venom over. IMHO, they did this to you when you misread Sharon's intentions. At any other time, they would overlook faults, as Baha'u'llah says, but when they're in this mode they go for the jugular. Very sad." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/House2.htm Frederick Glaysher, June 1998: "Some of the most striking methods demonstrated repeatedly by many Bahais during the last year and a half of discussion about an unmoderated newsgroup is their refusal to listen and respond to the criticisms of those who are in favor of talk.religion.bahai, ignoring their concerns, never responding analytically to their messages and reasoning and logic and evidence, attacking them through character assassination and ad hominem, ganging up on individuals, and "circling the wagons" around every action of the srb moderators or others who are opposed to talk.religion.bahai." "More than twenty different people on my web site have posted messages explaining their experience with srb censorship yet many srb Bahais NEVER address their concerns. Ignoring such charges will not make them go away. NO ONE has to "try" to link the trb interest poll with censorship on srb; the moderators themselves have done that by suppressing droves of people for years. There are many people who believe such suppression is part and parcel of the Bahai community as it exists today. A YES vote need not necessarily support such a belief. There are other reasons Bahais might vote YES." Fran Baker, May 1998: "Just have to say that in my experience this is a common technique of manipulative people in general; it is especially effective with thoughtful people who are willing to see both sides of things, i.e., their own fault. I consider this brow-beating technique to be a form of abuse. The only way to deal with it is to call them on it every time and to refuse to let yourself be beat up, i.e., not to do your part of the "tango." This can be very hard to do, but it works.You can break this pattern in a personal relationship. I don't know whether it's possible when a group acts this way. Very scary." Dr. Juan Cole, June 12, 1998: "Let me ask you why in the world you think that I would risk my professional reputation by publicly stating falsehoods? ...The very technique of the more glaze-eyed among these people is to unbearably bully a Baha'i whom they don't like, use unjustified threats of declaring him or her a CB to silence the individual, and if the person will not be silenced, then to depend upon the gullibility of the Baha'is in refusing to listen to any victim's story because, of course, the Baha'i institutions are infallible and divinely guided and could never do anything wrong. It is a perfect racket." "Of course, this technique of making liberals go away has been enormously successful, and ex-Baha'i liberals have no credibility with the remaining Baha'is nor do most of them have any energy to continue to make a case, either to the Baha'is or the outside world, for the incredible abuses that go on inside this organization ostensibly committed to tolerance!" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Cole10.htm K. Paul Johnson, September 15, 1998: "If that principle [people are innocent until proven guilty] were followed by Baha'i administration and individuals in their condemnations of their fellow believers, I would have very little to complain about regarding Baha'i affairs. But character assassination by innuendo is the preferred way of dealing with anything remotely resembling dissidence. Seems like that's exactly what you're doing to Juan Cole in your message. Saying I don't want to know what you've "got" on him, thus attacking me but insinuating you have some awful proof of unspecified guilt on his part. If that's not character assassination by innuendo, what is?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson18.htm Gibro28W, October 12, 1998: "In summary, the biggest problem, as I see it, is that most Baha'is don't take criticism seriously--they tune it out as "negative" or "harmful to spiritual growth." This selfish attitude is very stupid. First of all, Baha'is entice people to join them. When they do, they indoctrinate them until they think like the group. But as soon as a red flare of doubt goes up in the convert's mind, they're cordoned off by the group and reminded of their "spiritual" obligations in the name of Baha'u'llah or the "Covenant." If left unresolved and doubt gives vent to prolonged criticism, the convert is sent packing or is kicked out. What we have here is a broken family that had failed to truly listen to the needs of its members in the first place." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb73.htm Barthaman on September 14, 1998: "Baha'i dissenters, more or less, are wounded souls abandoned by their fathers,so-to-speak. They have been cast out and dismissed or shunned without having had a fair hearing. Consider their pain when the rest of their "family" dismisses them too. Can you know what it's like to be accused of heresy and shunned following a sincere intellectual conflict (inspired by doubt)-- after you've sacrificed years in devoted service to your religion? Can you comprehend their sense of betrayal and injustice? This is why disillusioned believers leave their religions each year--while some still hang around, banging on the door now and then, demanding a refund for their lost youth. In time they will have to move on, however, writing the Baha'i Faith off as another lesson in fraud. Mock these people all you want--but for the grace of God, the next dissenter could be you. Don't be too confident, my friend." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb66.htm Juan Cole wrote, February 23, 1999: "There is nothing to be puzzled by. Right wing Baha'is only like to hear the sound of their own voices (which are the only voices they will admit to being "Baha'i" at all)." "Obviously, the world is so constructed that they cannot in fact only hear their own voices. They are forced to hear other voices that differ from theirs. This most disturbs them when the voices come from enrolled Baha'is or when the voices speak of the Baha'i faith." "The way they sometimes deal with the enrolled Baha'is is to summon them to a heresy inquiry and threaten them with being shunned if they do not fall silent." "With non-Baha'is or with ex-Baha'is, they deal with their speech about the faith by backbiting, slandering and libelling the speaker. You will note that since I've been on this list I have been accused of long-term heresy, of "claiming authority," of out and out lying (though that was retracted, twice), of misrepresentation, of 'playing fast and loose with the facts,' and even of being 'delusional.' I have been accused of all these falsehoods by *Baha'is*, by prominent Baha'is. I have been backbitten by them." "This shows that all the talk about the danger a sharp tongue can do, all the talk about the need for harmony, for returning poison with honey, for a sin-covering eye, is just *talk* among right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute." "Paul Johnson has seen all these things, as well, for the past five years. He can explain it to you." Cf. K. Paul Johnson's general reflections on coercive techniques https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson21.htm And LaAeterna's method of silencing opponents https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb65.htm Comments on the related techniques of Susan Maneck: Juan Cole, February 13, 1999: "It is a very, very, very weird religion. And if anyone is reading Susan Maneck's absolutely bone-chilling screeds on the desirability of Heresy Trials and carefulness in Shunning, they are seeing what it is like at the core of the religion." "I really am sorry for them and her, since they seem sort of filled with hate and quite paranoid, yet say they are preaching love, unity and tolerance. Susan will say, 'may your abdomen be split by lightning and your guts fall out you filthy heretic whom I wish I could just have shunned and buried', and then she'll sign herself "warmest" and slander a university by adding it to her sig line. As if what she is about has anything at all to do with *universities*!" Frederick Glaysher, February 15, 1999: "Ms. Maneck's approach appears to me to be always to shunt the discussion off or back to who said what where when why how and so on.... The farther back in time the better, since the person's memory, being human, is bound to be unable to keep up or to have stocked the evidence needed on his or her hard drive or find it on dejanews.com. And it then allows her to claim pretty much anything she wants to while seeming to have discredited her opponent. Further, she relies on the tactics of demagoguery knowing they usually prevail and will be supported by other fundamentalist Bahais. By shrieking "slander" and referring to others' opinions as "garbage," she is able to create an emotional atmosphere that essentially negates whatever the topic or content might be and that allows her to appear to win what is often a narrowly legalistic point or interpretation." "All of this is done, of course, in conjunction with her employing the more common Bahai techniques of intimidation and psychological demonization and terrorism." Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 6:49 AM Subject: LIARS: Bahai Bullying I'm alarmed at the recent Bahai attempts, during May of 1999, at character assassination, ridicule, and generally portraying me and others as disturbed individuals. I have never claimed to be perfect. At times I have apologized to Bahais, Muslims, and other non-Bahais when I felt, or was convinced, that I was wrong or had spoken unfairly. I find the constant technique to portray me as a megalomanic or paranoid quite offensive. Similarly, the tactic of accusing me of spam for posting my opinions is calculated to discredit the validity of my and others' concerns regarding censorship in Bahai forums and has also been used on AOL. Such accusations reveal the frustration that Bahai fundamentalists apparently feel over my having found ways of enduring and resisting the onslaught of their concerted attacks, while preserving a historical record on a markedly ephermeral medium for innocent Bahais and non-Bahais.... Fair-minded Bahai and non-Bahai observers may judge for themselves whether my and others' allegations of censorship are valid by reading the record preserved under "Assorted Controversial Documents" on my website at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm As further corroboration that I am not the only person concerned with the intolerance and censorship that has overtaken the Bahai Faith, I recommend Professor Juan Cole's new book Modernity & the Millennium: The Genesis of the Bahai Faith in the Nineteenth-Century Middle East, available through Columbia University Press or Amazon.com at https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 In his conclusion, which would never have passed the system of Bahai "review" that the UHJ imposes on all publications brought out under its tight control, Professor Cole, of the Department of History at The University of Michigan, quite accurately identifies the distortions that have been wreaked upon Baha'u'llah's Teachings: "Some contemporary leaders of the Baha'i Faith have given answers increasingly similar to those of fundamentalists, stressing scriptural literalism, patriachy, theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values. While the values of the nineteenth- century Baha'i movement, which was far more tolerant, continue to exist as a minority view, by the late 1990s a different set of emphases prevailed." (196) He himself and many others, as evidence under the "Assorted Controversial Documents," have suffered at the hands of the fundamentalists who have taken control of the religion: "The rise of academic Baha'i scholarship has caused tension in the community, whose present-day leadership tends to be fundamentalist and antiliberal in orientation, and this has led to pressure on a number of prominent academics to resign or dissociate themselves from the movement." (201) These same forces of fundamentalist orthodoxy are evident on AOL, talk.religion.bahai, and alt.religion.bahai for impartial viewers to witness. They will be evident to all perceptive observers of whatever forum Bahais may be trying to control and influence. As a Bahai for more than 23 years, I myself have always found especially repulsive the manner in which Bahai fundamentalists attempt to manipulate the institutions and leaders of government, the United Nations, and public opinion, while pretending to values they deride in private or at Bahai-only meetings. Ultimately, it is the Bahai Universal House of Justice that is responsible for the perversion and corruption of such clear and elevating teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. The UHJ is also in the end responsible for inciting Bahai fanatics and fundamentalists to attack other Bahais and non-Bahais merely for their views expressed on and off line in free forums of public discussion. I recommend all newcomers to these matters read "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm On Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 6:49 AM Subject: LIARS: Bahai Attacks Incessant Bahai attacks upon my freedom of speech and liberty have made it necessary for me to adopt a persona for my own protection and well being. Other measures have been taken. During the last three months, Bahais have twice flooded my hotmail account with up to 1000 messages per day resulting in considerable inconvenience and expenditure of time and effort to block, and ultimately close, the offending accounts; they have, by using Bahai trolls, especially Gyr Falcon, slandered, maligned, and caricatured me in a further effort to discredit me and portray me on talk.religion.bahai and elsewhere as a disturbed and errant individual; through concerted false charges and allegations against me, they have now succeeded in deceiving Hotmail into closing my email account, which I depended on for a considerable part of my income and livelihood. For documentation of many similar incidents of Bahai oppression during the last decade, see Frederick Glaysher's website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 6:50 AM Subject: LIARS: soc.religion.bahai Robert J. Pease, December 5, 1998: "I support your efforts to expose SRB as a fundamentalist group." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb84.htm Ron House: "I think the following is a clear case of malicious rejection of an article by the worst of the moderators of soc.religion.bahai." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb53.htm Timothy Mulligan: "(Sigh) Fred, I'm beginning to think you're right about those SRB moderators." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb59.htm RobertNik: "these guys are pompous arseholes IMHO." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb54.htm Bruce Burrill: "What are Baha'i afraid of?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb60.htm Zuteflute: "Frankly I could not see anything in the letter I wrote which would prompt someone to ask whether or not I am a Baha'i." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb50.htm YU ZIR: "But as an outsider, I can perhaps see the point Fred Glaysher is making, and which point none of SRB's defenders seem to address." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb46.htm Matthew Cromer: "The current moderators regulate the contents--posting articles which they agree with...." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb47.htm Kavosh Soltani, December 9, 1998: "So many Bahais on these forums have shown to be ready to forget logic and reason, ignore clear evidence and Word of God, and come up with exactly the same line of tired and inaccurate excuses and arguments to justify their position, that it can not be a simple coincidence." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb77.htm Shakti3, December 4, 1998: "Sorry to hear that you've been surpressed on srb. Your comments were alway very "right on." Altho it does not surprise me one bit, seeing the way these newsgroups operate." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Ex7.htm Harold Shinsato: "It seems like there is an oppression over the Baha'i Faith." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb33.htm Steve Tomljenovic, December 3, 1998: "The moderators are a bit overzealous at times. Since all the controversy started, it has gotten worse." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb79.htm Laeterna: "To say I was flabberghasted at this type of "moderating" was putting it mildly indeed." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored2.htm Guy Macon" "Please explain which portion of the charter the following post violates." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored1.htm Robin Peters: "I think you're to be commended for your persistence in the face of consistent censorship." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb43.htm jgoldberg: "I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. " https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb57.htm Ruletherod, November 17, 1998: "Too much damage has already been done in the name and to the name of Baha'u'llah by right-wing administrative bullies, linear-thinking apologists, and doctrinaire-fundamentalists. You can't just blame it all on the critics." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb76.htm Many other similar messages may be found on my web site under soc.religion.bahai censorship. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 6:51 AM Subject: LIARS: Bahai Threats of Lawsuits Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, let me say I have never committed slander against any individual, Bahai or otherwise, nor against any Bahai institution. If anyone has been slandered on talk.religion.bahai, it is I by the constant character assassination Bahais have marshalled against me for near three years. I'd be happy to appear in court and present an American judge and jury with the evidence of Bahai lies, deceit, censorship, and tyranny over the last decade. I highly doubt any legitimately established jury would look favorably on what Bahai fundamentalists have done to the Walbridges, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Stephen Scholl, and many, many other, indeed, TENS of THOUSANDS, of American ex-Bahais.... I'd be happy to appear in an American court and present the judge and jury with the many passages from the Bahai Writings in which the Figures speak favorably of free speech and conscience, such as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. Only one of the tyrants on Mt. Carmel could distort such passages to mean the kinds of things they have had the gall to foist on American Bahais in their statement this April, which Professor Juan Cole has candidly and accurately referred to as an "outburst of vehement ignorance." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Bahais falsely accuse me of slander. Far from slandering the UHJ, I have stood up to Bahai fundamentalists and honestly spoken my conscience. They are free to call that "slander." I doubt any judge or jury in the West would call it such, especially after reading the EVIDENCE and reflecting on the enormous discrepancy between the sycophantic treatment leaders in government, the UN, and the media regularly receive from Bahais who are always interested in attempting to exploit their positions of power for one reason or another and the reality of abuse of the most basic human rights now well documented on Professor Juan Cole's website and on mine. I trust the American legal system to protect me from such organizations and fundamentalist reprobates. The objective observer will note the Bahai tactic of resorting to threats and intimidation instead of engaging in discussion, extensively noted in "The Bahai Technique." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm Such tactics remind me of a comment by Dr. Martin Luther King in his Letter from Birmingham Jail: "You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations." Fundamentalist Bahais typify this same mentality. They rail and threaten me, and others who dare speak their minds, but express no concern whatsoever for the underlying conditions of censorship and oppression that have led to distrust and contempt for the UHJ and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. Everything I have said is a matter of religious conscience protected under the US Constitution. My Bahai membership card proves it, and a scanned copy of it may be found on my website. I would be happy to present the original to any judge or jury in the land. "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." --Thomas Jefferson -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997," which surveys the many, many incidents of censorship and oppression that have taken place in the Bahai faith during the last decade or more: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:376EF2DE.221BD43@earthlink.net... > > I have stated that I may sue you - that is singular. I am not aware of > anyone else's attempt. BTW, my suing you is not a threat - a threat > is I will do this if you do that. You have already crossed that line. > I > said I would first take it up with Dejanews - Roger pointed out that > you were not using Dejanews to post your articles so I suppose it > is bigfoot at first. > > Now, if it gets to the point that I decide to sue you, I will offer > anyone > who wishes to join in a class-action suit, if that is legally possible. > > My feet are firmly on the ground - I am not joking or mincing words. > > Saman Ahmadi > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, > > let me say I have never committed slander. > > P.S. Ever heard of the Furman tapes? > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 6:52 AM Subject: LIARS: Bahai uhj From: FG To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; bahai-faith @ makelist.com Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM July 24,1998 Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." The tragic loss of Bahai lives in Iran and the subsequent exploitation of their deaths by Bahai spokesmen, often in the American media, always courting the President and other members of the government, has become a predictable pattern rendered intolerable in the context of continuing and pervasive Bahai censorship and denial of human and civil rights in the United States and elsewhere. Such incidents as I queried you about in my unanswered email of March 31, 1997, available on my Web site, regarding the crushing of the magazine Dialogue, the resignations of a number of scholars from the Bahai Encyclopedia, the attacks on the listserv known as Talisman I at Indiana University, the harassing and blacklisting of many individuals, Bahai and non-Bahai, suggest profoundly deep-seated problems within the Bahai community and administration. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/To-UHJ1.htm To these incidents must now be added the apparent conspiracy for more than a year and a half of the Bahai Computer and Communications Committee (BCCA), under the chairmanship of Mark Towfiq, to defeat twice now, along with the collusion of other Bahais, the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith which would be known as talk.religion.bahai. You may find extensive documentation for all of these violations of the basic human rights of many Bahais and non-Bahais on my Web site, "The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm Because the third interest poll for talk.religion.bahai on Usenet is approaching, after August 28th, I ask you again to investigate the BCCA and its depriving me of access last November from all private Bahai-only mailing lists at a crucial moment just when the tide of discussion was going very much in favor of the newsgroup, noted by many observers. I also ask whether you supported or were involved in that decision? The relevant files can be found on my Web site under Bahai-Discuss Archives. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm Similarly, I would like to know whether your institution or the BCCA has approved of or advocated the recent ban of my email signature file by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai, as well as their complete ban for more than a year and a half now on all discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai. The prevailing atmosphere of suppression of free speech and religious conscience that now characterizes the Bahai Faith cannot but call into question the honesty of many members of the Bahai administration and perhaps the institutions themselves. I ask once more whether censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith and what passages of the Bahai Writings support it, what are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship? Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ------ Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Wednesday, August 11, 1999 6:54 AM Subject: LIARS: The Pickering Tape From the talisman archive for April 1996. #1 is Henderson #2 is the Most Honorable Judge James Nelson. I believe a full transcript of this tape is still much needed for the Bahais and others to understand what truly took place. I would be happy to transcribe and post the entire tape if someone would like to send it to me, anonymously or otherwise, at PO Box 81842 Rochester, Michigan 48308 -- Frederick Glaysher, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ From jrcole@umich.eduFri Apr 12 14:50:37 1996 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 18:32:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Juan R Cole To: Rick Schaut Cc: "'talisman@indiana.edu'" Subject: RE: criticism of NSA policies Rick: I appreciate your measured response, and find myself in agreement with much of what you say. I brought the matter up only as an example. But for the record I have evidence that at least two NSA members were very intimately involved in supporting the Travel Agency monopoly that they set up. Moreover, if they did in fact step over the line and break the law by using threats of spiritual sanctions to reduce business competition, this would be a serious matter. People have gone to jail for analogous infractions, and public officials have resigned or been forced to resign over them. The NSA actions also may have cost Baha'i travel agents and their customers money, and subjected them to spiritual duress, which would be an arbitrary use of power. I enclose, so that others can judge for themselves, some passages from a transcript of a taped conversation between two NSA members and a Baha'i travel agent that took place the summer before the World Congress. Since I am only interested in the rights and wrongs in an abstract way, I have not included the names of the principals. Cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan NSA Member #1: We're calling, Mr. X, about your package offered for the World Congress. We have some concerns about it. The National Spiritual Assembly has asked X and me to consult with you-- Baha'i Travel Agent: --O.K. NSA Member # 1: --about it and tell you what we think and make a few suggestions. Baha'i Travel Agent: Sure. NSA Member # 1: First of all, we're concerned that there were some misrepresentations made in your brochure or what looks like from the copy I've got-- Baha'i TA: The recent one we sent out about our package? Hm hm. NSA Member # 1: And there are some incomplete and inaccuracies stated in yours compared to what you will be able to deliver at a guaranteed price . . . [expresses concern about Baha'i Travel Agent's past refusal to accept credit cards when arranging pilgrimages to Haifa, which has sometimes left Baha'is unable actually to go, and left the NSA to pay for their tickets) . . . We have a bit of concern that people are going to go for price only and neglect the essentials that you don't mention that they're going to get if they take the Logistics Office package. We are concerned that you are not going to be in a position to deliver them the airfares at the rate that you say. We will be, because we're locked into a no-lose situation. That is, if the fares go down, we get the down, if they go up, we get the guarantee. And . . . Baha'i Travel Agent: The same thing is true here. NSA Member # 1: We--You can do that? Baha'i Travel Agent: I work directly through US Air. Uh huh. NSA Member # 1: All right, then: I want you not to say, then, and you are directed not to say that if airfare prices increase substantially we will have to pass on the increase to the clients. Baha'i Travel Agent: All right--we've sent out a second letter. This was done while I was in Europe . . . I've made some corrections because of that. And we do not say--we say we do guarantee it . . . NSA Member # 1: Then we want you to spell out completely in your brochure that you do not offer transportation from the airport to the airport or between Jacob Javits Center and the hotel. Baha'i Travel Agent: O.k. . . . It does say that . . . [reads new brochure, which mentions that taxis can be taken to the Jacob Javitz center and that it is walking distance in good weather] NSA Member # 1: We want you to list the current price from the hotels to Javits and back . . . Baha'i Travel Agent: I'm not through, yet, sir . . . NSA Member # 1: I'm doing this as we go through, because I tell you this, when we get through we are going to publish in the American Baha'i a direct comparison-- Baha'i Travel Agent: Hm, hm. NSA Member # 1: And I want your comparison to agree with ours. Baha'i Travel Agent: How can you do that with a business? NSA Member # 1: We are not getting you out of business. We are simply comparing-- Baha'i Travel Agent: Oh, I know that sir. I didn't say that. I said, how can you require that of a business? We're just, like, representing, any other business. NSA Member # 1: You don't have to do it, sir. Baha'i Travel Agent: Oh, O.K. NSA Member # 1: But I tell you, you will be in some peril if you don't. [What is going on here is that the NSA has discovered that its Logistics Office prices are very high and can be easily undercut by Baha'i travel agents. This puts in doubt whether they can arrange enough reservations to receive the $50,000 in free suites from the official travel agency. The first tack it takes is that these are fly by night operations that don't guarantee the airfares. But this does not prove true. Then they want to push the idea that the competing packages are not full service, and don't include taxi fare (as if that could account for a $300 difference). At this point, the travel agent begins to realize that the NSA Logistics Office is trying to *compete* with him and trying to put conditions on how he can compete with it. He realizes that this is an anti-Trust violation, and questions how the NSA can place conditions on economic competitors. The NSA member, aware of the fine line he is treading, denies he is trying to prevent a competitor from doing business. The travel agent presses the point that NSA actions could nevertheless be perceived as attempting to place conditions on an economic competitor, which is still illegal. The NSA member realizes where this is going, and backs down. "You don't have to do it, sir." The travel agent is relieved. Then the NSA member appears to lose his temper. "But I tell you you will be in some peril if you don't," he adds. At this point I think he has stepped over the line into an illegal anti-trust violation. He is attempting to browbeat a competitor with the NSA Logistics Office, and to put conditions on the nature of the competition between them.) Baha'i Travel Agent: . . . We've had a number of people contact us and all we've tried to do is provide people who say they just cannot go with a way they can go. And we're not trying in any way to cut into your program, because we only have space for 550 . . . And all we're trying to do is help those like the ones in South Carolina, whole assemblies, that just say they could not go unless they had the less price. NSA Member # 1: You don't think our package includes the lesser price? Baha'i Travel Agent: No, sir. [NSA member # 2 alleges that the only safe way to have the World Congress travel accommodations taken care of is to have one Travel Agency handle everyone; and he intimates that the Universal House of Justice wanted the NSA to do it that way, though he says this in an ambiguous manner). NSA Member # 2: . . . One of our urgent concerns is that your material creates the impression you can provide a lower price. That is false. As you know, our materials indicate that the friends are guaranteed the lowest available price from any source at they time they travel . . . Your materials suggest that you can beat our prices. In fact, that is not true. One of the things the National Assembly wants you to address is the perception that you have created deliberately through your materials that you provide a lower cost. This suggests that the Institution has cheated the friends . . . [In fact, virtually any travel agent could have gotten a Baha'i a better price than than most Logistics Office packages afforded. This NSA member is either wholly uninformed or is being, uh, disingenuous. His suggestion that offering a lower price is forbidden because it makes the NSA look like it is cheating the friends is outrageous; it is an attempt to bully this individual into not offering competing, lower packages. Again, I think these statements border on illegality under anti-trust laws.) [This conversation went on for some time more, with much browbeating of the poor travel agent, and a final plea for him to withdraw his competing package, on the grounds that he could simply not provide a better price than did the Logistics Office. It is hard not to conclude that all parties here knew that the travel agent could in fact substantially undercut Logistics Office prices, but that putting things this way was a polite cover for bullying a competitor.\} Please note that I don't think the NSA members were personally profiting from the arrangements that had been made. I think their concerns are as they repeatedly stated them. They liked the idea of a centralized Travel Agency with a standardized package that cut down on the likelihood of out-of-town Baha'is wandering around New York (one caller inquired about camping facilities in New Jersey from the Logistics Office or their Travel Agent, and were told that there *were none!* When a complaint was lodged, Wilmette replied that they hadn't wanted people camping out). The official Travel Agency was offering the sweetener of $50,000 in free rooms if a certain number of Baha'is used them, and the NSA for some reason was fixated on getting this bonus (which, it is true, benefitted the Fund in a small way, not individuals). And since the NSA had made this unwise and untrue claim that their package was guaranteed the cheapest, they minded that being demonstrated to be untrue (were they afraid they might become responsible for the difference, themselves? Or just that someone would think they were taking profits or a kickback? There is no evidence of the latter). The fact remains that their solution to these problems, of bullying Baha'i Travel Agents (there were others) into cancelling competing reservations was at the least unethical and an arbitrary use of the spiritual authority they have; and was possibly even illegal. Along with their earlier bullying of the Dialogue editors, and their recent attempt to coerce the speech of one of our Talismanians, all this amounts to a worrisome *pattern* of behavior which I myself have difficulty seeing as very Baha'i-like. The naivete of the general run of Baha'is and their refusal to accept that any irregularities could occur in Wilmette by virtue of divine grace have perhaps deprived the NSA of useful community feedback on these sorts of problem. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Thursday, August 12, 1999 10:03 AM Subject: Re: Susan Maneck: A "Scholar?" wrote in message news:7os63l$d49$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > Well Mr. -LOL- Mehdi: this may be true. But this reveals something > about "ME", not my logic. What you should try to do is reveal > holes in my logic. .... >Cyrus A highly ironic statement given the fact that fundamentalist Bahais never consider the logic, reasoning, and arguments of those they have censored and oppressed. For more on along these lines see "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 10:17 AM Subject: Re: Compuserv: Recent lyings Another typical fundamentalist post, addressing none of the real issues of Bahai censorship and repression but merely once again maligning my character. All of which has been well summed up long ago in The Bahai Technique: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Pat Kohli wrote in message news:37B498E6.C59F1C3D@ameritel.net... > Greetings! > > FGlay254 wrote: > > > I am and have been a member of the Bahai faith for over 23 years. > > Sounds familiar. > > > If you'll > > take a moment to glance at my website, you'll see that many, many people other > > than myself have been censored and abused by our fellow Bahais. > > My impression is that Fred vacuums up any criticism that he can find. Most who > make the comments ask him to pull them off of the website. I would point out that > there is a difference between moderation of a forum and censorship. Reviewing the > website, it appears that Fred is at liberty to write what Fred wants; finding an > interested audience is another matter entirely and I suspect that that is the sore > point. It is like finding a publisher. > > > Even non-Bahais > > have been harassed and demonized by the fundamentalist Bahais. > > The only non-Baha'i that I recall Fred Glaysher (assuming that is the > fundamentalist that you refer to) harassing and demonizing, has been Kathy Pascoe. > If you consider persons of a given ethnicity, perhaps there are millions who have > been demonized by him. Perhaps there are other individuals I am unaware of. > > > Such intolerance > > of freedom of speech and conscience are condemned in the Bahai Writings, though > > more than a decade long record now exists on my website and others that the > > actual practice of the Bahai administration is contrary to Baha'u'llah's > > Teachings. > > I know. I wonder if Fred could cut it out already? > > > Every Bahai forum, on or offline, is tightly controlled by the > > fanatics. > > No, the forums that Fred gets kicked off of are no longer subject to his relentless > regurgi-posts. He will continue to regurge here for as long as he can. He can get > dropped by his ISP for spamming, but Fred will find another ISP. > > > I am merely presenting here the tip of the iceberg, if you will, that > > others should consider in a free and open society versus the distortions and > > propaganda that pervades reactionary Bahai sources. > > No. Fred is simply pressing Fred's point of view, despite its lack of credibility, > lack of interest by the readership and Fred's lack of interest in discussing the > regurgiposts. > > May Allah guide is in the striaght path! > - Pat > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 10:19 AM Subject: Re: Susan Maneck: A "Scholar?" Another typical fundamentalist post, addressing none of the real issues of Bahai censorship and repression but merely once again maligning my character. All of which has been well summed up long ago in The Bahai Technique: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7p21ci$gas$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > In article , > "Patrick Henry" wrote: > > wrote in message > news:7os63l$d49$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > > > > > > Well Mr. -LOL- Mehdi: this may be true. But this reveals something > > > about "ME", not my logic. What you should try to do is reveal > > > holes in my logic. > > .... > > >Cyrus > > > > A highly ironic statement given the fact that fundamentalist > > Bahais never consider the logic, reasoning, and arguments > > of those they have censored and oppressed. > > > > "highly ironic" ? And how in the wild wild world of Whiners-Anonymous > did you figure I am a Baha'i ..let alone a fundamentalist one ? > > Another reason why I highly suspect this Fred -The Whiner- Glaysher > is simply a 8086 based computer who scans all the articles for > keywords to response to ..and assumes automatically the writer > is a "Fundamentalist Baha'i". > > What an idiot indeed. > > - Cyrus > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 10:20 AM Subject: Re: MrMahdi's Predictable Inconsistencies Another typical fundamentalist post, addressing none of the real issues of Bahai censorship and repression but merely once again maligning my character. All of which has been well summed up long ago in The Bahai Technique: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Pat Kohli wrote in message news:37B4DD79.643ED091@ameritel.net... > Greetings! > > Smaneck wrote: > > > >I challenged this man to name me one > > >Muslim who believes that Jesus was crucified or killed or even DIED, of > > >course > > >he knows that that is a lost cause already because he will never find such a > > >Muslim > > The odd thing was that I remember the challenge to find some Muslim who would > agree that the Holy Qor'an confirmed the ENTIRE BIBLE, a thing Mahdi alleges I was > 'trying to say' (?), but I don't rember this one. I had the impression that Mahdi > made his "stunt double" interpretation out as another pillar in his version of > Islam (Hislam?). > > > Fazlur Rahman. > > > > Anyone want to bet me ten to one, Mahdi will say Fazlur Rahman isn't a Muslim? > > Not only is MrMahdi likely to claim that Fazlur Rahman and Husayn ibn Mansur > al-Hallaj were not Muslim; what gets weird is that when someone does not follow > his weird views, they are not Muslims AND he does not claim to be a > fundamentalist! > > > I know, Baha'is aren't supposed to gamble. Shucks. > > Careful, MrMahdi might take you up on it. I supect that gambling w/ Baha'is is > perfectly legit in Hislam because Huslims NEVER loose a single argument. Just ask > MrMahdi; he'll tell you. > > - Pat > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 10:24 AM Subject: Re: LIARS: Bahai uhj Another typical fundamentalist post, addressing none of the real issues of Bahai censorship and repression but merely once again maligning my character. All of which has been well summed up long ago in The Bahai Technique: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm Notice again the character assassination techniques used by my fellow Bahais--quite typical of their deceitful love and unity.... Incidentally, notice too their backbiting and slandering of my status as a Bahai. I've been a member of the Bahai faith for over 23 years and am every bit as good of a member as they or anyone else is. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7p225v$gov$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > In article <7otnl5$ba5$1@iceman.tac.net>, > "Mesbah Javid" <11111174NoSpam@3web.net> wrote: > > Is this person Fred a Baha'i in good standing in the USA? It > > is unbelievable! > > I dont know about that, but I know he is a perfect candidate > for Mr. -LOL-Mahdi's future Islam's "caliphate" ! > - Cyrus > > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 10:25 AM Subject: Re: LIARS: Bahai uhj More Bahai fundamentalist damage control, which is all one ever hears from Pat Kohli. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Pat Kohli wrote in message news:37B3A6F6.95406ABB@ameritel.net... > Allahu Abha! > > Mesbah Javid wrote: > > > Is this person Fred a Baha'i in good standing in the USA? It > > is unbelievable! > > Do the math. > > He has a site on the world wide web claiming that he is being censored. > I would tend to be skeptical of someone with a global audience telling > me that they were censored. I would wonder if _anyone_ could believe a > message so eloquently disproved by its own medium. > > He claims that the cause is oppressive and that he has known this for > seven or so years. Obviously the Baha'is have not dragged him off to a > heresy trial as is claimed is part of the "Technique" > > Makes you wonder if it is supposed to be a sick joke? > > May Allah guide us all in the straight path, > - Pat > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 10:30 AM Subject: Re: LIARS: Bahai uhj This message from Eddie is a quite typically self-righteous one for my fellow Bahais. Note the condencsion in it throughout, referring to spiritual disease, etc., all the while refusing to consider or acknowledge the lies and deceit that the uhj and its adminstrative "jerks" have used against many Bahais and non-Bahais, as is document on my website and Professor Cole's. I submit to newcomers here that the Assorted Controversial Documents on my website all demonstrate the very profound problems over more than a decade that the uhj has had with freedom of speech and conscience, both of which the central figures of the Bahai faith RESPECTED and spoke highly of many, many times. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Eddie wrote in message news:7p06mu$o3j@enews3.newsguy.com... > Dear Friends > > After reading more about Fred's postings,I noticed that we need to be > careful about how we judge Peope on the internet. We need to know that we > can have spiritual diseases. It is so painfull that we can't see spiritual > diseases with microscope. > There is no any power in this world which can heal Fred, beside the > Bahai Faith. Fred has been awared > of the revelation of Baha'u'llah. He read the covenant of Baha'u'llah. He > knows or may have read about the power which The all mighty GOD has > conferred to the UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE and to which all > mankind need to turn for guidance. > The question is : Did he understand the covenant of Baha'u'llah or > the will and testament of Baha'u'llah? > > So ,We can ask ourselves: " If not " . We need to pray for him and show him > a lot of love. Perhaps ,He doesn't > have yet the capacity of understanding the revelation of Baha'u'llah in > this time. > He does need a lot of love and prayers. > "If yes" We should pray > a lot for him , but leave him alone. We shouldn't dispute > with him. Fred can be a Test for us . Please let us not be tested by him.And > this applies to members of this > newsgroup, like , juan , Mehdi and all who bring confusion , doubt and > suspission about our divene supreme institution( The UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF > JUSTICE). > > Dear Friends, You know the difference between this dispensation( The > baha'i Faith) and past dispensations > ( Islam. Christinity, judaism,..................) is that In our holy > ook( Kitab-i-agdas), Baha'u'llah left us an instutition > (UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF JUSTICE) which need to guide us and all mankind and > promised to guide it and wrote about it in his writings, but in other past > dispensations ,this never occured. Now , we and all mankind ,we will not > be seduced by " Power-Hunger Leaders" and all people who have their > agenda,BECAUSE EVERYTHING ,we follow concerning the UNIVERSAL HOUSE OF > JUSTICE ,are WRITEN IN BAHAULLAH 's WRITINGS > Let us who have had privilege of understanding the covenant of > Baha'u'llah to pray every day for the mercy of God. Because with the > covenant of Baha'u'llah,We have inner peace , The faith will always win > victory. > Let us sit back and relaxe and let be happy,because the source of happiness > is the knowledge of the covenant of Baha'u'llah. > > In My ALL LIFE ,I was never happy ,until I recognised the COVENANT OF > BAHA"U"LLAH. > I invite People ,here Bahais or No-Bahais to be depened or to know about > the history of The COVENANT OF BAHA"U"LLAh ,if they are looking for > happiness . > > Adelard R. > One Love > > > > > > > > Patrick Henry wrote in message ... > >From: FG > >To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; > >bahai-faith @ makelist.com > >Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 > >Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM > >July 24,1998 > > > >Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: > > > >As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet > >another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements > >made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly > >of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in > >The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally > >lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President > >Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran > >would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international > >community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek > >justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." > > > >The tragic loss of Bahai lives in Iran and the subsequent exploitation > >of their deaths by Bahai spokesmen, often in the American media, > >always courting the President and other members of the government, > >has become a predictable pattern rendered intolerable in the context > >of continuing and pervasive Bahai censorship and denial of human > >and civil rights in the United States and elsewhere. Such incidents as > >I queried you about in my unanswered email of March 31, 1997, > >available on my Web site, regarding the crushing of the magazine > >Dialogue, the resignations of a number of scholars from the Bahai > >Encyclopedia, the attacks on the listserv known as Talisman I at > >Indiana University, the harassing and blacklisting of many individuals, > >Bahai and non-Bahai, suggest profoundly deep-seated problems within > >the Bahai community and administration. > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/To-UHJ1.htm > > > >To these incidents must now be added the apparent conspiracy for more > >than a year and a half of the Bahai Computer and Communications > >Committee (BCCA), under the chairmanship of Mark Towfiq, to defeat > >twice now, along with the collusion of other Bahais, the creation of an > >unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith which would be known as > >talk.religion.bahai. You may find extensive documentation for all of > >these violations of the basic human rights of many Bahais and > >non-Bahais on my Web site, "The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom > >of Conscience": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm > > > >Because the third interest poll for talk.religion.bahai on Usenet is > >approaching, after August 28th, I ask you again to investigate the > >BCCA and its depriving me of access last November from all private > >Bahai-only mailing lists at a crucial moment just when the tide of > >discussion was going very much in favor of the newsgroup, noted by > >many observers. I also ask whether you supported or were involved in > >that decision? The relevant files can be found on my Web site under > >Bahai-Discuss Archives. > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm > > > >Similarly, I would like to know whether your institution or the BCCA has > >approved of or advocated the recent ban of my email signature file by > >the moderators of soc.religion.bahai, as well as their complete ban for > >more than a year and a half now on all discussion regarding > >talk.religion.bahai. > > > >The prevailing atmosphere of suppression of free speech and > >religious conscience that now characterizes the Bahai Faith cannot > >but call into question the honesty of many members of the Bahai > >administration and perhaps the institutions themselves. > > > >I ask once more whether censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith and > >what passages of the Bahai Writings support it, what are the "rules," if > >you will, of Bahai censorship? > > > >Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, > >alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups > >------ > > > >Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, > >discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i > >Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": > > > >https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > > >Also see: > > > >Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm > > > >Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm > > > >Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 10:31 AM Subject: Re: LIARS: Bahai uhj wrote in message news:7p2d1o$o4c$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > In article <19990813024153.17344.00000346@ng-bk1.aol.com>, > mrmahdi@aol.com (Mr Mahdi) wrote: > > > Since you once bragged about being a proud African and black man, how > do you > > explain the fact that bab and bahaullah owned BLACK AFRICAN SLAVES > they NEVER > > freed? In Islam, it orders us to free slaves. In the bahai faith, > the central > > figures bab and bahaullah never freed their BLACK AFRICAN SLAVES. So > you still > > think that the bahai faith is for the BLACK MAN? I am half black and > iranian > > and since I am not a racial nationalist like you are, it must hurt > that a lot > > more than me that bab and bahaullah owned black slaves they never > freed. > > > > One Truth > > > > Mahdi > > Well ...dear Ayatollah-LOL-Mahdi: how do you explain the _FACT_ > that Muhammad was a child molesting charlatan who married a 9-year > old little girl ? Basically, the truth is, so did Baha'u'llah, but the uhj always lies about it.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Hmmm..what am I hearing in the background ? different > time and traditions ? > > By the way ..how's your search for new caliph going ? Can the > new caliph be a non-muslim (since a non-muslim country can be > governed by Islamic rules !!) ? > > - Cyrus (still wondering at your amazing brain power) > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 10:32 AM Subject: Re: LIARS: Smears on the Rasul (PBUH) This person really typifies so well the fanaticism that the perverted teachings of the uhj has led to among my fellow Bahais.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Pat Kohli wrote in message news:37B4E606.162F1D78@ameritel.net... > Greetings! > > Mr Mahdi wrote: > > > The ex-muslim disgruntled cry-baby anti-muslim iranian strikes again: > > I thought you were only half-Iranian. > > > >Well ...dear Ayatollah-LOL-Mahdi > > > > There are no "ayatollahs' or "mullas" in Islam. Muhammad (saaw) and the Sahaba > > were never ever "ayatollahs or mullas." Those are from shi'a. > > Doesn't change your role, though. > > > >how do you explain the _FACT_ > > >that Muhammad was a child molesting charlatan who married a 9-year > > >old little girl ? Hmmm..what am I hearing in the background ? different > > >time and traditions ? > > Tsk tsk! Low blows! You have not established that Rasul Muhammad was a charlatan > of any sort, or that His marriage was in some way dishonorable OR that there were > sexual relations with children other than His wife. > > > What he is hearing is the refutations of it right here (if he has the guts to > > go to the site): > > > > https://salam.muslimsonline.com/~islamawe/Polemics/aishah.html > > This essay argues that Rasul Muhammad married a _six_year_old_ rather than a nine > year old, and consummated the marriage when she was nine. > > > >By the way ..how's your search for new caliph going ? > > > > By the way, how was that site I referred him to: > > Answer the question. > > > https://www.it-is-truth.org/ > > > > Noticed he has yet to comment on that site. He is afraid he might find out the > > truth about Islam and the Quran, so he avoids the site all together. > > When you point out a 'refutation' I expect to read a confirmation. > > - Pat > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 10:36 AM Subject: Re: LIARS: Bahai uhj It may now be a tactic among Bahai fundamentalists to flood talk.religion.bahai with this type of ignorant banter so as not to have to address the very serious and real incidents of censorship and abuse that the uhj and the fascists in the administrative order have committed. That is, by lowering constantly the level of discussion and interaction, they created an environment that will drive out inquiring minds and make the contentions against censorship appear to be groundless or cranky--actually, a very old Bahai technique.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ wrote in message news:7p2epl$p8v$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > In article <19990813024153.17344.00000346@ng-bk1.aol.com>, > mrmahdi@aol.com (Mr Mahdi) wrote: > > I see your English and your common sense has not improved: > > > > > Since you once bragged about being a proud African and black man, how > do you > > explain the fact that bab and bahaullah owned BLACK AFRICAN SLAVES > they NEVER > > freed? In Islam, it orders us to free slaves. In the bahai faith, > the central > > figures bab and bahaullah never freed their BLACK AFRICAN SLAVES. So > you still > > think that the bahai faith is for the BLACK MAN? I am half black and > iranian > > and since I am not a racial nationalist like you are, it must hurt > that a lot > > more than me that bab and bahaullah owned black slaves they never > freed. > > > > One Truth > > > > Mahdi > > > > Well...dear Master_of_English_and_Logic: Following your line of > ligic, then how can you be a muslim when you know Muhammad was > a child-molester who married a 9-year-old little girl ? ha ? > > by the way ..how's your search for future calpih is going ? > Can I apply ? Please ? > -Cyrus > > > Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > Share what you know. Learn what you don't. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 10:39 AM Subject: Re: LIARS: Fred's pants on fire! The triviality of this supposed response reveals again the insincerity and deceit of this person-- typical of the Bahai fundamentalist. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Pat Kohli wrote in message news:37B3A56C.2862FCBD@ameritel.net... > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > The immediate pretext for terminating my account, according > > to the AOL official with whom I spoke on the phone, was that > > I had pointed out in a newly created Folder called Censorship that I > > and other AOL members had requested a Folder entitled Bahai > > Censorship and thereby undermined the authority of the Forum > > Leader.... > > > > In closing let me add that AOL personnel are extremely uninformed > > about the Bahai Faith, especially its practice of censorship, and its > > ability to exploit the TOS system.... > > > > Half a megabyte of messages documenting Bahai censorship > > on AOL may be found at > > > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm > > > > This link seems to be out of date. The summary reads: > "Unidentified Bahais on America Online's Message Boards under Keyword Bahai > successfully > convinced the TOSGeneral to place a TOS against me. After considering the > evidence I presented, > documenting Bahai censorship and attacks against me and others on AOL, the > TOSGeneral > removed the TOS." > > I get the impression that you educated those AOL folks and were vindicated, > which sounds good. But in the messsage to the newsgroup, you point out that > the AOL people kicked you out, which proved your point. So, if you get your > TOS removed, it is because AOL saw the truth, but when they kicked you out, it > is because they are ignorant? > > Why does your website say one thing while your message to the newsgroup say the > opposite? > > - Pat > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 6:07 PM Subject: Re: Bahai Fireside, CHRISTIAN response and rebuttal The whole system of review is corrupt and nothing but censorship--which both Baha'u'llah and Abdul-Baha were opposed to. If the uhj had any sense of justice whatsoever, they'd abolish it immediately. -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 6:13 PM Subject: Re: LIARS: Bahai uhj Pat Kohli wrote in message news:37B5BA4A.3171DBB0@ameritel.net... > > Fred, I am so flattered by this personal response. Your responses have only confirmed my suspicion that I was making a mistake in lowering myself to the level of responding to any message of yours. -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 6:21 PM Subject: Re: Deletebots Cannot Keep Women Off the UHJ https://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~saf/bahai/docs/hikmat.html https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOLcensorship.txt https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm Garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 6:22 PM Subject: Re: LIARS: Bahai uhj https://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~saf/bahai/docs/hikmat.html https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOLcensorship.txt https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm Garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Smaneck wrote in message news:19990814130531.03137.00001183@ng-ch1.aol.com... > >Is this person Fred a Baha'i in good standing in the USA? It > >is unbelievable! > > Why don't you call the National Baha'i Center and find out? > Susan Stiles Maneck > History, Stetson University ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 6:23 PM Subject: Re: LIARS: Bahai uhj # 1 https://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~saf/bahai/docs/hikmat.html https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOLcensorship.txt https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm Garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Smaneck wrote in message news:19990814133007.03137.00001192@ng-ch1.aol.com... > Abelard writes: > > > I would to let you know that Baha'u'llah or Bab didn't have Slaves , > >instead they had Servants > > Dear Abelard, > > The principle difference between a slave and a servant is that former is > purchased. The family of the Bab and Baha'u'llah had purchased these people. > > >most for > >the idea of protecting them. > > Do you have a source or documentation which would support this? > > > I thing Slaves > >was not practiced, and if yes , It was probably MUSLIMS WHO WERE > >PRACTICING SLAVELY. > > > > Slavery was quite widespread in the Islamic world. This is why the Bab and > Baha'u'llah had slaves. But it was not tied to race (although Africa was one > of the principle sources), slave status was less frequently passed down through > generations, and they were rarely used in plantation agriculture, one of the > most brutal forms of slavery. Slaves were often used in the military and state > bureaucracy, rising to the highest positions and sometimes even taking over. > > Slavery in the Middle East was a very different Institution than it was in the > Americas. But it was still slavery. > Susan Stiles Maneck > History, Stetson University ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 6:24 PM Subject: Re: the search for truth https://ccwf.cc.utexas.edu/~saf/bahai/docs/hikmat.html https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOLcensorship.txt https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm Garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Smaneck wrote in message news:19990814130408.03137.00001181@ng-ch1.aol.com... > >Perhaps I misunderstood? > > Probably, because I don't understand your question. > Susan Stiles Maneck > History, Stetson University ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 14, 1999 6:26 PM Subject: Re: Fred's Unpredictable Inconsistencies "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Pat Kohli wrote in message news:37B5B566.8EC2B42D@ameritel.net... > Greetings MrMahdi/Fred/Fglay/. . . ., > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > Another typical fundamentalist post, addressing > > none of the real issues of Bahai censorship and > > repression but merely once again maligning my > > character. > > Hmmm. I thought I was speculating what _MrMahdi_ would do; and given his > statemtents and conduct on trb, I would hardly think I've maligned your > character FredGlaysher/MrMahdi/PatrickHenry/. . . .. I would not have predicted > that you would step forward and claim MrMahdi as another of your internet > handles. MrMahdi had seemed so different to me. > > > All of which has been well summed > > up long ago in The Bahai Technique: > > > > https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm > > I had thought that this would be a new wrinkle in your disinformation campaign. > > Ciao! > - Pat > > > Pat Kohli wrote in message > > news:37B4DD79.643ED091@ameritel.net... > > > Greetings! > > > > > > Smaneck wrote: > > > > > > > >I challenged this man to name me one > > > > >Muslim who believes that Jesus was crucified or killed or even DIED, of > > > > >course > > > > >he knows that that is a lost cause already because he will never find > > such a > > > > >Muslim > > > > > > The odd thing was that I remember the challenge to find some Muslim who > > would > > > agree that the Holy Qor'an confirmed the ENTIRE BIBLE, a thing Mahdi > > alleges I was > > > 'trying to say' (?), but I don't rember this one. I had the impression > > that Mahdi > > > made his "stunt double" interpretation out as another pillar in his > > version of > > > Islam (Hislam?). > > > > > > > Fazlur Rahman. > > > > > > > > Anyone want to bet me ten to one, Mahdi will say Fazlur Rahman isn't a > > Muslim? > > > > > > Not only is MrMahdi likely to claim that Fazlur Rahman and Husayn ibn > > Mansur > > > al-Hallaj were not Muslim; what gets weird is that when someone does not > > follow > > > his weird views, they are not Muslims AND he does not claim to be a > > > fundamentalist! > > > > > > > I know, Baha'is aren't supposed to gamble. Shucks. > > > > > > Careful, MrMahdi might take you up on it. I supect that gambling w/ > > Baha'is is > > > perfectly legit in Hislam because Huslims NEVER loose a single argument. > > Just ask > > > MrMahdi; he'll tell you. > > > > > > - Pat > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, August 15, 1999 8:46 AM Subject: Re: Susan Maneck: A "Scholar?" An obvious Bahai troll. "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ baldi wrote in message news:37b5e2b5.41189123@news.compuserve.com... > If everyone just puts him on their kill list he (Fred) won't exist > anymore, and we can have some sort of intelligent discussion on here > without his constant whining. > > Gruesse -- > Joseph > > > > > > On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 21:06:34 GMT, benm@livingston.com wrote: > > >In article , > > "Patrick Henry" wrote: > >> wrote in message > >news:7os63l$d49$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > >> > > >> > Well Mr. -LOL- Mehdi: this may be true. But this reveals something > >> > about "ME", not my logic. What you should try to do is reveal > >> > holes in my logic. > >> .... > >> >Cyrus > >> > >> A highly ironic statement given the fact that fundamentalist > >> Bahais never consider the logic, reasoning, and arguments > >> of those they have censored and oppressed. > >> > > > >"highly ironic" ? And how in the wild wild world of Whiners-Anonymous > >did you figure I am a Baha'i ..let alone a fundamentalist one ? > > > >Another reason why I highly suspect this Fred -The Whiner- Glaysher > >is simply a 8086 based computer who scans all the articles for > >keywords to response to ..and assumes automatically the writer > >is a "Fundamentalist Baha'i". > > > >What an idiot indeed. > > > >- Cyrus > > > > > > > >Sent via Deja.com https://www.deja.com/ > >Share what you know. Learn what you don't. > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 16, 1999 7:38 AM Subject: Re: UHJ Fundamentalist Fantasy (Reply to Susan and all) Thank you, Mr. McKenny, for this eloquent message on what has indeed become the "darkness of this dead, dirty, dark, literalist fundamentalism" of the Bahai faith. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Michael McKenny wrote in message news:7p6fil$sgv@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > > Greetings, Susan and all. > Actually, the comment below is of a class that is highly significant, > if not central to an understanding of the ditch into which the Baha'i > Faith has been driven. > The UHJ is here seeking to portray itself as lacking responsibility > for what has happened. It is actually a normal custom of a beaurocrat to > place responsibility for her/his own failure on anyone other than the one > really responsible, i.e. herself/himself. > Here, the UHJ has the duty to guide the influence of Baha'u'llah, the > movement associated with his name, indeed, all of humanity to harmony on a > global scale. It has the responsibility to decide all issues of a divisive > or of a confusing nature. It has a responsibility to guide according to > the essential principles revealed by Baha'u'llah, expressly stated to be > essential for the realization of the only reason for there being a Baha'i > Faith, the attainment of human harmony. > Instead of doing this, the UHJ has devoted the attention and the > resources of this religion into the erection of a canonical text and an > authoritative interpretation of some words of Shoghi Effendi, Abdu'l Baha > and Baha'u'llah in that descending order of priority. In other words the > words of Shoghi Effendi, as literally understood, take precedence over > the words of Abdu'l Baha' whose words take precedence over those of the > Universal Manifestation of God. > The appointed members of "The Institution of the Learned" are sent > around to ascertain the doctrinal purity of thoughts of the members of the > Baha'i religion, notwithstanding the teaching that the harmony of humanity > requires the independent investigation of truth, the harmony of science > and religion, the non-interference with the thoughts and beliefs of any > person, the freedom of expression, and tolerance of the views of others > within, as well as without, the Baha'i Faith. > Now, this methodology adopted by the UHJ is not new. It has long been > the natural encrustation of the spirit of a Manifestation after this being > has departed this world and his religion has come into the hands of those > lacking his vision, but of a mindset focusing on the letter of the word, > instead of spirituality. This is why such individuals and clerical orders > have been addressed so harshly by each Manifestation of God, as, for > example, Moses harshly spoke to the priests of Egypt, Jesus to the priests > who took control of the religion of Moses, Muhammad to those in charge of > previous religions, and so on with the Bab and Baha'u'llah. > It is this methodology of seeking to impose one single interpretation, > indeed, one single method of interpretation, the literal, upon what may be > termed spiritual influence, the water of life, the light, only because it > is a rising above, a cleansing of and a dispelling of the darkness of this > dead, dirty, dark, literalist fundamentalism. > Let there be no Orwellian obfuscation. The UHJ, if it insists on a > single, literal, monolithic "interpretation" of the words of Shoghi Effendi > and Abdu'l Baha and then, at the lowest level of priority, the writings of > the Word of God for this age, is solely responsibility for the fantasy that > it is seeking to perpetrate upon its own followers and the rest of the > world. > There is no impediment at all to it guiding humanity, according to the > essential, necessary and harmonizing principles enunciated by Baha'u'llah. > That its hands are chained up by the infallible (has this word not already > been explained as meaning "morally upright" and NOT inerrant?) letter of > the words of Shoghi Effendi, and the leading according to the spirit of > the text, according to the example of the Guardian and the Perfect > Exemplar an impossibility, is a UHJ fundamentalist fantasy. > May it be this fundamentalist fantasy, rather than the Faith, which > is ditched. > May the fundamentalists in the religion, all of them, from UHJ members > on down, rapidly acquire that breadth of open-mindedness, tolerance, > empathy and understanding it was the intent of the Central figures of this > religion to seed, nurture and harvest. > May today find the human species faring very well, may tomorrow treat > humanity even more kindly and may each day after that be better than the > one it succeeds. > To the Future, > Michael > > > Smaneck (smaneck@aol.com) writes: > > If it is a fundamentalist fantasy it is Corinne True's and Shoghi Effendi's, > > not the Universal House of Justice's. > > > > Susan Stiles Maneck > > > -- > "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." > (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 16, 1999 7:54 AM Subject: Re: A serious response for David Fiorito Then you're rare among our fellow Bahais who are here--most of them are liars and deceivers who have never honestly confronted and considered the evidence of tyranny, deception, deceit, censorship, collusion, skullduggery, treachery, and corruption that has been amassed over the last decade regarding the way the Bahai faith is actually run by the uhj and its fellow administrative "jerks," for whom I feel nothing but unmitigated, seething contempt.... The over 15 megabyte archive on my website demonstrates I often wasted my time responding to the sycophants for the uhj who posted their false and deceitful messages here and during their opposition to the formation of talk.religion.bahai, which they lost in the end. I'm simply not about to waste my energy on them any longer. The periodic posts I've written have at key points answered and created a record of their machinations and designs. If you're sincere about discussing them and the censorship that the uhj has imposed on Baha'u'llah's religion, its perversion of his Teachings, especially His many statements extolling free conscience and condemning tyranny, I'd be happy to discuss in detail with you or anyone else the nature of the many incidents of Bahai repression against myself and other Bahais and non-Bahais. Start with the documents for Newcomers and Assorted Controversial Documents on my website. -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ David Fiorito and Jennifer Spotila wrote in message news:sUMt3.1950$1B5.117643@monger.newsread.com... > Rather than post links to your site and repeat common responses to people, > why don't you actually enter into a dialogue about the subjects you care so > much about? Wouldn't that be a better way of creating understanding? I > respect Michael McKenny's views because he and I have had some good dialogue > and I have come to understand his point of view even though it is not one > that we share. I have always felt it was better to have an honest > disagreement than a simple series of accusations and contradictions. > > I am not here to attack anyone's character or beliefs. I am just here to > understand the range of opinions and formulate my own. > > Peace, > > Dave > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 16, 1999 8:00 AM Subject: Mark Foster Censors COMPUSERV It appears Mark Foster is the putative Forum Leader, or whatever title Compuserv uses, for the Bahai section there and is now suppressing a number of uploads to the Files/Library section under Religion GO, Bahai. It is to be noted that the more than 148 files there are all of the most sacharine nature allowing no expression of opinion other than the received one from the liars and tyrants on Mt Carmel. The situation on Compuserv seems to me to be completely analogous to that on AOL, where fanatic Bahais, by banding together, have imposed their narrow little views on all discussion and thought, suborning the non-Bahais in control of the Compuserv forums in the process. -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 1999 4:29 PM Subject: Re: Mark Foster Censors COMPUSERV Mr. Mahdi, I do believe you have it right about Foster being essentially "commissioned" or self-appointed to censor other people on AOL and Compuserv. Many Bahai fundamentalists enjoy the deceptive thrill of power they get from being Forum Leaders or whatever. For most of them, it's about all they'll ever be able to do in the real world. Despite Mark's claims, Compuserve is still presently listing him as the Forum Leader and has yet to post my several uploads. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Mr Mahdi wrote in message news:19990816113514.16693.00000589@ng-bd1.aol.com... > >It appears Mark Foster is the putative Forum Leader, > >or whatever title Compuserv uses, for the Bahai section > >there and is now suppressing a number of uploads to > >the Files/Library section under Religion GO, Bahai. > > Hello Fred, > > I swear to God that this Mark Foster has this sick FETISH in always wanting to > be a "Forum Leader." He is obviously not married, a wife would leave him in a > second if this censor-prone bigot spends all of his time trying to censor > people he doesnt like on the Internet. He has no life, he needs to get one > soon. > > When I was on AOL, a person complained to me that Mark Foster was also a > censor-prone bigot on a bahai/sufi forum. He is the forum leader for several > ISPs and websites. To me being a prolific forum leader implies you are being > "commisioned" into doing this. This is more than just an innocent ole' "past > time." > > Mahdi > > https://members.aol.com/mrmahdi/opinions/index.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 1999 4:31 PM Subject: Re: A question and an answer Roger, This is exactly the kind of fanaticism I'd expect from you given your harassing and slandering me as a quote "covenant breaker" three and half years ago during the first interest poll for talk.religion.bahai. Haven't you learnt anything yet? -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Roger Reini wrote in message news:37bb1291.126991174@enews.newsguy.com... > Q: What do you call a Baha'i who continually bad-mouths the > institutions of the Faith and who attacks the integrity of the > believers without justification? > > A: I don't know, but I know what you shouldn't call him/her: a > Baha'i. > > Baha'u'llah and the Administrative Order of His Faith are inseparable. > If you attack the administration, you attack Baha'u'llah. Period. > Even if you say you don't, you really do. > > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, August 20, 1999 5:12 PM Subject: Re: A question and an answer "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Roger Reini wrote in message news:37bdf293.51933285@enews.newsguy.com... > Before I begin, I want to clarify that my original note should have > stated that it was not directed to any specific individual. I did say > this in a followup note. Apologies to any who may have been offended. > > On Tue, 17 Aug 1999 16:31:49 -0400, "Patrick Henry" > wrote: > > >Roger, > > > >This is exactly the kind of fanaticism I'd expect from > >you given your harassing and slandering me as a > >quote "covenant breaker" three and half years ago > >during the first interest poll for talk.religion.bahai. > > This is untrue. I never called you a Covenant breaker; I never used > the term "Covenant breaker" to describe you. I did say in a private > e-mail message which you made public without my consent that I thought > certain statements you'd made could be construed, IMHO, as trying to > undermine the Institutions of the Faith. I also requested that you > post a clarification, as I admitted that I might have misunderstood > your original comments. > > I have my original e-mail, but I have no intention of posting it here. > It's already in the DejaNews archives, if anyone wants to dig it out > (from Feb. 1997). > > > > >Haven't you learnt anything yet? > > I'd abstained in the first poll and voted Yes in the subsequent ones. > > I also stand by what I said in my original note. A Baha'i must not > attack the Institutions of the Faith. > > > > >-- > >Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" > >The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm > >Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ > > > >Roger Reini wrote in message > >news:37bb1291.126991174@enews.newsguy.com... > >> Q: What do you call a Baha'i who continually bad-mouths the > >> institutions of the Faith and who attacks the integrity of the > >> believers without justification? > >> > >> A: I don't know, but I know what you shouldn't call him/her: a > >> Baha'i. > >> > >> Baha'u'llah and the Administrative Order of His Faith are inseparable. > >> If you attack the administration, you attack Baha'u'llah. Period. > >> Even if you say you don't, you really do. > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.net) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, August 20, 1999 5:25 PM Subject: Re: AOL Bahais attacks Thank you, Mr. Mahdi, for bringing these slanderous, backbiting Bahai messages to my attention. I dare say I'm not surprised by them. I have, though, on a number of occasions, during the last three years, pointed that my goal is the conversion of the masses to the Revelation of Baha'u'llah, both East and West.... Despite the fanaticism, ignorance, and censorship that the uhj inculcates in Bahais, I am that Baha'u'llah "holdeth the keys and unlocketh the doors." Incidentally, I have never had a Yahoo account nor been blackballed by Bahai fundamentalists there, though they have hounded and slandered me off of AOL and elsewhere. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Mr Mahdi wrote in message news:19990818152426.21112.00000772@ng-xb1.aol.com... > Here are some posts on AOL attacking Fred Glaysher: > > Subject: Re: Jim Price Story > Date: Wed, 04 August 1999 06:13 PM EDT > From: Nadle > Message-id: <19990804181309.00349.00002700@ng-fo1.aol.com> > > < the Faith? > warmest, > > Susan Maneck >> > > Are you sure you really want mistakenly encourage Fred to rejoin us in these > folders? > > > > > ________________________ > > Nadle > > > My mother already knows about it. > > Subject: Fred > Date: Wed, 04 August 1999 11:45 PM EDT > From: Smaneck > Message-id: <19990804234520.09552.00000757@ng-bj1.aol.com> > > >Are you sure you really want mistakenly encourage Fred to rejoin us in these > >folders? > > Not much chance of that Lars. Did you know after he lost his AOL account he was > kicked off of Yahoo as well? Have you ever heard of *anyone* getting kicked off > of Yahoo? Of course now he has his own list, as you've noticed. And you thought > our message board had lots of homophobes! > > But I know, Lars, you stand behind them all. > warmest, > > Susan Maneck > > > > Mahdi > > https://members.aol.com/mrmahdi/opinions/index.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, August 20, 1999 5:27 PM Subject: Re: Fred's Unpredictable Inconsistencies Much better English than you're capable of writing, that's for sure.... -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Smaneck wrote in message news:19990818155317.00368.00001378@ng-cg1.aol.com... > >so what gives? Is Fred MrMahdi?? > > No, whatever Fred's faults, he can at least write grammatical English. > Susan Stiles Maneck > History, Stetson University ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Friday, August 20, 1999 5:40 PM Subject: Re: A serious response for David Fiorito https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRESULT.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/NOvoters3rd.htm For the benefit of newcomers, the fact is Bahais did not vote for and pass the interest poll for talk.religion.bahai. The numbers are broken down at the links above. Fundamentalist Bahais attempted to infiltrate the proponents and skew the voting. Frank Baker was mostly likely a mole, who incidentally has never posted a single message here since the vote. It's doubtful that Ron House fully supported the poll. Others were both dishonest about their supposed support, especially the administrative "jerk" Ron dragged in from the Australian NSA. When Bahais begin answering the old charges of censorship and tyranny, I'll be glad to move on to other topics. I'm not interested pretending to discuss the Bahai writings when there is no freedom of speech and uhj continues to suppress people who are real scholars of the Bahai faith by censoring the writings and calling it "review." New comers should read the work of Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, who discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Incidentally, it should be obvious most fair-minded people that David Fiorito is not sincere.... -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ Ron House wrote in message news:37B8B98D.407CD439@usq.edu.au... > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > Then you're rare among our fellow Bahais who > > are here--most of them are liars and deceivers > > who have never honestly confronted and considered > > the evidence of tyranny, deception, deceit, censorship, > > collusion, skullduggery, treachery, and corruption > > that has been amassed over the last decade regarding > > the way the Bahai faith is actually run by the uhj and > > its fellow administrative "jerks," for whom I feel > > nothing but unmitigated, seething contempt.... > > > The over 15 megabyte archive on my website > > demonstrates I often wasted my time responding to > > the sycophants for the uhj who posted their false > > and deceitful messages here and during their > > opposition to the formation of talk.religion.bahai, > > which they lost in the end. > > For the benefit of newcomers, the vote that succeeded for trb was > preceded by a wide-ranging consensus amongst people of all kinds: > opponents of the faith, traditional Baha'is, nontraditional Baha'is, > interested onlookers and enquirers, etc. In no sense did any particular > group 'lose' the vote for trb. Certain people whose motives were > dishonest were exposed, but that is another matter. Since the newsgroup > was formed, many people of all viewpoints have posted thoughtful and > well-intentioned articles, and they have earned respect notwithstanding > one's agreement or otherwise with their views. > > > I'm simply not about to waste my energy on them > > any longer. The periodic posts I've written have > > at key points answered and created a record of > > their machinations and designs. > > You have been asked specific questions by many people, including ones > who are equally as disaffected by the institutions as yourself. As far > as I know, you haven't once entered a serious dialogue. Yet you keep > reposting your same articles without even editing them to keep them up > to date (as with the "Over the last two months" article that was exposed > here by another reader), and you change the subjects so that they can't > be killfiled (short of killfiling you entirely). So much for your claim > that they are only there for readers who have come in late - a new > reader is as well served by the old subject as a new one. You refuse to > mark them as reposts, as netiquette requires. The existence of this > newsgroup provides a wonderful opportunity for free and creative > dialogue with many thousands of people we could never hope to meet in > our lives, and it behoves us to attempt as well as we can to put that > opportunity to the most godly purposes that are within our powers. > > -- > Ron House house@usq.edu.au ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 1999 8:51 AM Subject: Re: A serious response for David Fiorito Happy to discuss any of the acts of oppression and tyranny committed by the uhj as documented below on my website. I provide the "headlines" for newcomers: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Newcomers might want to start here: The Bahai Technique (Essential Reading) soc.religion.bahai - Brief Quotations (Documenting Censorship) alt.religion.bahai FAQ & Chronology (Frequently Asked Questions) Bahais on AOL Late 1998 & early 1999 Bahai Attacks I & II Fall & Spring 1999 Bahai Threats of Lawsuits During Spring 1999 To the Universal House of Justice - March 31, 1997 To the Universal House of Justice - July 24, 1998 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- A comprehensive outline of the major incidents of Bahai censorship: Juan Cole, "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997" ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Assorted Controversial Documents "A Modest Proposal" 1987 "The Service of Women" 1988 The Majnun Post 2/7/96 The Pickering Tape 4/96 "Crisis of Faith" 5/15/96 Letter: Stephen Birkland, Continental Board of Counsellors 7/16/96 "Baha'i Leaders Vexed by On-Line Critics" Winter 1997 Stephen Scholl re the suppression of Dialogue Magazine 1997 Mark Towfiq's NO Vote Campaign on BCCA mailing lists 3/12/97 Susan Maneck's NO Vote Campaign on AOL 12/7/98 Juan Cole, Dismissal of NSA Member Judge James F. Nelson... April, 1999 Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---- Universal House of Justice From the UHJ: 14 October 1997 From the UHJ: 19 December 1997 To the UHJ: December 21, 1997 David Fiorito and Jennifer Spotila wrote in message news:3cov3.3833$1B5.263621@monger.newsread.com... > This response truly saddens me. > > I was hoping to have a thoughtful discussion of the writings that are the > foundation of the issue which is of utmost importance to you. The Baha'i > Faith is based on the Writings of Baha'u'llah and not the actions of the > UHJ. My purpose in starting this thread was to examine - very carefully and > sincerely - what Baha'u'llah and the other central figures had to say on > this matter. The actions of the UHJ find their origin in the writings, so > we need to examine the writings to understand their motives. The real > question is - do the writings support their actions or is there something > there that shows that the UHJ has somehow over-stepped its mandate? But > until we examine the Foundation of our Faith how can this question be > answered? The quotes I previously posted would be a good starting point for > such an examination. > > I sincerely hope you will change your mind and engage in a dialogue that may > shed light on this crucial issue. > > Peace, > > David Fiorito > Patrick Henry wrote in message ... > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRESULT.htm > > > >https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/NOvoters3rd.htm > > > >For the benefit of newcomers, the fact is Bahais did not > >vote for and pass the interest poll for talk.religion.bahai. > >The numbers are broken down at the links above. > > > >Fundamentalist Bahais attempted to infiltrate the proponents > >and skew the voting. Frank Baker was mostly likely a mole, > >who incidentally has never posted a single message here > >since the vote. It's doubtful that Ron House fully supported > >the poll. Others were both dishonest about their supposed > >support, especially the administrative "jerk" Ron dragged > >in from the Australian NSA. > > > >When Bahais begin answering the old charges of censorship > >and tyranny, I'll be glad to move on to other topics. I'm not > >interested pretending to discuss the Bahai writings when > >there is no freedom of speech and uhj continues to suppress > >people who are real scholars of the Bahai faith by censoring > >the writings and calling it "review." > > > >New comers should read the work of Professor Juan Cole, of > >the University of Michigan, who discusses related issues in his > >journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": > > > >https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm > > > >Incidentally, it should be obvious most fair-minded people that > >David Fiorito is not sincere.... > > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 1999 9:12 AM Subject: Bahai Lies: On AOL In August of 1998 I took out an account on AOL. It quickly became apparent that my fellow Bahais were using AOL in such a way as to further withhold knowledge and information from AOL's more than 14 million members. It appeared to me that there were four main issues. Alt.religion.bahai, which had been created in April of 1997 and which had had more than 20,000 messages posted to it, was not even offered in the list of AOL newsgroups. AOL personnel with which I spoke over the phone were very puzzled why it wasn't and even implied that some action would have had to have been taken to keep it from automatically being picked up and added to their newsgroups. It took more than a month of strenuous effort to get AOL to add alt.religion.bahai. On the AOL Bahai Forums it became apparent that Bahais were manipulating and controlling information by NOT making it available, by essentially preserving the frozen, non-functioning state of affairs or the status quo: 1. The Libraries were not accepting new uploads for others then to download and read. 2. The list of Newsgroups on the Main Menu for Bahai offered only soc.religion.bahai with no mention of alt.religion.bahai, or talk.religion.bahai once it was created in January of 1999. Coupled with soc.religion.bahai's suppression of all mention of alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai, this prevents people from even hearing of their existence. 3. The available links for Web Sites on the Main Menu for Bahai did not offered my website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience, though it has to be one of the most visited sites on the Bahai Faith with more than 7,000 hits since May 1998. As the months went by, my repeated attempts to improve these deficiencies met with greater and greater opposition from the Bahai fundamentalists on AOL. Similiarly, my requests, beginning in August of 1998, that the Forum Leader, Mark Foster, who no one had seen for months, resign, for derilection of duty, were increasingly opposed while various excuses were offered for his absence. Not until talk.religion.bahai was passed five months later in January 1999 did he suddenly reappear only to begin immediately reporting absolutely EVERY message I posted to AOL as a TOS. It quickly became clear to me that he was back in order to target and build a case against me to have me suspended from AOL. My account was then temporarily suspended on three different occasions and finally terminated March 6, 1999. Of the four issues, only two have partially been remedied. 1. Alt.religion.bahai and now talk.religion.bahai are available under AOL's Keyword Newsgroups, Expert Add. 2. The Libraries are accepting some uploads, though Foster banned the 15+ megabytes I uploaded in late February of my entire archive of discussion for talk.religion.bahai and which is at least available on my website. It's obvious Foster is finding pretexts for suppressing further uploads. While Foster has claimed since mid-January that alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai would be added to the Main Menu under Newsgroups, he continued to make excuses for it not happening. As of March 9, 1999 they were not yet listed under Newsgroups along with soc.religion.bahai. All of these factors, coupled with Mark Foster's abuse of his position as Forum Leader and his harassing and targetting of dissenting voices, not only mine, leaves no doubt that he and other Bahais, including some among the Bahai Administration, are involved in manipulating and censoring discourse on AOL. For an instance of "back-channel" email coercion on AOL see https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm For an instance of Foster's double standard handling fundamentalist Bahais see Susan Maneck's accusations on AOL against me of "slander" and references to my views as "garbage" and "litter": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm The immediate pretext for terminating my account, according to the AOL official with whom I spoke on the phone, was that I had pointed out in a newly created Folder called Censorship that I and other AOL members had requested a Folder entitled Bahai Censorship and thereby undermined the authority of the Forum Leader.... In closing let me add that AOL personnel are extremely uninformed about the Bahai Faith, especially its practice of censorship, and its ability to exploit the TOS system.... Half a megabyte of messages documenting Bahai censorship on AOL may be found at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 1999 9:18 AM Subject: For trb & arb - FAQ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Alt.Religion.Bahai, Talk.Religion.Bahai This FAQ will be reposted approximately every two weeks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- People with only web access might want to use www.deja.com www.reference.com or www.newsguy.com or https://www.remarq.com/ They all offer reading and posting capabilities for people who can't directly access alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai and filter out spam. Alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai are available on America Online (AOL) Keyword, Newsgroups, then search for alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai If your ISP does not offer talk.religion.bahai, follow this news.groupie advice: "If your ISP doesn't have the group shortly, I suggest that you ask the newsmaster there to add it (Try news@isp.net, or newsmaster@isp.net) Ask politely. Include the msg ID of the results posting, and of the newgroup msg." Dave Cornejo's RESULT posting: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=431106082&CONTEXT=918305125.781648012&hi tnum=0 David Lawrence's newgroup msg creating talk.religion.bahai: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=434026333&CONTEXT=918304600.713490686&hi tnum=3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: Not all people agree on the interpretations given below. Question #1 "Why create arb or t.r.b.?" ANSWER #1: Because many people believe they experienced or are continuing to experience censorship when attempting to post to soc.religion.bahai. See the quotations from Abdu'l-Baha: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #2: Because the Bahai writings support free speech and religious conscience. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #3: [fill in the blank according to your own opinion.] Question #2: "Why do the srb moderators oppose trb?" ANSWER: Perhaps they'll supply an answer to place here. (Three years later their NO votes are their only answer.) Question #3: "Are Bahais opposed to freedom of speech and conscience?" ANSWER: Despite glowing words of love and support for other people's opinions, despite the Universal House of Justice stating at least publicly it is not opposed to an unmoderated forum, the record of actual behavior by Bahais and on soc.religion.bahai and the experience of TENS of THOUSANDS of Bahais and people who have left the Bahai Faith give serious reason for concern. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chronology of major events: talk.religion.bahai ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- January 17, 1997: The 1st proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted to news.announce.newgroups. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRFD.htm Early March 1997: Mark Towfiq, chairman of the BCCA, the Bahai Computer and Communication Association, posts to three Bahai-only mailing lists a call for Bahais to vote NO against talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Towfiq.htm March 1997: soc.religion.bahai bans all discussion of talk.religion.bahai from its newsgroup. This ban is still in effect more than a year and a half later. March 31, 1997: The 1st proposal was defeated 157 YES to 691 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRESULT.htm April 3, 1997: Jonathan Grobe, a non-Bahai, creates alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/arb.htm October 14, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message stating it has no objection to unmoderated newsgroups: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ1.htm November 1997: At a time when discussion was highly favorable in support of talk.religion.bahai, the BCCA deprives Frederick Glaysher of access to the private Bahai-only mailing list bahai-discuss and all of its other lists, inflaming Bahai passions against trb. See bahai-discuss archived files and correspondence between Frederick Glaysher and the BCCA committee: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm December 19, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message that suggests it does not understand the nature of Usenet interest polling: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ2.htm January 12, 1998: The 2nd proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRFD.htm February 22, 1998: The 2nd proposal was defeated 109 YES to 65 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRESULT.htm May 25, 1998: srb bans all messages from Frederick Glaysher that contain his signature file: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb23.htm September 9,1998: America Online (AOL) places a Bahai-inspired TOS against Frederick Glaysher; AOL removes the TOS after considering both sides of the issue, i.e., Bahai messages attacking and threatening him and the experience of others: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm September 14, 1998: soc.religion.bahai extends its ban on Frederick Glaysher's signature file to include all signature files and URLs from all posters, allowing only email addresses and the name of the poster: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srbban.htm October 14, 1998: Soc.religion.bahai moderator Bill Hyman backbites and casts aspersions on proponent Ron House and attempts to undermine the new support for the "neutral" RFD: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb67.htm December 3, 1998: The Call For Votes (CFV) was posted to news.announce.newgroups and news.groups for the 3rd interest poll for talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRFD.htm December 7, 1998: Bahai scholar Susan Maneck begins her NO vote campaign on AOL and alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm January 10, 1999: Talk.religion.bahai passes 218: 63. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRESULT.htm It should be noted that talk.religion.bahai eventually passed despite of the opposition of Bahais. The annotated RESULT may be read at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRESULT.htm The annotated NO voters list may be read at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/NOvoters3rd.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- For past discussion of censorship on soc.religion.bahai and other issues, including censorship within the Bahai community, see the website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/FAQ.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 1999 9:20 AM Subject: Bahai Lies: The Technique During the last several years or more a number of observers have noted the common methods many Bahais use to avoid various issues or discredit people who hold opinions other than their own: Frederick Glaysher, May 12, 1992: "The Baha'i Faith has become very oppressive and manipulative of the individual. That to me is merely a statement of fact, as I have experienced it, for nearly sixteen years now [over 22]. The usual stratagem in dealing with anyone who would express his conscience in good faith is to pretend the Cause is above any kind of criticism whatsoever while intimating that anyone who would speak honestly must have something wrong with him, i.e., his spiritual life isn't what it should be, he doesn't understand the nature of unity, or he's accused of trying to obtain power for himself, which at times seems merely a calculated way of discrediting the person, and so on. Another common strategy used to acquire control over the individual is to humor the person by letting him pour himself out, etc., and then self-righteously giving him the Truth." Ron House, November 14, 1997: "I know what you mean. I've found over the years that there is a technique used by traditional Baha'is and others to squash dissension: harry the dissenter so much he says something intemperate, then point out how 'loving' and 'compassionate' they are and how nasty the dissenter is. The trouble is that this technique works, so I've been making a conscious effort not to fall for it. Also, when they get the dissenter discouraged and miserable enough, he invariably makes a slip-up sooner or later that they can REALLY let loose the venom over. IMHO, they did this to you when you misread Sharon's intentions. At any other time, they would overlook faults, as Baha'u'llah says, but when they're in this mode they go for the jugular. Very sad." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/House2.htm Frederick Glaysher, June 1998: "Some of the most striking methods demonstrated repeatedly by many Bahais during the last year and a half of discussion about an unmoderated newsgroup is their refusal to listen and respond to the criticisms of those who are in favor of talk.religion.bahai, ignoring their concerns, never responding analytically to their messages and reasoning and logic and evidence, attacking them through character assassination and ad hominem, ganging up on individuals, and "circling the wagons" around every action of the srb moderators or others who are opposed to talk.religion.bahai." "More than twenty different people on my web site have posted messages explaining their experience with srb censorship yet many srb Bahais NEVER address their concerns. Ignoring such charges will not make them go away. NO ONE has to "try" to link the trb interest poll with censorship on srb; the moderators themselves have done that by suppressing droves of people for years. There are many people who believe such suppression is part and parcel of the Bahai community as it exists today. A YES vote need not necessarily support such a belief. There are other reasons Bahais might vote YES." Fran Baker, May 1998: "Just have to say that in my experience this is a common technique of manipulative people in general; it is especially effective with thoughtful people who are willing to see both sides of things, i.e., their own fault. I consider this brow-beating technique to be a form of abuse. The only way to deal with it is to call them on it every time and to refuse to let yourself be beat up, i.e., not to do your part of the "tango." This can be very hard to do, but it works.You can break this pattern in a personal relationship. I don't know whether it's possible when a group acts this way. Very scary." Dr. Juan Cole, June 12, 1998: "Let me ask you why in the world you think that I would risk my professional reputation by publicly stating falsehoods? ...The very technique of the more glaze-eyed among these people is to unbearably bully a Baha'i whom they don't like, use unjustified threats of declaring him or her a CB to silence the individual, and if the person will not be silenced, then to depend upon the gullibility of the Baha'is in refusing to listen to any victim's story because, of course, the Baha'i institutions are infallible and divinely guided and could never do anything wrong. It is a perfect racket." "Of course, this technique of making liberals go away has been enormously successful, and ex-Baha'i liberals have no credibility with the remaining Baha'is nor do most of them have any energy to continue to make a case, either to the Baha'is or the outside world, for the incredible abuses that go on inside this organization ostensibly committed to tolerance!" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Cole10.htm K. Paul Johnson, September 15, 1998: "If that principle [people are innocent until proven guilty] were followed by Baha'i administration and individuals in their condemnations of their fellow believers, I would have very little to complain about regarding Baha'i affairs. But character assassination by innuendo is the preferred way of dealing with anything remotely resembling dissidence. Seems like that's exactly what you're doing to Juan Cole in your message. Saying I don't want to know what you've "got" on him, thus attacking me but insinuating you have some awful proof of unspecified guilt on his part. If that's not character assassination by innuendo, what is?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson18.htm Gibro28W, October 12, 1998: "In summary, the biggest problem, as I see it, is that most Baha'is don't take criticism seriously--they tune it out as "negative" or "harmful to spiritual growth." This selfish attitude is very stupid. First of all, Baha'is entice people to join them. When they do, they indoctrinate them until they think like the group. But as soon as a red flare of doubt goes up in the convert's mind, they're cordoned off by the group and reminded of their "spiritual" obligations in the name of Baha'u'llah or the "Covenant." If left unresolved and doubt gives vent to prolonged criticism, the convert is sent packing or is kicked out. What we have here is a broken family that had failed to truly listen to the needs of its members in the first place." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb73.htm Barthaman on September 14, 1998: "Baha'i dissenters, more or less, are wounded souls abandoned by their fathers,so-to-speak. They have been cast out and dismissed or shunned without having had a fair hearing. Consider their pain when the rest of their "family" dismisses them too. Can you know what it's like to be accused of heresy and shunned following a sincere intellectual conflict (inspired by doubt)-- after you've sacrificed years in devoted service to your religion? Can you comprehend their sense of betrayal and injustice? This is why disillusioned believers leave their religions each year--while some still hang around, banging on the door now and then, demanding a refund for their lost youth. In time they will have to move on, however, writing the Baha'i Faith off as another lesson in fraud. Mock these people all you want--but for the grace of God, the next dissenter could be you. Don't be too confident, my friend." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb66.htm Juan Cole wrote, February 23, 1999: "There is nothing to be puzzled by. Right wing Baha'is only like to hear the sound of their own voices (which are the only voices they will admit to being "Baha'i" at all)." "Obviously, the world is so constructed that they cannot in fact only hear their own voices. They are forced to hear other voices that differ from theirs. This most disturbs them when the voices come from enrolled Baha'is or when the voices speak of the Baha'i faith." "The way they sometimes deal with the enrolled Baha'is is to summon them to a heresy inquiry and threaten them with being shunned if they do not fall silent." "With non-Baha'is or with ex-Baha'is, they deal with their speech about the faith by backbiting, slandering and libelling the speaker. You will note that since I've been on this list I have been accused of long-term heresy, of "claiming authority," of out and out lying (though that was retracted, twice), of misrepresentation, of 'playing fast and loose with the facts,' and even of being 'delusional.' I have been accused of all these falsehoods by *Baha'is*, by prominent Baha'is. I have been backbitten by them." "This shows that all the talk about the danger a sharp tongue can do, all the talk about the need for harmony, for returning poison with honey, for a sin-covering eye, is just *talk* among right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute." "Paul Johnson has seen all these things, as well, for the past five years. He can explain it to you." Cf. K. Paul Johnson's general reflections on coercive techniques https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson21.htm And LaAeterna's method of silencing opponents https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb65.htm Comments on the related techniques of Susan Maneck: Juan Cole, February 13, 1999: "It is a very, very, very weird religion. And if anyone is reading Susan Maneck's absolutely bone-chilling screeds on the desirability of Heresy Trials and carefulness in Shunning, they are seeing what it is like at the core of the religion." "I really am sorry for them and her, since they seem sort of filled with hate and quite paranoid, yet say they are preaching love, unity and tolerance. Susan will say, 'may your abdomen be split by lightning and your guts fall out you filthy heretic whom I wish I could just have shunned and buried', and then she'll sign herself "warmest" and slander a university by adding it to her sig line. As if what she is about has anything at all to do with *universities*!" Frederick Glaysher, February 15, 1999: "Ms. Maneck's approach appears to me to be always to shunt the discussion off or back to who said what where when why how and so on.... The farther back in time the better, since the person's memory, being human, is bound to be unable to keep up or to have stocked the evidence needed on his or her hard drive or find it on dejanews.com. And it then allows her to claim pretty much anything she wants to while seeming to have discredited her opponent. Further, she relies on the tactics of demagoguery knowing they usually prevail and will be supported by other fundamentalist Bahais. By shrieking "slander" and referring to others' opinions as "garbage," she is able to create an emotional atmosphere that essentially negates whatever the topic or content might be and that allows her to appear to win what is often a narrowly legalistic point or interpretation." "All of this is done, of course, in conjunction with her employing the more common Bahai techniques of intimidation and psychological demonization and terrorism." Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 1999 9:23 AM Subject: Bahai Lies: Bullying I'm alarmed at the Bahai attempts, during May of 1999, at character assassination, ridicule, and generally portraying me and others as disturbed individuals. This tactic has been used for over three years and continues to be used against me and other Bahais and non-Bahais or ex-Bahais. I have never claimed to be perfect. At times I have apologized to Bahais, Muslims, and other non-Bahais when I felt, or was convinced, that I was wrong or had spoken unfairly. I find the constant technique to portray me as a megalomanic or paranoid quite offensive. Similarly, the tactic of accusing me of spam for posting my opinions is calculated to discredit the validity of my and others' concerns regarding censorship in Bahai forums and has also been used on AOL. Such accusations reveal the frustration that Bahai fundamentalists apparently feel over my having found ways of enduring and resisting the onslaught of their concerted attacks, while preserving a historical record on a markedly ephermeral medium for innocent Bahais and non-Bahais.... Fair-minded Bahai and non-Bahai observers may judge for themselves whether my and others' allegations of censorship are valid by reading the record preserved under "Assorted Controversial Documents" on my website at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm As further corroboration that I am not the only person concerned with the intolerance and censorship that has overtaken the Bahai Faith, I recommend Professor Juan Cole's new book Modernity & the Millennium: The Genesis of the Bahai Faith in the Nineteenth-Century Middle East, available through Columbia University Press or Amazon.com at https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 In his conclusion, which would never have passed the system of Bahai "review" that the UHJ imposes on all publications brought out under its tight control, Professor Cole, of the Department of History at The University of Michigan, quite accurately identifies the distortions that have been wreaked upon Baha'u'llah's Teachings: "Some contemporary leaders of the Baha'i Faith have given answers increasingly similar to those of fundamentalists, stressing scriptural literalism, patriachy, theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values. While the values of the nineteenth- century Baha'i movement, which was far more tolerant, continue to exist as a minority view, by the late 1990s a different set of emphases prevailed." (196) He himself and many others, as evidence under the "Assorted Controversial Documents," have suffered at the hands of the fundamentalists who have taken control of the religion: "The rise of academic Baha'i scholarship has caused tension in the community, whose present-day leadership tends to be fundamentalist and antiliberal in orientation, and this has led to pressure on a number of prominent academics to resign or dissociate themselves from the movement." (201) These same forces of fundamentalist orthodoxy are evident on AOL, talk.religion.bahai, and alt.religion.bahai for impartial viewers to witness. They will be evident to all perceptive observers of whatever forum Bahais may be trying to control and influence. As a Bahai for more than 23 years, I myself have always found especially repulsive the manner in which Bahai fundamentalists attempt to manipulate the institutions and leaders of government, the United Nations, and public opinion, while pretending to values they deride in private or at Bahai-only meetings. Ultimately, it is the Bahai Universal House of Justice that is responsible for the perversion and corruption of such clear and elevating teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. The UHJ is also in the end responsible for inciting Bahai fanatics and fundamentalists to attack other Bahais and non-Bahais merely for their views expressed on and off line in free forums of public discussion. I recommend all newcomers to these matters read "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm On Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 1999 9:26 AM Subject: Bahai Lies: Attacks Incessant Bahai attacks upon my freedom of speech and liberty, as well as on others, have made it necessary for me to adopt a persona for my own protection and well being. Other measures have been taken. During the late winter and spring of 1999, Bahais twice flooded my hotmail account with up to 1000 messages per day resulting in considerable inconvenience and expenditure of time and effort to block, and ultimately close, the offending accounts; they have, by using numerous Bahai trolls, especially Gyr Falcon, slandered, maligned, and caricatured me in a further effort to discredit me and portray me on talk.religion.bahai and elsewhere as a disturbed and errant individual; through concerted false charges and allegations against me, they have now succeeded in deceiving Hotmail into closing my email account, which I depended on for a considerable part of my income and livelihood. For documentation of many similar incidents of Bahai oppression during the last decade, see Frederick Glaysher's website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com ---- Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 1999 9:26 AM Subject: Bahai Lies: soc.religion.bahai Robert J. Pease, December 5, 1998: "I support your efforts to expose SRB as a fundamentalist group." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb84.htm Ron House: "I think the following is a clear case of malicious rejection of an article by the worst of the moderators of soc.religion.bahai." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb53.htm Timothy Mulligan: "(Sigh) Fred, I'm beginning to think you're right about those SRB moderators." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb59.htm RobertNik: "these guys are pompous arseholes IMHO." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb54.htm Bruce Burrill: "What are Baha'i afraid of?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb60.htm Zuteflute: "Frankly I could not see anything in the letter I wrote which would prompt someone to ask whether or not I am a Baha'i." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb50.htm YU ZIR: "But as an outsider, I can perhaps see the point Fred Glaysher is making, and which point none of SRB's defenders seem to address." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb46.htm Matthew Cromer: "The current moderators regulate the contents--posting articles which they agree with...." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb47.htm Kavosh Soltani, December 9, 1998: "So many Bahais on these forums have shown to be ready to forget logic and reason, ignore clear evidence and Word of God, and come up with exactly the same line of tired and inaccurate excuses and arguments to justify their position, that it can not be a simple coincidence." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb77.htm Shakti3, December 4, 1998: "Sorry to hear that you've been surpressed on srb. Your comments were alway very "right on." Altho it does not surprise me one bit, seeing the way these newsgroups operate." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Ex7.htm Harold Shinsato: "It seems like there is an oppression over the Baha'i Faith." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb33.htm Steve Tomljenovic, December 3, 1998: "The moderators are a bit overzealous at times. Since all the controversy started, it has gotten worse." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb79.htm Laeterna: "To say I was flabberghasted at this type of "moderating" was putting it mildly indeed." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored2.htm Guy Macon" "Please explain which portion of the charter the following post violates." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored1.htm Robin Peters: "I think you're to be commended for your persistence in the face of consistent censorship." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb43.htm jgoldberg: "I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. " https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb57.htm Ruletherod, November 17, 1998: "Too much damage has already been done in the name and to the name of Baha'u'llah by right-wing administrative bullies, linear-thinking apologists, and doctrinaire-fundamentalists. You can't just blame it all on the critics." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb76.htm Many other similar messages may be found on my web site under soc.religion.bahai censorship. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 1999 9:29 AM Subject: Bahai Lies: Threats of Lawsuits Given the Bahai threats of lawsuits against me during the spring and early summer of 1999 let me say I have never committed slander against any individual, Bahai or otherwise, nor against any Bahai institution. If anyone has been slandered on talk.religion.bahai, it is I by the constant character assassination Bahais have marshalled against me for nearly three years. I'd be happy to appear in court and present an American judge and jury with the evidence of Bahai lies, deceit, censorship, and tyranny over the last decade. I highly doubt any legitimately established jury would look favorably on what Bahai fundamentalists have done to the Walbridges, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Stephen Scholl, and many, many other, indeed, TENS of THOUSANDS, of American ex-Bahais.... I'd be happy to appear in an American court and present the judge and jury with the many passages from the Bahai Writings in which the Figures speak favorably of free speech and conscience, such as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. Only one of the nine tyrants on Mt. Carmel could distort such passages to mean the kinds of things they have had the gall to foist on American Bahais in their statement this April, which Professor Juan Cole has candidly and accurately referred to as an "outburst of vehement ignorance." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Bahais falsely accuse me of slander. Far from slandering the UHJ, I have stood up to Bahai fundamentalists and honestly spoken my conscience. They are free to call that "slander." I doubt any judge or jury in the West would call it such, especially after reading the EVIDENCE and reflecting on the enormous discrepancy between the sycophantic treatment leaders in government, the UN, and the media regularly receive from Bahais who are always interested in attempting to exploit their positions of power for one reason or another and the reality of abuse of the most basic human rights now well documented on Professor Juan Cole's website and on mine. I trust the American legal system to protect me from such organizations and fundamentalist reprobates. The objective observer will note the Bahai tactic of resorting to threats and intimidation instead of engaging in discussion of the actual incidents of censorship and oppression, extensively noted in "The Bahai Technique." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm Such tactics remind me of a comment by Dr. Martin Luther King in his Letter from Birmingham Jail: "You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations." Fundamentalist Bahais typify this same mentality. They rail and threaten me, and others who dare speak their minds, but express no concern whatsoever for the underlying conditions of censorship and oppression that have led to distrust and contempt for the UHJ and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. Everything I have said is a matter of religious conscience protected under the US Constitution. My Bahai membership card proves it, and a scanned copy of it may be found on my website. I would be happy to present the original to any judge or jury in the land. "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." --Thomas Jefferson -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997," which surveys the many, many incidents of censorship and oppression that have taken place in the Bahai faith during the last decade or more: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:376EF2DE.221BD43@earthlink.net... > > I have stated that I may sue you - that is singular. I am not aware of > anyone else's attempt. BTW, my suing you is not a threat - a threat > is I will do this if you do that. You have already crossed that line. > I > said I would first take it up with Dejanews - Roger pointed out that > you were not using Dejanews to post your articles so I suppose it > is bigfoot at first. > > Now, if it gets to the point that I decide to sue you, I will offer > anyone > who wishes to join in a class-action suit, if that is legally possible. > > My feet are firmly on the ground - I am not joking or mincing words. > > Saman Ahmadi > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, > > let me say I have never committed slander. > > P.S. Ever heard of the Furman tapes? > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 1999 9:30 AM Subject: Bahai Lies: uhj From: FG To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; bahai-faith @ makelist.com Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM July 24,1998 Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." The tragic loss of Bahai lives in Iran and the subsequent exploitation of their deaths by Bahai spokesmen, often in the American media, always courting the President and other members of the government, has become a predictable pattern rendered intolerable in the context of continuing and pervasive Bahai censorship and denial of human and civil rights in the United States and elsewhere. Such incidents as I queried you about in my unanswered email of March 31, 1997, available on my Web site, regarding the crushing of the magazine Dialogue, the resignations of a number of scholars from the Bahai Encyclopedia, the attacks on the listserv known as Talisman I at Indiana University, the harassing and blacklisting of many individuals, Bahai and non-Bahai, suggest profoundly deep-seated problems within the Bahai community and administration. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/To-UHJ1.htm To these incidents must now be added the apparent conspiracy for more than a year and a half of the Bahai Computer and Communications Committee (BCCA), under the chairmanship of Mark Towfiq, to defeat twice now, along with the collusion of other Bahais, the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith which would be known as talk.religion.bahai. You may find extensive documentation for all of these violations of the basic human rights of many Bahais and non-Bahais on my Web site, "The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm Because the third interest poll for talk.religion.bahai on Usenet is approaching, after August 28th, I ask you again to investigate the BCCA and its depriving me of access last November from all private Bahai-only mailing lists at a crucial moment just when the tide of discussion was going very much in favor of the newsgroup, noted by many observers. I also ask whether you supported or were involved in that decision? The relevant files can be found on my Web site under Bahai-Discuss Archives. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm Similarly, I would like to know whether your institution or the BCCA has approved of or advocated the recent ban of my email signature file by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai, as well as their complete ban for more than a year and a half now on all discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai. The prevailing atmosphere of suppression of free speech and religious conscience that now characterizes the Bahai Faith cannot but call into question the honesty of many members of the Bahai administration and perhaps the institutions themselves. I ask once more whether censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith and what passages of the Bahai Writings support it, what are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship? Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ------ Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 1999 9:33 AM Subject: Bahai Lies: The Pickering Tape From the talisman archive for April 1996: Person #1 is Henderson Person #2 is the Most Honorable Judge James Nelson. I believe a full transcript of this tape is still much needed for the Bahais and others to understand what truly took place. I would be happy to transcribe and post the entire tape if someone would like to send it to me, anonymously or otherwise, at PO Box 81842 Rochester, Michigan 48308 -- Frederick Glaysher, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ From jrcole@umich.eduFri Apr 12 14:50:37 1996 Date: Thu, 11 Apr 1996 18:32:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Juan R Cole To: Rick Schaut Cc: "'talisman@indiana.edu'" Subject: RE: criticism of NSA policies Rick: I appreciate your measured response, and find myself in agreement with much of what you say. I brought the matter up only as an example. But for the record I have evidence that at least two NSA members were very intimately involved in supporting the Travel Agency monopoly that they set up. Moreover, if they did in fact step over the line and break the law by using threats of spiritual sanctions to reduce business competition, this would be a serious matter. People have gone to jail for analogous infractions, and public officials have resigned or been forced to resign over them. The NSA actions also may have cost Baha'i travel agents and their customers money, and subjected them to spiritual duress, which would be an arbitrary use of power. I enclose, so that others can judge for themselves, some passages from a transcript of a taped conversation between two NSA members and a Baha'i travel agent that took place the summer before the World Congress. Since I am only interested in the rights and wrongs in an abstract way, I have not included the names of the principals. Cheers Juan Cole, History, Univ. of Michigan NSA Member #1: We're calling, Mr. X, about your package offered for the World Congress. We have some concerns about it. The National Spiritual Assembly has asked X and me to consult with you-- Baha'i Travel Agent: --O.K. NSA Member # 1: --about it and tell you what we think and make a few suggestions. Baha'i Travel Agent: Sure. NSA Member # 1: First of all, we're concerned that there were some misrepresentations made in your brochure or what looks like from the copy I've got-- Baha'i TA: The recent one we sent out about our package? Hm hm. NSA Member # 1: And there are some incomplete and inaccuracies stated in yours compared to what you will be able to deliver at a guaranteed price . . . [expresses concern about Baha'i Travel Agent's past refusal to accept credit cards when arranging pilgrimages to Haifa, which has sometimes left Baha'is unable actually to go, and left the NSA to pay for their tickets) . . . We have a bit of concern that people are going to go for price only and neglect the essentials that you don't mention that they're going to get if they take the Logistics Office package. We are concerned that you are not going to be in a position to deliver them the airfares at the rate that you say. We will be, because we're locked into a no-lose situation. That is, if the fares go down, we get the down, if they go up, we get the guarantee. And . . . Baha'i Travel Agent: The same thing is true here. NSA Member # 1: We--You can do that? Baha'i Travel Agent: I work directly through US Air. Uh huh. NSA Member # 1: All right, then: I want you not to say, then, and you are directed not to say that if airfare prices increase substantially we will have to pass on the increase to the clients. Baha'i Travel Agent: All right--we've sent out a second letter. This was done while I was in Europe . . . I've made some corrections because of that. And we do not say--we say we do guarantee it . . . NSA Member # 1: Then we want you to spell out completely in your brochure that you do not offer transportation from the airport to the airport or between Jacob Javits Center and the hotel. Baha'i Travel Agent: O.k. . . . It does say that . . . [reads new brochure, which mentions that taxis can be taken to the Jacob Javitz center and that it is walking distance in good weather] NSA Member # 1: We want you to list the current price from the hotels to Javits and back . . . Baha'i Travel Agent: I'm not through, yet, sir . . . NSA Member # 1: I'm doing this as we go through, because I tell you this, when we get through we are going to publish in the American Baha'i a direct comparison-- Baha'i Travel Agent: Hm, hm. NSA Member # 1: And I want your comparison to agree with ours. Baha'i Travel Agent: How can you do that with a business? NSA Member # 1: We are not getting you out of business. We are simply comparing-- Baha'i Travel Agent: Oh, I know that sir. I didn't say that. I said, how can you require that of a business? We're just, like, representing, any other business. NSA Member # 1: You don't have to do it, sir. Baha'i Travel Agent: Oh, O.K. NSA Member # 1: But I tell you, you will be in some peril if you don't. [What is going on here is that the NSA has discovered that its Logistics Office prices are very high and can be easily undercut by Baha'i travel agents. This puts in doubt whether they can arrange enough reservations to receive the $50,000 in free suites from the official travel agency. The first tack it takes is that these are fly by night operations that don't guarantee the airfares. But this does not prove true. Then they want to push the idea that the competing packages are not full service, and don't include taxi fare (as if that could account for a $300 difference). At this point, the travel agent begins to realize that the NSA Logistics Office is trying to *compete* with him and trying to put conditions on how he can compete with it. He realizes that this is an anti-Trust violation, and questions how the NSA can place conditions on economic competitors. The NSA member, aware of the fine line he is treading, denies he is trying to prevent a competitor from doing business. The travel agent presses the point that NSA actions could nevertheless be perceived as attempting to place conditions on an economic competitor, which is still illegal. The NSA member realizes where this is going, and backs down. "You don't have to do it, sir." The travel agent is relieved. Then the NSA member appears to lose his temper. "But I tell you you will be in some peril if you don't," he adds. At this point I think he has stepped over the line into an illegal anti-trust violation. He is attempting to browbeat a competitor with the NSA Logistics Office, and to put conditions on the nature of the competition between them.) Baha'i Travel Agent: . . . We've had a number of people contact us and all we've tried to do is provide people who say they just cannot go with a way they can go. And we're not trying in any way to cut into your program, because we only have space for 550 . . . And all we're trying to do is help those like the ones in South Carolina, whole assemblies, that just say they could not go unless they had the less price. NSA Member # 1: You don't think our package includes the lesser price? Baha'i Travel Agent: No, sir. [NSA member # 2 alleges that the only safe way to have the World Congress travel accommodations taken care of is to have one Travel Agency handle everyone; and he intimates that the Universal House of Justice wanted the NSA to do it that way, though he says this in an ambiguous manner). NSA Member # 2: . . . One of our urgent concerns is that your material creates the impression you can provide a lower price. That is false. As you know, our materials indicate that the friends are guaranteed the lowest available price from any source at they time they travel . . . Your materials suggest that you can beat our prices. In fact, that is not true. One of the things the National Assembly wants you to address is the perception that you have created deliberately through your materials that you provide a lower cost. This suggests that the Institution has cheated the friends . . . [In fact, virtually any travel agent could have gotten a Baha'i a better price than than most Logistics Office packages afforded. This NSA member is either wholly uninformed or is being, uh, disingenuous. His suggestion that offering a lower price is forbidden because it makes the NSA look like it is cheating the friends is outrageous; it is an attempt to bully this individual into not offering competing, lower packages. Again, I think these statements border on illegality under anti-trust laws.) [This conversation went on for some time more, with much browbeating of the poor travel agent, and a final plea for him to withdraw his competing package, on the grounds that he could simply not provide a better price than did the Logistics Office. It is hard not to conclude that all parties here knew that the travel agent could in fact substantially undercut Logistics Office prices, but that putting things this way was a polite cover for bullying a competitor.\} Please note that I don't think the NSA members were personally profiting from the arrangements that had been made. I think their concerns are as they repeatedly stated them. They liked the idea of a centralized Travel Agency with a standardized package that cut down on the likelihood of out-of-town Baha'is wandering around New York (one caller inquired about camping facilities in New Jersey from the Logistics Office or their Travel Agent, and were told that there *were none!* When a complaint was lodged, Wilmette replied that they hadn't wanted people camping out). The official Travel Agency was offering the sweetener of $50,000 in free rooms if a certain number of Baha'is used them, and the NSA for some reason was fixated on getting this bonus (which, it is true, benefitted the Fund in a small way, not individuals). And since the NSA had made this unwise and untrue claim that their package was guaranteed the cheapest, they minded that being demonstrated to be untrue (were they afraid they might become responsible for the difference, themselves? Or just that someone would think they were taking profits or a kickback? There is no evidence of the latter). The fact remains that their solution to these problems, of bullying Baha'i Travel Agents (there were others) into cancelling competing reservations was at the least unethical and an arbitrary use of the spiritual authority they have; and was possibly even illegal. Along with their earlier bullying of the Dialogue editors, and their recent attempt to coerce the speech of one of our Talismanians, all this amounts to a worrisome *pattern* of behavior which I myself have difficulty seeing as very Baha'i-like. The naivete of the general run of Baha'is and their refusal to accept that any irregularities could occur in Wilmette by virtue of divine grace have perhaps deprived the NSA of useful community feedback on these sorts of problem. ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 1999 9:46 AM Subject: Re: Universal House of Justice/Fundamentalism Unreliable comments, or two faced, from someone who has referred to the administrative "jerks" censoring him.... Calls into doubt his putative intentions to begin with, pretending his heresy trial this spring had helped him to see the light. -- Patrick Henry, "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ TLCULHANE wrote in message news:19990820234138.01754.00000817@ng-fp1.aol.com... > > > Michael wrote: > > << There is a post allegedly from Terry Culhane arguing, if my first glance > is correct, that one may not know what literalist fundamentalism is. I'm > only now noticing this, and have to rush off. . . >> > > TC: I want to contrast this opening remark with Michaels closing remark. It is > indicative of the issue I tried to address in my earlier post. > > < impelled to defend the dearth of principle, when no one perceives other > people as enemies, lepers or anything of the kind.>> > >> > TC: This post opens with a not so subtle accusation that the comments in > question were "allegedly" made by me. The use of allegedly in this case serves > to cast doubt on the integrity of the person who forwarded the post rather than > the person who wrote the post. In other words it is a form of ad hominen attack > meant to cast doubt on the integrity of Professor Maneck. As such it is > inconsistent with the closing argument in the form of a plea for a day when no > one will be seen 'as an enemy or a leper. In other words when no one is seen as > beyond the pale. I can assure everyone that I am the author of the remarks that > Professor Maneck forwarded at my request. > > < violate essential principles. The literal text, intending to urge those > charged with guiding harmoniously and in a principled manner to be obeyed > in such guidance, may not be forced on everyone else as a justification > to suppress the divinely created diversity of thought within and without > <> > > TC: Please see my earlier comments as to Baha u llahs perception of the role > and purpose of language and the "spirit" within which that is expected to > occur. > There is no such thing as a"literal text". There are texts and the > interpretation of texts that can take many forms. The entire statement above > negates the closing remarks that Michael made with respect to enemies and > lepers. He uses such words as " mindless obediance" justification to suppress:. > These terms are used in the context of an allegation directed at,presumably, > the House of Justice. It is an ideological statement that makes assertions,not > substantiated either by reason or empirical evidence and impervious to the > *principle* of authority invested by Baha u lah in the House of Justice. > Michael may not like this *principle* but the exercise of that principle hardly > constitutes "mindless obedience or an act of "suppression." > > All principles,unless they are simply discussions that begin in words and end > in words have to be applied. And they are applied to specific situations. If > not they are meaningless and ineffectual as principles. Michael would, through > ideological posturing, attempt to dismiss both the principle of authority and > its application to all but those situations with which he agrees in advance. > Thats fine but it is an irrelevant argument when discussing the principle of > authority and its application within the Bahai community. > > > << This word Covenant has a twin edge to it. There are two sides to an > agreement. It is the duty of the UHJ to rule in a principled manner, not to > insist that whatever unprincipled thing it extracts from the words of the > founder of the faith, his son or anyone else is really the principled will > << of God. > > TC: A Covenant , in the context of religion, is more than an agreement. It is a > divine call and includes a human response. In the Covenant of Baha u llah there > is established a legitimate (and I mean this in the sociological sense) > exercise of authority. That legitimacy within the covenant-of the *principle* > of authority- is exercised by houses of justice. It is not exercised in any > binding sense by individuals. I have already said that principles in order to > have effect must be applied and in the Bahai context those principles and their > application are derived from the verified texts of Baha u llah and their > interpretation by Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi. The House of Justice is > charged by Baha u llah with applying the binding application of principle > within the Bahai community. That is not the charge of Terry Culhane or Michael > McKenney. Please read the Will and testament of Abdul Baha for a discussion of > this principle. That is one of the authoritative texts on this matter. > Presumably Michael disagrees with the determination by the House of Justice > in relation to the application of a particular principle. Michael is entitled > to his view. It is however not a rational conclusion to assume tat because the > House of Justice arrived at a different application of that principle that the > House is therefore acting in an "unprincipled" manner. The rational basis for > such a conclusion would be made by the Guardian or Abdul Baha. Since the House > of Justice is relying on its understanding of the interpretations of Abdul Baha > and the Guardian and Michael does not agree with those interpretations or its > application by the House of Justice he has assumed the prerogative of the > House of Justice and the Guardian at the same time. Neat trick but such an > assertion is clearly outside the boundaries of the Covenant of Baha u llah as > to the exercise of authority granted by Baha u llah, extended by Abdul Baha and > Shoghi Effendi. Michaels real problem here is that the Manifestation of God > does not appear to conform his expectations and because the central figures of > the Faith of Baha u llah and the House of Justice to not conform to Michaels > expectations they are therefore "literal fundamentalists." That great ideology > but short on an understanding of the *principle * of Covenant and its > applicability within the Bahai community. > > << We may indeed know what literalist fundamentalism is, as any fair > minded reader of this newsgroup has seen. Some people urge the application > of principle. Other people point to words, letters, texts that impel the > opposite of principle. The latter is literalist fundamentalism and has no > << place in any decent, especially any spiritual, movement,>> > > TC: We may know what a possible meaning of literal fundamentalist is but > Michael still fails to provide one. This is more evasion and ideological > posturing meant to cloak the lack of a reasoned and verifiable argument. Its > great rhetoric but bad philosophy or history. Again its argument rests on the > simple assertion of its existence. > Once we witness the same dynamic of I dont like the application of a principle > so therefore that action is unprincipled. This is a circular argument and does > not meet the minimum standards of reason and evidence. > > We have a convenient divide set in place within the above paragraph.It is > also contrary to the closing comment of Michael that I referenced at the > beginning of my comments about not creating "enemies or lepers. > > The world is neatly divided into two opposing groups - the forces of light > and forces of darkness known respectively as those who "urge the application of > principle" and those who "point to words, letters texts and impel the opposite > of principle." It is the latter Michael says who are "literal > fundamentalists." > > I am pleased to see that Michael now agrees that principle is intended to be > applied. We agree on something. The problem is that for a principle to be > applied everyone relies of "words" (what we are doing right now) and letters > and texts from someone in order to apply a principle. The question is not > whether one applies a principle but whose words and what texts are considered > authoritative in determining how a *principle* is to be applied. > > In the case of the Bahai community the principle of authority and the > binding application of principle accrues to the House of Justice. Who says so? > Baha u llah, Abdul Baha and Shoghi Effendi. What texts are authoritative in > this context? The Kitabi Aqdas, The Kitabi Ahd, the Will and Testament of Abdul > Baha among others. In other words the application of principle in any setting > relies on words, letters, and texts. In the case of the Bahai community the > above texts are authoritative. John Locke, John Stuart Mill, Harriet Taylor nor > anyone else constitute authoritative words,letters or texts in determining the > application of *principle* within the Bahai community. As such Michael's > syllogism and conclusion that anyone who relies on words letters and texts is a > literal fundamentalist does not hold and is,in fact, an illogical and > meaningless conclusion. > > Further the construction of the statement about those who urge application of > principle and those who rely on words and texts negates his conclusion. By this > definition Michael is himself a literal fundamentalist as is any one who ever > tries to apply a principle to actual situations. Thus the term literal > fundamentalist is void of any content and is unable to serve as a reasoned > basis for argument or evidence. > > The real issue in this discussion is not those who urge principle and those > who urge words and texts. The issue is what texts are definitive and who has > the authority to make binding applications of principle within the Bahai > community. > > The answer based on the authoritative texts and the application of the > principle of authority within the Bahai community is the House of Justice. It > is not Michael Mc Kenney or Terry Culhane and that is the issue. Michael has > different views about the application of principle within the Bahai community > than those "applied" by the House of Justice. So do I. > > The difference is I dont consider my views principled and those of the > House of Justice unprincipled. Nor do I think that because those differences > exist that I am right and the House of Justice is wrong. I do not subscribe to > the convenient division of the world into those who are principled and right > and those who are not principled and wrong. That is the hallmark of > fundamentalism. I do not accept the view of the modern worlds binary > oppositions between simple views of true and false, self and other(Michael is > engaging in the classic case of self and demonized other in his > characterizations of the House). The opposite of one truth,as natural > scientists have long since learned, is the presence of another truth. How those > truths and application as the moral good are applied, acted upon in the world > is the issue. The "texts" of the Bahai community are fairly clear about that. > > < even will commit suicide in the name of God, people who can accept > anything at all from the leader(s), still, if the goal really is to attain > human harmony, rather than enforced and uniform compliance with the dearth > of principle which means unending contention, conflict, rebellion and > revolution, then not the seemingly clear words of anyone saying > discriminate against women, suppress freedom of speech, harass and > persecute people, but the principles of the full equality of women and > men, the freedom of thought and honest expression of personal views, the > open-minded, accepting of human harmony, diversity, variety, are > << essential. > > TC: This is more ideological posturing and a dearth of reason itself. The > issues in this statement have already been addressed. The link of "cult' with > the particular application of principle and those who are willing to abide by > that application is grand ideology but again short on reason and evidence. It > is a red herring argument. All we have here is the continuos assertion in the > form of ideological invective. > > As for conflict and contention: In both the spirit and principle of Baha u > llah "conflict and contention are forbidden" and "divinely preserved from > annulment " by the clear text of the Book of the Covenant. To argue that > because one disagrees with the application of principle within the Bahai > community that one therefore has the privilege or is justified in promoting > "unending contenton, conflict ,rebellion and revolution" as Michael says is an > argument contrary to both the spirit,the principle and application of that > spirit and principle of the Covenant within the Bahai community. > > This argument ,for all its ideological flourish, is a variation of what I > refer to as the philosophy of egocentric liberalism that posits the self as the > center of existence and the ground of being. In other words it is a secular > argument. In themselves they lead to philosophical conclusions of nihilism. > Secular arguments words letters and texts are not authoritative in determining > the application of principle within the Bahai community > Unless this discussion is capable of being conducted on the basis of reason and > textual evidence considered authoritative within the Bahai community as to the > application of Bahai principles there is no reason for me to participate any > further in this conversation. I would suggest the same for everyone else. > Otherwise it is a conversation that begins in words and ends in words. > > > warm regards, > Terry Culhane > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, August 22, 1999 8:15 PM Subject: Re: Bahai Fanaticism on Compuserv Michael McKenny wrote in message news:7pml1b$rqn@freenet-news.carleton.ca... > > Greetings, Patrick. > Many thanks for sharing this with us. This is a tasty little candy, > isn't it? Sickeningly sweet to my taste.... Alas, it's the usually fanaticism, and then the inevitable sycophantic damage control.... Michael, and those of you who have been true friends, farewell, I'll be posting less this fall. I have many things I must now turn to, though I expect to find the time to post my regularly messages lest all memory fade on this most ephemeral medium.... More in another post, in a minute, -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, August 22, 1999 8:19 PM Subject: Bahai Lies: Discussion Agenda - trb I would be happy to discuss any of the acts of oppression and tyranny committed by the uhj as documented below on The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm I provide the "headlines" below for newcomers and Bahais on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai. Otherwise, I expect to be posting less frequently this fall, having learnt during the last three years what I needed to know about my fellow Bahais and the uhj. Should the uhj come to its senses and abolish "review," I'd appreciate someone informing me to that effect.... In the meantime, I must return to my literary interests. Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ------------------------------------------------------------------- Newcomers might want to start here: The Bahai Technique (Essential Reading) soc.religion.bahai - Brief Quotations (Documenting Censorship) alt.religion.bahai FAQ & Chronology (Frequently Asked Questions) Bahais on AOL Late 1998 & early 1999 Bahai Attacks I & II Fall & Spring 1999 Bahai Threats of Lawsuits During Spring 1999 To the Universal House of Justice - March 31, 1997 To the Universal House of Justice - July 24, 1998 -------------------------------------------------------------------- A comprehensive outline of the major incidents of Bahai censorship: Juan Cole, "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997" --------------------------------------------------------------------- Assorted Controversial Documents "A Modest Proposal" 1987 "The Service of Women" 1988 The Majnun Post 2/7/96 The Pickering Tape 4/96 "Crisis of Faith" 5/15/96 Letter: Stephen Birkland, Continental Board of Counsellors 7/16/96 "Baha'i Leaders Vexed by On-Line Critics" Winter 1997 Stephen Scholl re the suppression of Dialogue Magazine 1997 Mark Towfiq's NO Vote Campaign on BCCA mailing lists 3/12/97 Susan Maneck's NO Vote Campaign on AOL 12/7/98 Juan Cole, Dismissal of NSA Member Judge James F. Nelson... April, 1999 Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Universal House of Justice From the UHJ: 14 October 1997 From the UHJ: 19 December 1997 To the UHJ: December 21, 1997 -------------------------------------- For the full text of any of these topics, see https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 30, 1999 3:32 PM Subject: Re: Bahai Fanaticism on Compuserv macleod wrote in message news:935439857.29507.0.nnrp-08.c2de8324@news.demon.co.uk... > > Patrick Henry wrote in message ... > >Michael, and those of you who have been true friends, farewell, > >I'll be posting less this fall. I have many things I must now turn > >to, though I expect to find the time to post my regularly messages > >lest all memory fade on this most ephemeral medium.... > > > I'll genuinely miss you. I hope you have success in whatever you turn to > but do come back and visit sometimes. Thanks for saying so. I appreciate your good will. I'll be peeking in once in a while as time permits, though fairly infrequently. -- Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 30, 1999 3:44 PM Subject: Lying Bahais: On AOL In August of 1998 I took out an account on AOL. It quickly became apparent that my fellow Bahais were using AOL in such a way as to further withhold knowledge and information from AOL's more than 14 million members. It appeared to me that there were four main issues. Alt.religion.bahai, which had been created in April of 1997 and which had had more than 20,000 messages posted to it, was not even offered in the list of AOL newsgroups. AOL personnel with which I spoke over the phone were very puzzled why it wasn't and even implied that some action would have had to have been taken to keep it from automatically being picked up and added to their newsgroups. It took more than a month of strenuous effort to get AOL to add alt.religion.bahai. On the AOL Bahai Forums it became apparent that Bahais were manipulating and controlling information by NOT making it available, by essentially preserving the frozen, non-functioning state of affairs or the status quo: 1. The Libraries were not accepting new uploads for others then to download and read. 2. The list of Newsgroups on the Main Menu for Bahai offered only soc.religion.bahai with no mention of alt.religion.bahai, or talk.religion.bahai once it was created in January of 1999. Coupled with soc.religion.bahai's suppression of all mention of alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai, this prevents people from even hearing of their existence. 3. The available links for Web Sites on the Main Menu for Bahai did not offered my website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience, though it has to be one of the most visited sites on the Bahai Faith with more than 7,000 hits since May 1998. As the months went by, my repeated attempts to improve these deficiencies met with greater and greater opposition from the Bahai fundamentalists on AOL. Similiarly, my requests, beginning in August of 1998, that the Forum Leader, Mark Foster, who no one had seen for months, resign, for derilection of duty, were increasingly opposed while various excuses were offered for his absence. Not until talk.religion.bahai was passed five months later in January 1999 did he suddenly reappear only to begin immediately reporting absolutely EVERY message I posted to AOL as a TOS. It quickly became clear to me that he was back in order to target and build a case against me to have me suspended from AOL. My account was then temporarily suspended on three different occasions and finally terminated March 6, 1999. Of the four issues, only two have partially been remedied. 1. Alt.religion.bahai and now talk.religion.bahai are available under AOL's Keyword Newsgroups, Expert Add. 2. The Libraries are accepting some uploads, though Foster banned the 15+ megabytes I uploaded in late February of my entire archive of discussion for talk.religion.bahai and which is at least available on my website. It's obvious Foster is finding pretexts for suppressing further uploads. While Foster has claimed since mid-January that alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai would be added to the Main Menu under Newsgroups, he continued to make excuses for it not happening. As of March 9, 1999 they were not yet listed under Newsgroups along with soc.religion.bahai. All of these factors, coupled with Mark Foster's abuse of his position as Forum Leader and his harassing and targetting of dissenting voices, not only mine, leaves no doubt that he and other Bahais, including some among the Bahai Administration, are involved in manipulating and censoring discourse on AOL. For an instance of "back-channel" email coercion on AOL see https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm For an instance of Foster's double standard handling fundamentalist Bahais see Susan Maneck's accusations on AOL against me of "slander" and references to my views as "garbage" and "litter": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm The immediate pretext for terminating my account, according to the AOL official with whom I spoke on the phone, was that I had pointed out in a newly created Folder called Censorship that I and other AOL members had requested a Folder entitled Bahai Censorship and thereby undermined the authority of the Forum Leader.... In closing let me add that AOL personnel are extremely uninformed about the Bahai Faith, especially its practice of censorship, and its ability to exploit the TOS system.... Half a megabyte of messages documenting Bahai censorship on AOL may be found at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 30, 1999 3:45 PM Subject: Frequently ASKED Questions: FAQ for trb ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Alt.Religion.Bahai, Talk.Religion.Bahai This FAQ will be reposted approximately every two weeks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- People with only web access might want to use www.deja.com www.reference.com or www.newsguy.com or https://www.remarq.com/ They all offer reading and posting capabilities for people who can't directly access alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai and filter out spam. Alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai are available on America Online (AOL) Keyword, Newsgroups, then search for alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai If your ISP does not offer talk.religion.bahai, follow this news.groupie advice: "If your ISP doesn't have the group shortly, I suggest that you ask the newsmaster there to add it (Try news@isp.net, or newsmaster@isp.net) Ask politely. Include the msg ID of the results posting, and of the newgroup msg." Dave Cornejo's RESULT posting: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=431106082&CONTEXT=918305125.781648012&hi tnum=0 David Lawrence's newgroup msg creating talk.religion.bahai: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=434026333&CONTEXT=918304600.713490686&hi tnum=3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: Not all people agree on the interpretations given below. Question #1 "Why create arb or t.r.b.?" ANSWER #1: Because many people believe they experienced or are continuing to experience censorship when attempting to post to soc.religion.bahai. See the quotations from Abdu'l-Baha: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #2: Because the Bahai writings support free speech and religious conscience. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #3: [fill in the blank according to your own opinion.] Question #2: "Why do the srb moderators oppose trb?" ANSWER: Perhaps they'll supply an answer to place here. (Three years later their NO votes are their only answer.) Question #3: "Are Bahais opposed to freedom of speech and conscience?" ANSWER: Despite glowing words of love and support for other people's opinions, despite the Universal House of Justice stating at least publicly it is not opposed to an unmoderated forum, the record of actual behavior by Bahais and on soc.religion.bahai and the experience of TENS of THOUSANDS of Bahais and people who have left the Bahai Faith give serious reason for concern. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chronology of major events: talk.religion.bahai ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- January 17, 1997: The 1st proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted to news.announce.newgroups. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRFD.htm Early March 1997: Mark Towfiq, chairman of the BCCA, the Bahai Computer and Communication Association, posts to three Bahai-only mailing lists a call for Bahais to vote NO against talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Towfiq.htm March 1997: soc.religion.bahai bans all discussion of talk.religion.bahai from its newsgroup. This ban is still in effect more than a year and a half later. March 31, 1997: The 1st proposal was defeated 157 YES to 691 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRESULT.htm April 3, 1997: Jonathan Grobe, a non-Bahai, creates alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/arb.htm October 14, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message stating it has no objection to unmoderated newsgroups: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ1.htm November 1997: At a time when discussion was highly favorable in support of talk.religion.bahai, the BCCA deprives Frederick Glaysher of access to the private Bahai-only mailing list bahai-discuss and all of its other lists, inflaming Bahai passions against trb. See bahai-discuss archived files and correspondence between Frederick Glaysher and the BCCA committee: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm December 19, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message that suggests it does not understand the nature of Usenet interest polling: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ2.htm January 12, 1998: The 2nd proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRFD.htm February 22, 1998: The 2nd proposal was defeated 109 YES to 65 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRESULT.htm May 25, 1998: srb bans all messages from Frederick Glaysher that contain his signature file: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb23.htm September 9,1998: America Online (AOL) places a Bahai-inspired TOS against Frederick Glaysher; AOL removes the TOS after considering both sides of the issue, i.e., Bahai messages attacking and threatening him and the experience of others: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm September 14, 1998: soc.religion.bahai extends its ban on Frederick Glaysher's signature file to include all signature files and URLs from all posters, allowing only email addresses and the name of the poster: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srbban.htm October 14, 1998: Soc.religion.bahai moderator Bill Hyman backbites and casts aspersions on proponent Ron House and attempts to undermine the new support for the "neutral" RFD: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb67.htm December 3, 1998: The Call For Votes (CFV) was posted to news.announce.newgroups and news.groups for the 3rd interest poll for talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRFD.htm December 7, 1998: Bahai scholar Susan Maneck begins her NO vote campaign on AOL and alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm January 10, 1999: Talk.religion.bahai passes 218: 63. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRESULT.htm It should be noted that talk.religion.bahai eventually passed despite of the opposition of Bahais. The annotated RESULT may be read at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRESULT.htm The annotated NO voters list may be read at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/NOvoters3rd.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- For past discussion of censorship on soc.religion.bahai and other issues, including censorship within the Bahai community, see the website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/FAQ.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 30, 1999 3:45 PM Subject: Lying Bahais: The Technique During the last several years or more a number of observers have noted the common methods many Bahais use to avoid various issues or discredit people who hold opinions other than their own: Frederick Glaysher, May 12, 1992: "The Baha'i Faith has become very oppressive and manipulative of the individual. That to me is merely a statement of fact, as I have experienced it, for nearly sixteen years now [over 22]. The usual stratagem in dealing with anyone who would express his conscience in good faith is to pretend the Cause is above any kind of criticism whatsoever while intimating that anyone who would speak honestly must have something wrong with him, i.e., his spiritual life isn't what it should be, he doesn't understand the nature of unity, or he's accused of trying to obtain power for himself, which at times seems merely a calculated way of discrediting the person, and so on. Another common strategy used to acquire control over the individual is to humor the person by letting him pour himself out, etc., and then self-righteously giving him the Truth." Ron House, November 14, 1997: "I know what you mean. I've found over the years that there is a technique used by traditional Baha'is and others to squash dissension: harry the dissenter so much he says something intemperate, then point out how 'loving' and 'compassionate' they are and how nasty the dissenter is. The trouble is that this technique works, so I've been making a conscious effort not to fall for it. Also, when they get the dissenter discouraged and miserable enough, he invariably makes a slip-up sooner or later that they can REALLY let loose the venom over. IMHO, they did this to you when you misread Sharon's intentions. At any other time, they would overlook faults, as Baha'u'llah says, but when they're in this mode they go for the jugular. Very sad." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/House2.htm Frederick Glaysher, June 1998: "Some of the most striking methods demonstrated repeatedly by many Bahais during the last year and a half of discussion about an unmoderated newsgroup is their refusal to listen and respond to the criticisms of those who are in favor of talk.religion.bahai, ignoring their concerns, never responding analytically to their messages and reasoning and logic and evidence, attacking them through character assassination and ad hominem, ganging up on individuals, and "circling the wagons" around every action of the srb moderators or others who are opposed to talk.religion.bahai." "More than twenty different people on my web site have posted messages explaining their experience with srb censorship yet many srb Bahais NEVER address their concerns. Ignoring such charges will not make them go away. NO ONE has to "try" to link the trb interest poll with censorship on srb; the moderators themselves have done that by suppressing droves of people for years. There are many people who believe such suppression is part and parcel of the Bahai community as it exists today. A YES vote need not necessarily support such a belief. There are other reasons Bahais might vote YES." Fran Baker, May 1998: "Just have to say that in my experience this is a common technique of manipulative people in general; it is especially effective with thoughtful people who are willing to see both sides of things, i.e., their own fault. I consider this brow-beating technique to be a form of abuse. The only way to deal with it is to call them on it every time and to refuse to let yourself be beat up, i.e., not to do your part of the "tango." This can be very hard to do, but it works.You can break this pattern in a personal relationship. I don't know whether it's possible when a group acts this way. Very scary." Dr. Juan Cole, June 12, 1998: "Let me ask you why in the world you think that I would risk my professional reputation by publicly stating falsehoods? ...The very technique of the more glaze-eyed among these people is to unbearably bully a Baha'i whom they don't like, use unjustified threats of declaring him or her a CB to silence the individual, and if the person will not be silenced, then to depend upon the gullibility of the Baha'is in refusing to listen to any victim's story because, of course, the Baha'i institutions are infallible and divinely guided and could never do anything wrong. It is a perfect racket." "Of course, this technique of making liberals go away has been enormously successful, and ex-Baha'i liberals have no credibility with the remaining Baha'is nor do most of them have any energy to continue to make a case, either to the Baha'is or the outside world, for the incredible abuses that go on inside this organization ostensibly committed to tolerance!" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Cole10.htm K. Paul Johnson, September 15, 1998: "If that principle [people are innocent until proven guilty] were followed by Baha'i administration and individuals in their condemnations of their fellow believers, I would have very little to complain about regarding Baha'i affairs. But character assassination by innuendo is the preferred way of dealing with anything remotely resembling dissidence. Seems like that's exactly what you're doing to Juan Cole in your message. Saying I don't want to know what you've "got" on him, thus attacking me but insinuating you have some awful proof of unspecified guilt on his part. If that's not character assassination by innuendo, what is?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson18.htm Gibro28W, October 12, 1998: "In summary, the biggest problem, as I see it, is that most Baha'is don't take criticism seriously--they tune it out as "negative" or "harmful to spiritual growth." This selfish attitude is very stupid. First of all, Baha'is entice people to join them. When they do, they indoctrinate them until they think like the group. But as soon as a red flare of doubt goes up in the convert's mind, they're cordoned off by the group and reminded of their "spiritual" obligations in the name of Baha'u'llah or the "Covenant." If left unresolved and doubt gives vent to prolonged criticism, the convert is sent packing or is kicked out. What we have here is a broken family that had failed to truly listen to the needs of its members in the first place." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb73.htm Barthaman on September 14, 1998: "Baha'i dissenters, more or less, are wounded souls abandoned by their fathers,so-to-speak. They have been cast out and dismissed or shunned without having had a fair hearing. Consider their pain when the rest of their "family" dismisses them too. Can you know what it's like to be accused of heresy and shunned following a sincere intellectual conflict (inspired by doubt)-- after you've sacrificed years in devoted service to your religion? Can you comprehend their sense of betrayal and injustice? This is why disillusioned believers leave their religions each year--while some still hang around, banging on the door now and then, demanding a refund for their lost youth. In time they will have to move on, however, writing the Baha'i Faith off as another lesson in fraud. Mock these people all you want--but for the grace of God, the next dissenter could be you. Don't be too confident, my friend." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb66.htm Juan Cole wrote, February 23, 1999: "There is nothing to be puzzled by. Right wing Baha'is only like to hear the sound of their own voices (which are the only voices they will admit to being "Baha'i" at all)." "Obviously, the world is so constructed that they cannot in fact only hear their own voices. They are forced to hear other voices that differ from theirs. This most disturbs them when the voices come from enrolled Baha'is or when the voices speak of the Baha'i faith." "The way they sometimes deal with the enrolled Baha'is is to summon them to a heresy inquiry and threaten them with being shunned if they do not fall silent." "With non-Baha'is or with ex-Baha'is, they deal with their speech about the faith by backbiting, slandering and libelling the speaker. You will note that since I've been on this list I have been accused of long-term heresy, of "claiming authority," of out and out lying (though that was retracted, twice), of misrepresentation, of 'playing fast and loose with the facts,' and even of being 'delusional.' I have been accused of all these falsehoods by *Baha'is*, by prominent Baha'is. I have been backbitten by them." "This shows that all the talk about the danger a sharp tongue can do, all the talk about the need for harmony, for returning poison with honey, for a sin-covering eye, is just *talk* among right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute." "Paul Johnson has seen all these things, as well, for the past five years. He can explain it to you." Cf. K. Paul Johnson's general reflections on coercive techniques https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson21.htm And LaAeterna's method of silencing opponents https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb65.htm Comments on the related techniques of Susan Maneck: Juan Cole, February 13, 1999: "It is a very, very, very weird religion. And if anyone is reading Susan Maneck's absolutely bone-chilling screeds on the desirability of Heresy Trials and carefulness in Shunning, they are seeing what it is like at the core of the religion." "I really am sorry for them and her, since they seem sort of filled with hate and quite paranoid, yet say they are preaching love, unity and tolerance. Susan will say, 'may your abdomen be split by lightning and your guts fall out you filthy heretic whom I wish I could just have shunned and buried', and then she'll sign herself "warmest" and slander a university by adding it to her sig line. As if what she is about has anything at all to do with *universities*!" Frederick Glaysher, February 15, 1999: "Ms. Maneck's approach appears to me to be always to shunt the discussion off or back to who said what where when why how and so on.... The farther back in time the better, since the person's memory, being human, is bound to be unable to keep up or to have stocked the evidence needed on his or her hard drive or find it on dejanews.com. And it then allows her to claim pretty much anything she wants to while seeming to have discredited her opponent. Further, she relies on the tactics of demagoguery knowing they usually prevail and will be supported by other fundamentalist Bahais. By shrieking "slander" and referring to others' opinions as "garbage," she is able to create an emotional atmosphere that essentially negates whatever the topic or content might be and that allows her to appear to win what is often a narrowly legalistic point or interpretation." "All of this is done, of course, in conjunction with her employing the more common Bahai techniques of intimidation and psychological demonization and terrorism." Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 30, 1999 3:46 PM Subject: Lying Bahais: Bullying I'm alarmed at the Bahai attempts, during May of 1999, at character assassination, ridicule, and generally portraying me and others as disturbed individuals. This tactic has been used for over three years and continues to be used against me and other Bahais and non-Bahais or ex-Bahais. I have never claimed to be perfect. At times I have apologized to Bahais, Muslims, and other non-Bahais when I felt, or was convinced, that I was wrong or had spoken unfairly. I find the constant technique to portray me as a megalomanic or paranoid quite offensive. Similarly, the tactic of accusing me of spam for posting my opinions is calculated to discredit the validity of my and others' concerns regarding censorship in Bahai forums and has also been used on AOL. Such accusations reveal the frustration that Bahai fundamentalists apparently feel over my having found ways of enduring and resisting the onslaught of their concerted attacks, while preserving a historical record on a markedly ephermeral medium for innocent Bahais and non-Bahais.... Fair-minded Bahai and non-Bahai observers may judge for themselves whether my and others' allegations of censorship are valid by reading the record preserved under "Assorted Controversial Documents" on my website at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm As further corroboration that I am not the only person concerned with the intolerance and censorship that has overtaken the Bahai Faith, I recommend Professor Juan Cole's new book Modernity & the Millennium: The Genesis of the Bahai Faith in the Nineteenth-Century Middle East, available through Columbia University Press or Amazon.com at https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 In his conclusion, which would never have passed the system of Bahai "review" that the UHJ imposes on all publications brought out under its tight control, Professor Cole, of the Department of History at The University of Michigan, quite accurately identifies the distortions that have been wreaked upon Baha'u'llah's Teachings: "Some contemporary leaders of the Baha'i Faith have given answers increasingly similar to those of fundamentalists, stressing scriptural literalism, patriachy, theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values. While the values of the nineteenth- century Baha'i movement, which was far more tolerant, continue to exist as a minority view, by the late 1990s a different set of emphases prevailed." (196) He himself and many others, as evidence under the "Assorted Controversial Documents," have suffered at the hands of the fundamentalists who have taken control of the religion: "The rise of academic Baha'i scholarship has caused tension in the community, whose present-day leadership tends to be fundamentalist and antiliberal in orientation, and this has led to pressure on a number of prominent academics to resign or dissociate themselves from the movement." (201) These same forces of fundamentalist orthodoxy are evident on AOL, talk.religion.bahai, and alt.religion.bahai for impartial viewers to witness. They will be evident to all perceptive observers of whatever forum Bahais may be trying to control and influence. As a Bahai for more than 23 years, I myself have always found especially repulsive the manner in which Bahai fundamentalists attempt to manipulate the institutions and leaders of government, the United Nations, and public opinion, while pretending to values they deride in private or at Bahai-only meetings. Ultimately, it is the Bahai Universal House of Justice that is responsible for the perversion and corruption of such clear and elevating teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. The UHJ is also in the end responsible for inciting Bahai fanatics and fundamentalists to attack other Bahais and non-Bahais merely for their views expressed on and off line in free forums of public discussion. I recommend all newcomers to these matters read "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm On Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 30, 1999 3:46 PM Subject: Lying Bahais: Attacks Incessant Bahai attacks upon my freedom of speech and liberty, as well as on others, have made it necessary for me to adopt a persona for my own protection and well being. Other measures have been taken. During the late winter and spring of 1999, Bahais twice flooded my hotmail account with up to 1000 messages per day resulting in considerable inconvenience and expenditure of time and effort to block, and ultimately close, the offending accounts; they have, by using numerous Bahai trolls, especially Gyr Falcon, slandered, maligned, and caricatured me in a further effort to discredit me and portray me on talk.religion.bahai and elsewhere as a disturbed and errant individual; through concerted false charges and allegations against me, they have now succeeded in deceiving Hotmail into closing my email account, which I depended on for a considerable part of my income and livelihood. For documentation of many similar incidents of Bahai oppression during the last decade, see Frederick Glaysher's website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com ---- Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 30, 1999 3:47 PM Subject: Lying Bahais: on soc.religion.bahai Robert J. Pease, December 5, 1998: "I support your efforts to expose SRB as a fundamentalist group." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb84.htm Ron House: "I think the following is a clear case of malicious rejection of an article by the worst of the moderators of soc.religion.bahai." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb53.htm Timothy Mulligan: "(Sigh) Fred, I'm beginning to think you're right about those SRB moderators." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb59.htm RobertNik: "these guys are pompous arseholes IMHO." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb54.htm Bruce Burrill: "What are Baha'i afraid of?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb60.htm Zuteflute: "Frankly I could not see anything in the letter I wrote which would prompt someone to ask whether or not I am a Baha'i." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb50.htm YU ZIR: "But as an outsider, I can perhaps see the point Fred Glaysher is making, and which point none of SRB's defenders seem to address." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb46.htm Matthew Cromer: "The current moderators regulate the contents--posting articles which they agree with...." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb47.htm Kavosh Soltani, December 9, 1998: "So many Bahais on these forums have shown to be ready to forget logic and reason, ignore clear evidence and Word of God, and come up with exactly the same line of tired and inaccurate excuses and arguments to justify their position, that it can not be a simple coincidence." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb77.htm Shakti3, December 4, 1998: "Sorry to hear that you've been surpressed on srb. Your comments were alway very "right on." Altho it does not surprise me one bit, seeing the way these newsgroups operate." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Ex7.htm Harold Shinsato: "It seems like there is an oppression over the Baha'i Faith." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb33.htm Steve Tomljenovic, December 3, 1998: "The moderators are a bit overzealous at times. Since all the controversy started, it has gotten worse." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb79.htm Laeterna: "To say I was flabberghasted at this type of "moderating" was putting it mildly indeed." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored2.htm Guy Macon" "Please explain which portion of the charter the following post violates." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored1.htm Robin Peters: "I think you're to be commended for your persistence in the face of consistent censorship." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb43.htm jgoldberg: "I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. " https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb57.htm Ruletherod, November 17, 1998: "Too much damage has already been done in the name and to the name of Baha'u'llah by right-wing administrative bullies, linear-thinking apologists, and doctrinaire-fundamentalists. You can't just blame it all on the critics." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb76.htm Many other similar messages may be found on my web site under soc.religion.bahai censorship. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb.htm See Frederick Glaysher's The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 30, 1999 3:48 PM Subject: Lying Bahais: Threats of Lawsuits Given the Bahai threats of lawsuits against me during the spring and early summer of 1999 let me say I have never committed slander against any individual, Bahai or otherwise, nor against any Bahai institution. If anyone has been slandered on talk.religion.bahai, it is I by the constant character assassination Bahais have marshalled against me for nearly three years. I'd be happy to appear in court and present an American judge and jury with the evidence of Bahai lies, deceit, censorship, and tyranny over the last decade. I highly doubt any legitimately established jury would look favorably on what Bahai fundamentalists have done to the Walbridges, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Stephen Scholl, and many, many other, indeed, TENS of THOUSANDS, of American ex-Bahais.... I'd be happy to appear in an American court and present the judge and jury with the many passages from the Bahai Writings in which the Figures speak favorably of free speech and conscience, such as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. Only one of the nine tyrants on Mt. Carmel could distort such passages to mean the kinds of things they have had the gall to foist on American Bahais in their statement this April, which Professor Juan Cole has candidly and accurately referred to as an "outburst of vehement ignorance." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Bahais falsely accuse me of slander. Far from slandering the UHJ, I have stood up to Bahai fundamentalists and honestly spoken my conscience. They are free to call that "slander." I doubt any judge or jury in the West would call it such, especially after reading the EVIDENCE and reflecting on the enormous discrepancy between the sycophantic treatment leaders in government, the UN, and the media regularly receive from Bahais who are always interested in attempting to exploit their positions of power for one reason or another and the reality of abuse of the most basic human rights now well documented on Professor Juan Cole's website and on mine. I trust the American legal system to protect me from such organizations and fundamentalist reprobates. The objective observer will note the Bahai tactic of resorting to threats and intimidation instead of engaging in discussion of the actual incidents of censorship and oppression, extensively noted in "The Bahai Technique." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm Such tactics remind me of a comment by Dr. Martin Luther King in his Letter from Birmingham Jail: "You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations." Fundamentalist Bahais typify this same mentality. They rail and threaten me, and others who dare speak their minds, but express no concern whatsoever for the underlying conditions of censorship and oppression that have led to distrust and contempt for the UHJ and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. Everything I have said is a matter of religious conscience protected under the US Constitution. My Bahai membership card proves it, and a scanned copy of it may be found on my website. I would be happy to present the original to any judge or jury in the land. "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." --Thomas Jefferson -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997," which surveys the many, many incidents of censorship and oppression that have taken place in the Bahai faith during the last decade or more: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:376EF2DE.221BD43@earthlink.net... > > I have stated that I may sue you - that is singular. I am not aware of > anyone else's attempt. BTW, my suing you is not a threat - a threat > is I will do this if you do that. You have already crossed that line. > I > said I would first take it up with Dejanews - Roger pointed out that > you were not using Dejanews to post your articles so I suppose it > is bigfoot at first. > > Now, if it gets to the point that I decide to sue you, I will offer > anyone > who wishes to join in a class-action suit, if that is legally possible. > > My feet are firmly on the ground - I am not joking or mincing words. > > Saman Ahmadi > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, > > let me say I have never committed slander. > > P.S. Ever heard of the Furman tapes? > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 30, 1999 3:48 PM Subject: Lying Bahais: uhj From: FG To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; bahai-faith @ makelist.com Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM July 24,1998 Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." The tragic loss of Bahai lives in Iran and the subsequent exploitation of their deaths by Bahai spokesmen, often in the American media, always courting the President and other members of the government, has become a predictable pattern rendered intolerable in the context of continuing and pervasive Bahai censorship and denial of human and civil rights in the United States and elsewhere. Such incidents as I queried you about in my unanswered email of March 31, 1997, available on my Web site, regarding the crushing of the magazine Dialogue, the resignations of a number of scholars from the Bahai Encyclopedia, the attacks on the listserv known as Talisman I at Indiana University, the harassing and blacklisting of many individuals, Bahai and non-Bahai, suggest profoundly deep-seated problems within the Bahai community and administration. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/To-UHJ1.htm To these incidents must now be added the apparent conspiracy for more than a year and a half of the Bahai Computer and Communications Committee (BCCA), under the chairmanship of Mark Towfiq, to defeat twice now, along with the collusion of other Bahais, the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith which would be known as talk.religion.bahai. You may find extensive documentation for all of these violations of the basic human rights of many Bahais and non-Bahais on my Web site, "The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm Because the third interest poll for talk.religion.bahai on Usenet is approaching, after August 28th, I ask you again to investigate the BCCA and its depriving me of access last November from all private Bahai-only mailing lists at a crucial moment just when the tide of discussion was going very much in favor of the newsgroup, noted by many observers. I also ask whether you supported or were involved in that decision? The relevant files can be found on my Web site under Bahai-Discuss Archives. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm Similarly, I would like to know whether your institution or the BCCA has approved of or advocated the recent ban of my email signature file by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai, as well as their complete ban for more than a year and a half now on all discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai. The prevailing atmosphere of suppression of free speech and religious conscience that now characterizes the Bahai Faith cannot but call into question the honesty of many members of the Bahai administration and perhaps the institutions themselves. I ask once more whether censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith and what passages of the Bahai Writings support it, what are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship? Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ------ Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Monday, August 30, 1999 3:53 PM Subject: Lying Bahais: REVISED Discussion Agenda - trb I would be happy to discuss any of the acts of oppression and tyranny committed by the uhj as documented below on The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm I provide the "headlines" below for newcomers and Bahais on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai. Otherwise, I expect to be posting less frequently this fall, having learnt during the last three years what I needed to know about my fellow Bahais and the uhj. Should the uhj come to its senses and abolish "review," I'd appreciate someone informing me to that effect, unlikely as it may seem.... In the meantime, I must return to my literary interests. Others will have to step forward.... Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ------------------------------------------------------------------- Newcomers might want to start here: The Bahai Technique (Essential Reading) soc.religion.bahai - Brief Quotations (Documenting Censorship) alt.religion.bahai FAQ & Chronology (Frequently Asked Questions) Bahais on AOL Late 1998 & early 1999 Bahai Attacks I & II Fall & Spring 1999 Bahai Threats of Lawsuits During Spring 1999 To the Universal House of Justice - March 31, 1997 To the Universal House of Justice - July 24, 1998 -------------------------------------------------------------------- A comprehensive outline of the major incidents of Bahai censorship: Juan Cole, "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997" --------------------------------------------------------------------- Assorted Controversial Documents "A Modest Proposal" 1987 "The Service of Women" 1988 The Majnun Post 2/7/96 The Pickering Tape 4/96 "Crisis of Faith" 5/15/96 Letter: Stephen Birkland, Continental Board of Counsellors 7/16/96 "Baha'i Leaders Vexed by On-Line Critics" Winter 1997 Stephen Scholl re the suppression of Dialogue Magazine 1997 Mark Towfiq's NO Vote Campaign on BCCA mailing lists 3/12/97 Susan Maneck's NO Vote Campaign on AOL 12/7/98 Juan Cole, Dismissal of NSA Member Judge James F. Nelson... April, 1999 Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Universal House of Justice From the UHJ: 14 October 1997 From the UHJ: 19 December 1997 To the UHJ: December 21, 1997 -------------------------------------- For the full text of any of these topics, see https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, September 19, 1999 10:57 AM Subject: SCAM: uhj - Bahai From: FG To: UHJ ; Letters to Editor ; bahai-faith @ makelist.com Subject: To UHJ July 24, 1998 Date: Friday, July 24, 1998 9:03 PM July 24,1998 Dear Members of the Universal House of Justice: As a Bahai, I am saddened by the news of the execution of yet another Bahai in Iran. However, the immediate public statements made by Firuz Kazemzadeh of the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States, reminiscent of Robert Henderson's piece in The New York Times on January 13th of this year, appear equally lamentable for their blatant hypocrisy: "We had hoped that President Khatami's assertions about freedom, justice and the rule of law in Iran would apply to the Baha'is of that country.... We urge the international community to protest vigorously Mr. Rowhani's killing and to seek justice for the beleaguered Iranian Baha'i community." The tragic loss of Bahai lives in Iran and the subsequent exploitation of their deaths by Bahai spokesmen, often in the American media, always courting the President and other members of the government, has become a predictable pattern rendered intolerable in the context of continuing and pervasive Bahai censorship and denial of human and civil rights in the United States and elsewhere. Such incidents as I queried you about in my unanswered email of March 31, 1997, available on my Web site, regarding the crushing of the magazine Dialogue, the resignations of a number of scholars from the Bahai Encyclopedia, the attacks on the listserv known as Talisman I at Indiana University, the harassing and blacklisting of many individuals, Bahai and non-Bahai, suggest profoundly deep-seated problems within the Bahai community and administration. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/To-UHJ1.htm To these incidents must now be added the apparent conspiracy for more than a year and a half of the Bahai Computer and Communications Committee (BCCA), under the chairmanship of Mark Towfiq, to defeat twice now, along with the collusion of other Bahais, the creation of an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith which would be known as talk.religion.bahai. You may find extensive documentation for all of these violations of the basic human rights of many Bahais and non-Bahais on my Web site, "The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm Because the third interest poll for talk.religion.bahai on Usenet is approaching, after August 28th, I ask you again to investigate the BCCA and its depriving me of access last November from all private Bahai-only mailing lists at a crucial moment just when the tide of discussion was going very much in favor of the newsgroup, noted by many observers. I also ask whether you supported or were involved in that decision? The relevant files can be found on my Web site under Bahai-Discuss Archives. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm Similarly, I would like to know whether your institution or the BCCA has approved of or advocated the recent ban of my email signature file by the moderators of soc.religion.bahai, as well as their complete ban for more than a year and a half now on all discussion regarding talk.religion.bahai. The prevailing atmosphere of suppression of free speech and religious conscience that now characterizes the Bahai Faith cannot but call into question the honesty of many members of the Bahai administration and perhaps the institutions themselves. I ask once more whether censorship is allowed in the Bahai Faith and what passages of the Bahai Writings support it, what are the "rules," if you will, of Bahai censorship? Frederick Glaysher....The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm On talk.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and AOL: Keyword Bahai or Newsgroups ------ Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, September 19, 1999 10:58 AM Subject: SCAM: Lawsuit Threats from Bahais Given the Bahai threats of lawsuits against me during the spring and early summer of 1999 let me say I have never committed slander against any individual, Bahai or otherwise, nor against any Bahai institution. If anyone has been slandered on talk.religion.bahai, it is I by the constant character assassination Bahais have marshalled against me for nearly three years. I'd be happy to appear in court and present an American judge and jury with the evidence of Bahai lies, deceit, censorship, and tyranny over the last decade. I highly doubt any legitimately established jury would look favorably on what Bahai fundamentalists have done to the Walbridges, Juan Cole, Michael McKenny, Stephen Scholl, and many, many other, indeed, TENS of THOUSANDS, of American ex-Bahais.... I'd be happy to appear in an American court and present the judge and jury with the many passages from the Bahai Writings in which the Figures speak favorably of free speech and conscience, such as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world, what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of [His] servants." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. Only one of the nine tyrants on Mt. Carmel could distort such passages to mean the kinds of things they have had the gall to foist on American Bahais in their statement this April, which Professor Juan Cole has candidly and accurately referred to as an "outburst of vehement ignorance." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Bahais falsely accuse me of slander. Far from slandering the UHJ, I have stood up to Bahai fundamentalists and honestly spoken my conscience. They are free to call that "slander." I doubt any judge or jury in the West would call it such, especially after reading the EVIDENCE and reflecting on the enormous discrepancy between the sycophantic treatment leaders in government, the UN, and the media regularly receive from Bahais who are always interested in attempting to exploit their positions of power for one reason or another and the reality of abuse of the most basic human rights now well documented on Professor Juan Cole's website and on mine. I trust the American legal system to protect me from such organizations and fundamentalist reprobates. The objective observer will note the Bahai tactic of resorting to threats and intimidation instead of engaging in discussion of the actual incidents of censorship and oppression, extensively noted in "The Bahai Technique." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm Such tactics remind me of a comment by Dr. Martin Luther King in his Letter from Birmingham Jail: "You deplore the demonstrations taking place in Birmingham. But your statement, I am sorry to say, fails to express a similar concern for the conditions that brought about the demonstrations." Fundamentalist Bahais typify this same mentality. They rail and threaten me, and others who dare speak their minds, but express no concern whatsoever for the underlying conditions of censorship and oppression that have led to distrust and contempt for the UHJ and its fascist distortion of Baha'u'llah's Teachings. Everything I have said is a matter of religious conscience protected under the US Constitution. My Bahai membership card proves it, and a scanned copy of it may be found on my website. I would be happy to present the original to any judge or jury in the land. "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man." --Thomas Jefferson -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty or give me death." Visit The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997," which surveys the many, many incidents of censorship and oppression that have taken place in the Bahai faith during the last decade or more: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm Saman Ahmadi wrote in message news:376EF2DE.221BD43@earthlink.net... > > I have stated that I may sue you - that is singular. I am not aware of > anyone else's attempt. BTW, my suing you is not a threat - a threat > is I will do this if you do that. You have already crossed that line. > I > said I would first take it up with Dejanews - Roger pointed out that > you were not using Dejanews to post your articles so I suppose it > is bigfoot at first. > > Now, if it gets to the point that I decide to sue you, I will offer > anyone > who wishes to join in a class-action suit, if that is legally possible. > > My feet are firmly on the ground - I am not joking or mincing words. > > Saman Ahmadi > > > Patrick Henry wrote: > > > Given the recurrent Bahai threats of lawsuits against me, > > let me say I have never committed slander. > > P.S. Ever heard of the Furman tapes? > > > > ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, September 19, 1999 10:59 AM Subject: SCAM: soc.religion.bahai Robert J. Pease, December 5, 1998: "I support your efforts to expose SRB as a fundamentalist group." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb84.htm Ron House: "I think the following is a clear case of malicious rejection of an article by the worst of the moderators of soc.religion.bahai." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb53.htm Timothy Mulligan: "(Sigh) Fred, I'm beginning to think you're right about those SRB moderators." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb59.htm RobertNik: "these guys are pompous arseholes IMHO." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb54.htm Bruce Burrill: "What are Baha'i afraid of?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb60.htm Zuteflute: "Frankly I could not see anything in the letter I wrote which would prompt someone to ask whether or not I am a Baha'i." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb50.htm YU ZIR: "But as an outsider, I can perhaps see the point Fred Glaysher is making, and which point none of SRB's defenders seem to address." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb46.htm Matthew Cromer: "The current moderators regulate the contents--posting articles which they agree with...." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb47.htm Kavosh Soltani, December 9, 1998: "So many Bahais on these forums have shown to be ready to forget logic and reason, ignore clear evidence and Word of God, and come up with exactly the same line of tired and inaccurate excuses and arguments to justify their position, that it can not be a simple coincidence." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb77.htm Shakti3, December 4, 1998: "Sorry to hear that you've been surpressed on srb. Your comments were alway very "right on." Altho it does not surprise me one bit, seeing the way these newsgroups operate." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Ex7.htm Harold Shinsato: "It seems like there is an oppression over the Baha'i Faith." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb33.htm Steve Tomljenovic, December 3, 1998: "The moderators are a bit overzealous at times. Since all the controversy started, it has gotten worse." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb79.htm Laeterna: "To say I was flabberghasted at this type of "moderating" was putting it mildly indeed." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored2.htm Guy Macon" "Please explain which portion of the charter the following post violates." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/censored1.htm Robin Peters: "I think you're to be commended for your persistence in the face of consistent censorship." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb43.htm jgoldberg: "I refuse to post on soc.religion.bahai because of the arbitrary and mean-spirited manner of censorship practiced by the moderators. " https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb57.htm Ruletherod, November 17, 1998: "Too much damage has already been done in the name and to the name of Baha'u'llah by right-wing administrative bullies, linear-thinking apologists, and doctrinaire-fundamentalists. You can't just blame it all on the critics." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb76.htm Many other similar messages may be found on my web site under soc.religion.bahai censorship. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb.htm See The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, September 19, 1999 10:59 AM Subject: SCAM: Attacks by Bahais Incessant Bahai attacks upon my freedom of speech and liberty, as well as on others, have made it necessary for me to adopt a persona for my own protection and well being. Other measures have been taken. During the late winter and spring of 1999, Bahais twice flooded my hotmail account with up to 1000 messages per day resulting in considerable inconvenience and expenditure of time and effort to block, and ultimately close, the offending accounts; they have, by using numerous Bahai trolls, especially Gyr Falcon, slandered, maligned, and caricatured me in a further effort to discredit me and portray me on talk.religion.bahai and elsewhere as a disturbed and errant individual; through concerted false charges and allegations against me, they have now succeeded in deceiving Hotmail into closing my email account, which I depended on for a considerable part of my income and livelihood. For documentation of many similar incidents of Bahai oppression during the last decade, see The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm -- Patrick Henry "Give me liberty, or give me death." Patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com ---- Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, September 19, 1999 11:00 AM Subject: SCAM: Bahais Bullying I'm alarmed at the Bahai attempts, during May of 1999, at character assassination, ridicule, and generally portraying me and others as disturbed individuals. This tactic has been used for over three years and continues to be used against me and other Bahais and non-Bahais or ex-Bahais. I have never claimed to be perfect. At times I have apologized to Bahais, Muslims, and other non-Bahais when I felt, or was convinced, that I was wrong or had spoken unfairly. I find the constant technique to portray me as a megalomanic or paranoid quite offensive. Similarly, the tactic of accusing me of spam for posting my opinions is calculated to discredit the validity of my and others' concerns regarding censorship in Bahai forums and has also been used on AOL. Such accusations reveal the frustration that Bahai fundamentalists apparently feel over my having found ways of enduring and resisting the onslaught of their concerted attacks, while preserving a historical record on a markedly ephermeral medium for innocent Bahais and non-Bahais.... Fair-minded Bahai and non-Bahai observers may judge for themselves whether my and others' allegations of censorship are valid by reading the record preserved under "Assorted Controversial Documents" on my website at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm As further corroboration that I am not the only person concerned with the intolerance and censorship that has overtaken the Bahai Faith, I recommend Professor Juan Cole's new book Modernity & the Millennium: The Genesis of the Bahai Faith in the Nineteenth-Century Middle East, available through Columbia University Press or Amazon.com at https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D0231110812/002-4036721-8058448 In his conclusion, which would never have passed the system of Bahai "review" that the UHJ imposes on all publications brought out under its tight control, Professor Cole, of the Department of History at The University of Michigan, quite accurately identifies the distortions that have been wreaked upon Baha'u'llah's Teachings: "Some contemporary leaders of the Baha'i Faith have given answers increasingly similar to those of fundamentalists, stressing scriptural literalism, patriachy, theocracy, censorship, intellectual intolerance, and denying key democratic values. While the values of the nineteenth- century Baha'i movement, which was far more tolerant, continue to exist as a minority view, by the late 1990s a different set of emphases prevailed." (196) He himself and many others, as evidence under the "Assorted Controversial Documents," have suffered at the hands of the fundamentalists who have taken control of the religion: "The rise of academic Baha'i scholarship has caused tension in the community, whose present-day leadership tends to be fundamentalist and antiliberal in orientation, and this has led to pressure on a number of prominent academics to resign or dissociate themselves from the movement." (201) These same forces of fundamentalist orthodoxy are evident on AOL, talk.religion.bahai, and alt.religion.bahai for impartial viewers to witness. They will be evident to all perceptive observers of whatever forum Bahais may be trying to control and influence. As a Bahai for more than 23 years, I myself have always found especially repulsive the manner in which Bahai fundamentalists attempt to manipulate the institutions and leaders of government, the United Nations, and public opinion, while pretending to values they deride in private or at Bahai-only meetings. Ultimately, it is the Bahai Universal House of Justice that is responsible for the perversion and corruption of such clear and elevating teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha as the following: "These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the secrets of the contingent world." Abdu'l-Baha, A Traveler's Narrative, 91. The UHJ is also in the end responsible for inciting Bahai fanatics and fundamentalists to attack other Bahais and non-Bahais merely for their views expressed on and off line in free forums of public discussion. I recommend all newcomers to these matters read "The Bahai Technique": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm On The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, September 19, 1999 11:01 AM Subject: SCAM: Bahai Techniques - Censorship During the last several years or more a number of observers have noted the common methods many Bahais use to avoid various issues or discredit people who hold opinions other than their own: Frederick Glaysher, May 12, 1992: "The Baha'i Faith has become very oppressive and manipulative of the individual. That to me is merely a statement of fact, as I have experienced it, for nearly sixteen years now [over 22]. The usual stratagem in dealing with anyone who would express his conscience in good faith is to pretend the Cause is above any kind of criticism whatsoever while intimating that anyone who would speak honestly must have something wrong with him, i.e., his spiritual life isn't what it should be, he doesn't understand the nature of unity, or he's accused of trying to obtain power for himself, which at times seems merely a calculated way of discrediting the person, and so on. Another common strategy used to acquire control over the individual is to humor the person by letting him pour himself out, etc., and then self-righteously giving him the Truth." Ron House, November 14, 1997: "I know what you mean. I've found over the years that there is a technique used by traditional Baha'is and others to squash dissension: harry the dissenter so much he says something intemperate, then point out how 'loving' and 'compassionate' they are and how nasty the dissenter is. The trouble is that this technique works, so I've been making a conscious effort not to fall for it. Also, when they get the dissenter discouraged and miserable enough, he invariably makes a slip-up sooner or later that they can REALLY let loose the venom over. IMHO, they did this to you when you misread Sharon's intentions. At any other time, they would overlook faults, as Baha'u'llah says, but when they're in this mode they go for the jugular. Very sad." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/House2.htm Frederick Glaysher, June 1998: "Some of the most striking methods demonstrated repeatedly by many Bahais during the last year and a half of discussion about an unmoderated newsgroup is their refusal to listen and respond to the criticisms of those who are in favor of talk.religion.bahai, ignoring their concerns, never responding analytically to their messages and reasoning and logic and evidence, attacking them through character assassination and ad hominem, ganging up on individuals, and "circling the wagons" around every action of the srb moderators or others who are opposed to talk.religion.bahai." "More than twenty different people on my web site have posted messages explaining their experience with srb censorship yet many srb Bahais NEVER address their concerns. Ignoring such charges will not make them go away. NO ONE has to "try" to link the trb interest poll with censorship on srb; the moderators themselves have done that by suppressing droves of people for years. There are many people who believe such suppression is part and parcel of the Bahai community as it exists today. A YES vote need not necessarily support such a belief. There are other reasons Bahais might vote YES." Fran Baker, May 1998: "Just have to say that in my experience this is a common technique of manipulative people in general; it is especially effective with thoughtful people who are willing to see both sides of things, i.e., their own fault. I consider this brow-beating technique to be a form of abuse. The only way to deal with it is to call them on it every time and to refuse to let yourself be beat up, i.e., not to do your part of the "tango." This can be very hard to do, but it works.You can break this pattern in a personal relationship. I don't know whether it's possible when a group acts this way. Very scary." Dr. Juan Cole, June 12, 1998: "Let me ask you why in the world you think that I would risk my professional reputation by publicly stating falsehoods? ...The very technique of the more glaze-eyed among these people is to unbearably bully a Baha'i whom they don't like, use unjustified threats of declaring him or her a CB to silence the individual, and if the person will not be silenced, then to depend upon the gullibility of the Baha'is in refusing to listen to any victim's story because, of course, the Baha'i institutions are infallible and divinely guided and could never do anything wrong. It is a perfect racket." "Of course, this technique of making liberals go away has been enormously successful, and ex-Baha'i liberals have no credibility with the remaining Baha'is nor do most of them have any energy to continue to make a case, either to the Baha'is or the outside world, for the incredible abuses that go on inside this organization ostensibly committed to tolerance!" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Cole10.htm K. Paul Johnson, September 15, 1998: "If that principle [people are innocent until proven guilty] were followed by Baha'i administration and individuals in their condemnations of their fellow believers, I would have very little to complain about regarding Baha'i affairs. But character assassination by innuendo is the preferred way of dealing with anything remotely resembling dissidence. Seems like that's exactly what you're doing to Juan Cole in your message. Saying I don't want to know what you've "got" on him, thus attacking me but insinuating you have some awful proof of unspecified guilt on his part. If that's not character assassination by innuendo, what is?" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson18.htm Gibro28W, October 12, 1998: "In summary, the biggest problem, as I see it, is that most Baha'is don't take criticism seriously--they tune it out as "negative" or "harmful to spiritual growth." This selfish attitude is very stupid. First of all, Baha'is entice people to join them. When they do, they indoctrinate them until they think like the group. But as soon as a red flare of doubt goes up in the convert's mind, they're cordoned off by the group and reminded of their "spiritual" obligations in the name of Baha'u'llah or the "Covenant." If left unresolved and doubt gives vent to prolonged criticism, the convert is sent packing or is kicked out. What we have here is a broken family that had failed to truly listen to the needs of its members in the first place." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb73.htm Barthaman on September 14, 1998: "Baha'i dissenters, more or less, are wounded souls abandoned by their fathers,so-to-speak. They have been cast out and dismissed or shunned without having had a fair hearing. Consider their pain when the rest of their "family" dismisses them too. Can you know what it's like to be accused of heresy and shunned following a sincere intellectual conflict (inspired by doubt)-- after you've sacrificed years in devoted service to your religion? Can you comprehend their sense of betrayal and injustice? This is why disillusioned believers leave their religions each year--while some still hang around, banging on the door now and then, demanding a refund for their lost youth. In time they will have to move on, however, writing the Baha'i Faith off as another lesson in fraud. Mock these people all you want--but for the grace of God, the next dissenter could be you. Don't be too confident, my friend." https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb66.htm Juan Cole wrote, February 23, 1999: "There is nothing to be puzzled by. Right wing Baha'is only like to hear the sound of their own voices (which are the only voices they will admit to being "Baha'i" at all)." "Obviously, the world is so constructed that they cannot in fact only hear their own voices. They are forced to hear other voices that differ from theirs. This most disturbs them when the voices come from enrolled Baha'is or when the voices speak of the Baha'i faith." "The way they sometimes deal with the enrolled Baha'is is to summon them to a heresy inquiry and threaten them with being shunned if they do not fall silent." "With non-Baha'is or with ex-Baha'is, they deal with their speech about the faith by backbiting, slandering and libelling the speaker. You will note that since I've been on this list I have been accused of long-term heresy, of "claiming authority," of out and out lying (though that was retracted, twice), of misrepresentation, of 'playing fast and loose with the facts,' and even of being 'delusional.' I have been accused of all these falsehoods by *Baha'is*, by prominent Baha'is. I have been backbitten by them." "This shows that all the talk about the danger a sharp tongue can do, all the talk about the need for harmony, for returning poison with honey, for a sin-covering eye, is just *talk* among right wing Baha'is. No one fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot silence and cannot refute." "Paul Johnson has seen all these things, as well, for the past five years. He can explain it to you." Cf. K. Paul Johnson's general reflections on coercive techniques https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Johnson21.htm And LaAeterna's method of silencing opponents https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb65.htm Comments on the related techniques of Susan Maneck: Juan Cole, February 13, 1999: "It is a very, very, very weird religion. And if anyone is reading Susan Maneck's absolutely bone-chilling screeds on the desirability of Heresy Trials and carefulness in Shunning, they are seeing what it is like at the core of the religion." "I really am sorry for them and her, since they seem sort of filled with hate and quite paranoid, yet say they are preaching love, unity and tolerance. Susan will say, 'may your abdomen be split by lightning and your guts fall out you filthy heretic whom I wish I could just have shunned and buried', and then she'll sign herself "warmest" and slander a university by adding it to her sig line. As if what she is about has anything at all to do with *universities*!" Frederick Glaysher, February 15, 1999: "Ms. Maneck's approach appears to me to be always to shunt the discussion off or back to who said what where when why how and so on.... The farther back in time the better, since the person's memory, being human, is bound to be unable to keep up or to have stocked the evidence needed on his or her hard drive or find it on dejanews.com. And it then allows her to claim pretty much anything she wants to while seeming to have discredited her opponent. Further, she relies on the tactics of demagoguery knowing they usually prevail and will be supported by other fundamentalist Bahais. By shrieking "slander" and referring to others' opinions as "garbage," she is able to create an emotional atmosphere that essentially negates whatever the topic or content might be and that allows her to appear to win what is often a narrowly legalistic point or interpretation." "All of this is done, of course, in conjunction with her employing the more common Bahai techniques of intimidation and psychological demonization and terrorism." Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as garbage: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck3.htm Maneck's scholarly reference to others' opinions as litter: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck7.htm https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/technique.htm See The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, September 19, 1999 11:01 AM Subject: A FAQ for arBahai and trBahai ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) for Alt.Religion.Bahai, Talk.Religion.Bahai This FAQ will be reposted approximately every two weeks. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- People with only web access might want to use www.deja.com www.reference.com or www.newsguy.com or https://www.remarq.com/ They all offer reading and posting capabilities for people who can't directly access alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai and filter out spam. Alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai are available on America Online (AOL) Keyword, Newsgroups, then search for alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai If your ISP does not offer talk.religion.bahai, follow this news.groupie advice: "If your ISP doesn't have the group shortly, I suggest that you ask the newsmaster there to add it (Try news@isp.net, or newsmaster@isp.net) Ask politely. Include the msg ID of the results posting, and of the newgroup msg." Dave Cornejo's RESULT posting: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=431106082&CONTEXT=918305125.781648012&hi tnum=0 David Lawrence's newgroup msg creating talk.religion.bahai: https://x3.dejanews.com/getdoc.xp?AN=434026333&CONTEXT=918304600.713490686&hi tnum=3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- NOTE: Not all people agree on the interpretations given below. Question #1 "Why create arb or t.r.b.?" ANSWER #1: Because many people believe they experienced or are continuing to experience censorship when attempting to post to soc.religion.bahai. See the quotations from Abdu'l-Baha: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #2: Because the Bahai writings support free speech and religious conscience. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm ANSWER #3: [fill in the blank according to your own opinion.] Question #2: "Why do the srb moderators oppose trb?" ANSWER: Perhaps they'll supply an answer to place here. (Three years later their NO votes are their only answer.) Question #3: "Are Bahais opposed to freedom of speech and conscience?" ANSWER: Despite glowing words of love and support for other people's opinions, despite the Universal House of Justice stating at least publicly it is not opposed to an unmoderated forum, the record of actual behavior by Bahais and on soc.religion.bahai and the experience of TENS of THOUSANDS of Bahais and people who have left the Bahai Faith give serious reason for concern. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Chronology of major events: talk.religion.bahai ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- January 17, 1997: The 1st proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted to news.announce.newgroups. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRFD.htm Early March 1997: Mark Towfiq, chairman of the BCCA, the Bahai Computer and Communication Association, posts to three Bahai-only mailing lists a call for Bahais to vote NO against talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Towfiq.htm March 1997: soc.religion.bahai bans all discussion of talk.religion.bahai from its newsgroup. This ban is still in effect more than a year and a half later. March 31, 1997: The 1st proposal was defeated 157 YES to 691 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/1stRESULT.htm April 3, 1997: Jonathan Grobe, a non-Bahai, creates alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/arb.htm October 14, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message stating it has no objection to unmoderated newsgroups: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ1.htm November 1997: At a time when discussion was highly favorable in support of talk.religion.bahai, the BCCA deprives Frederick Glaysher of access to the private Bahai-only mailing list bahai-discuss and all of its other lists, inflaming Bahai passions against trb. See bahai-discuss archived files and correspondence between Frederick Glaysher and the BCCA committee: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/archive.htm December 19, 1997: The Universal House of Justice releases a message that suggests it does not understand the nature of Usenet interest polling: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJ2.htm January 12, 1998: The 2nd proposal for talk.religion.bahai was submitted. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRFD.htm February 22, 1998: The 2nd proposal was defeated 109 YES to 65 NO. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/2ndRESULT.htm May 25, 1998: srb bans all messages from Frederick Glaysher that contain his signature file: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb23.htm September 9,1998: America Online (AOL) places a Bahai-inspired TOS against Frederick Glaysher; AOL removes the TOS after considering both sides of the issue, i.e., Bahai messages attacking and threatening him and the experience of others: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm September 14, 1998: soc.religion.bahai extends its ban on Frederick Glaysher's signature file to include all signature files and URLs from all posters, allowing only email addresses and the name of the poster: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srbban.htm October 14, 1998: Soc.religion.bahai moderator Bill Hyman backbites and casts aspersions on proponent Ron House and attempts to undermine the new support for the "neutral" RFD: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/srb67.htm December 3, 1998: The Call For Votes (CFV) was posted to news.announce.newgroups and news.groups for the 3rd interest poll for talk.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRFD.htm December 7, 1998: Bahai scholar Susan Maneck begins her NO vote campaign on AOL and alt.religion.bahai. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm January 10, 1999: Talk.religion.bahai passes 218: 63. https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRESULT.htm It should be noted that talk.religion.bahai eventually passed despite of the opposition of Bahais. The annotated RESULT may be read at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/3rdRESULT.htm The annotated NO voters list may be read at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/NOvoters3rd.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- For past discussion of censorship on soc.religion.bahai and other issues, including censorship within the Bahai community, see the website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/index.htm ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- This document at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/FAQ.htm See The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm ---------- From: Patrick Henry[SMTP:patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com] Sent: Sunday, September 19, 1999 11:02 AM Subject: SCAM: By Bahais on AOL In August of 1998 I took out an account on AOL. It quickly became apparent that my fellow Bahais were using AOL in such a way as to further withhold knowledge and information from AOL's more than 14 million members. It appeared to me that there were four main issues. Alt.religion.bahai, which had been created in April of 1997 and which had had more than 20,000 messages posted to it, was not even offered in the list of AOL newsgroups. AOL personnel with which I spoke over the phone were very puzzled why it wasn't and even implied that some action would have had to have been taken to keep it from automatically being picked up and added to their newsgroups. It took more than a month of strenuous effort to get AOL to add alt.religion.bahai. On the AOL Bahai Forums it became apparent that Bahais were manipulating and controlling information by NOT making it available, by essentially preserving the frozen, non-functioning state of affairs or the status quo: 1. The Libraries were not accepting new uploads for others then to download and read. 2. The list of Newsgroups on the Main Menu for Bahai offered only soc.religion.bahai with no mention of alt.religion.bahai, or talk.religion.bahai once it was created in January of 1999. Coupled with soc.religion.bahai's suppression of all mention of alt.religion.bahai or talk.religion.bahai, this prevents people from even hearing of their existence. 3. The available links for Web Sites on the Main Menu for Bahai did not offered my website The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience, though it has to be one of the most visited sites on the Bahai Faith with more than 7,000 hits since May 1998. As the months went by, my repeated attempts to improve these deficiencies met with greater and greater opposition from the Bahai fundamentalists on AOL. Similiarly, my requests, beginning in August of 1998, that the Forum Leader, Mark Foster, who no one had seen for months, resign, for derilection of duty, were increasingly opposed while various excuses were offered for his absence. Not until talk.religion.bahai was passed five months later in January 1999 did he suddenly reappear only to begin immediately reporting absolutely EVERY message I posted to AOL as a TOS. It quickly became clear to me that he was back in order to target and build a case against me to have me suspended from AOL. My account was then temporarily suspended on three different occasions and finally terminated March 6, 1999. Of the four issues, only two have partially been remedied. 1. Alt.religion.bahai and now talk.religion.bahai are available under AOL's Keyword Newsgroups, Expert Add. 2. The Libraries are accepting some uploads, though Foster banned the 15+ megabytes I uploaded in late February of my entire archive of discussion for talk.religion.bahai and which is at least available on my website. It's obvious Foster is finding pretexts for suppressing further uploads. While Foster has claimed since mid-January that alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai would be added to the Main Menu under Newsgroups, he continued to make excuses for it not happening. As of March 9, 1999 they were not yet listed under Newsgroups along with soc.religion.bahai. All of these factors, coupled with Mark Foster's abuse of his position as Forum Leader and his harassing and targetting of dissenting voices, not only mine, leaves no doubt that he and other Bahais, including some among the Bahai Administration, are involved in manipulating and censoring discourse on AOL. For an instance of "back-channel" email coercion on AOL see https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm For an instance of Foster's double standard handling fundamentalist Bahais see Susan Maneck's accusations on AOL against me of "slander" and references to my views as "garbage" and "litter": https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Maneck1.htm The immediate pretext for terminating my account, according to the AOL official with whom I spoke on the phone, was that I had pointed out in a newly created Folder called Censorship that I and other AOL members had requested a Folder entitled Bahai Censorship and thereby undermined the authority of the Forum Leader.... In closing let me add that AOL personnel are extremely uninformed about the Bahai Faith, especially its practice of censorship, and its ability to exploit the TOS system.... Half a megabyte of messages documenting Bahai censorship on AOL may be found at https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/AOL.htm See The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997": https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/UHJLetterApril71999.htm Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm ---------- From: Fred Glaysher[SMTP:glaysher@mi-mls.com] Sent: Sunday, October 10, 1999 6:05 PM To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: agenda updated I would be happy to discuss any of the acts of oppression and tyranny committed by the uhj as documented below on The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm I provide the "headlines" below for newcomers and Bahais on talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai. Otherwise, I expect to be posting less frequently this fall, having learnt during the last three years what I needed to know about my fellow Bahais and the uhj.... I am content to have played a central role in the creation or propagation of alt.religion.bahai and talk.religion.bahai, forums where others may now speak freely about the Bahai faith. Should anything be posted that might be especially suitable for my website, I'd appreciate someone emailing a copy to patrick_Henry@bigfoot.com with "Bahai" in the subject line. Should the uhj come to its senses and abolish "review," unlikely as it may be, I'd appreciate someone informing me to that effect.... In the meantime, I must return to my literary interests, prepared for, and now accepting, a more arduous psychomachia..... Others will have to step forward.... Patrick Henry.... The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience: https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Into the Ruins: https://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0967042127/ ------------------------------------------------------------------- Newcomers might want to start here: The Bahai Technique (Essential Reading) soc.religion.bahai - Brief Quotations (Documenting Censorship) alt.religion.bahai FAQ & Chronology (Frequently Asked Questions) Bahais on AOL Late 1998 & early 1999 Bahai Attacks I & II Fall & Spring 1999 Bahai Threats of Lawsuits During Spring 1999 To the Universal House of Justice - March 31, 1997 To the Universal House of Justice - July 24, 1998 -------------------------------------------------------------------- A comprehensive outline of the major incidents of Bahai censorship: Juan Cole, "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997" Juan Cole, "The Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Baha'i Scriptures" --------------------------------------------------------------------- Assorted Controversial Documents "A Modest Proposal" 1987 "The Service of Women" 1988 The Majnun Post 2/7/96 The Pickering Tape 4/96 "Crisis of Faith" 5/15/96 Letter: Stephen Birkland, Continental Board of Counsellors 7/16/96 "Baha'i Leaders Vexed by On-Line Critics" Winter 1997 Stephen Scholl re the suppression of Dialogue Magazine 1997 Mark Towfiq's NO Vote Campaign on BCCA mailing lists 3/12/97 Susan Maneck's NO Vote Campaign on AOL 12/7/98 Michael McKenny - uhj throws him out of the Bahai faith 7/97 Nima Hazini-ex-Bahai-NSA letter warns Australian Bahais against him 11/4/97 Nima Hazini - ex-Bahai - his response to Bahai NSA Surveillance 9/7/99 Juan Cole, Dismissal of NSA Member Judge James F. Nelson... April, 1999 Full Text of UHJ's Letter of April 7, 1999 Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Universal House of Justice From the UHJ: 14 October 1997 From the UHJ: 19 December 1997 To the UHJ: December 21, 1997 -------------------------------------- For the full text of the messages above, see https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/bahai.htm Professor Juan Cole, of the University of Michigan, discusses related issues in his journal article "The Baha'i Faith in America as Panopticon, 1963-1997," which surveys the many, many incidents of censorship and oppression that have taken place in the Bahai faith during the last decade or more: https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai/1999/jssr/bhjssr.htm Also see: Juan Cole, "Commentary" on UHJ's "outburst of vehement ignorance" https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/Outburst.htm Letter of Resignation from Paul Dodenhoff, Assistant to the Auxiliary Board https://members.tripod.com/~fglaysher/LetterResignationPD.htm