My advice to Sincere Supporters of Baha'i Organization
Sam Ghandchi
If you are a sincere supporter of Baha'i organization and think that
you are supporting the human rights of Baha'is by doing that, I would
like to let you know that you are mistaken. Baha'i organization is
a huge organization and is not just a few people who happen to be
emotional now and then and post threats to Baha'i dissenters on this or
other forums. The issue is a lot bigger and because it is
a lot bigger it is not hard to investigate if you spend the time
and go and ask the many Baha'is who have left the Baha'i
organization. Actually it is like the issue of Islamists that
the West was basically igoring it prior to WTC
and thought it is just a small issue of a few dissidents of
Muslim countries and the WTC was a wakeup call that
showed them those who were mentioning the Islamist threat were
not imaginign it and it was not a few crazy guys here and
there and it was *organized* in a big organziation with
finances and trained staff. If the West really wanted to know the
reality of the Islamist organization, it should have investigated the
reports of the murders of dissidents by Iranians such as the
murder of Bakhtiar, Ghasemloo and others that actually
happned right in the West. Unfortunately the West
was late to do it and even seeing the threats to the
life of Salman Rushdie, the Western states hardly took
the issue of Islamist cultist fundamantalist criminals
seriously. After WTC, actually many Muslims
themselves are frowing on the practices
of Islamist murderers and more and more the Muslims
are distancing themselves from these fanatics and
are themselves condeming them. Before WTC, one
would seldom find regular Muslims condemn the
actions of these Islamist fanatics on SCI or similar
newsgroups. Now, even their supporters have
a hard time to support the Islamist terrorists with a
straight face. And they all know they are dealing
with big *organziations* of Islamists that
cover many countries. The issue of Bahaiist
organization is similar to the Islamist organizations
all over the world with the difference that
the rank and file Baha'i is still not comfortable
to separate himself/herself from these cultists
and in this respect fortunately after 23 years
of IRI, those with Muslim background are
ahead by separating themselves from Islamist cultists.
Those who sincerely want to know about the
reality of the Bahaiist organization, should go
to the Baha'is who left the faith and ask them
about the fears and threats they have had to
endure and see how scared all those people
are if asked to speak publically. I saw the
same type of fear only among people who
had dissneted from Communist Party of
Soviet Union. If Iranian dissidents can tell you best
about hezbollAh organization, the Baha'i dissidents
are the best to tell you about the Bahaiist
organization which is a very very large
enterprise with strong funding and big
membership.
Do I say the same about all religions. Not really.
Even many Muslim organizations are *not*
Islamist fanatical organizations. So I am
not saying all this because of Baha'is being a
religion or about their religion. Of course,
Islam and Baha'i faith have more such
cultist fanatic organizations than other
religions at this period of history because of
reason beyond this note. But such fanatical
organizations have existed even among
Buddhists. There were fanatic
Buddhist organizations in Thailand that
at time were partially in power too and they
were as fanatic and intimidating as the organization
of Islamists or Bahaiists today. In contrast
Zoroastrians have not had a fanatic organization
for a long time. Even Catholic Chruch org today
does not have such intimidating characteristics
whereas in the Middle Ages, it burnt
Giordano Bruno for having semi-Muslim
views about Christ. So it is not autmoatic
that any religious or political organziation
to always be fanatical and intimidating
when it is large. Catholic Chruch is
even bigger than it was in Middle Ages
but is not hat way today.
So there is not a formula about the huge
religious and political organizations. One
needs to ask those who have had the direct
experience with that giant organization.
If the adherent of a religion on SCI is
very fanatic, I would not necessarily
think that all orgs of that creed are fanatical.
Or if an adherent of a religion is very
nice and democratic, that does not mean
the orgs of that creed are all democratic.
There were many people on SCI
who were Baha'i and then wrote
on topics that Baha'i organization did
not like and they were scared away.
Those interested can go and ask them
but I will not name anybody as this
is a private decision for any of them
to want to discuss these issues with
anybody or not. I already know the
pain they are going thru dealing with this
sad reality. I will not really write much more about these.
There are many people who are more knwledgeable
than me about the Baha'i organziation of other
creeds for that matter. And more importantly
those who are interested can go and do
their own research and ask the people who have
left these creeds, and for those who are not,
there is no need to drag this.
All the Best,
- Sam
Ariamehr
liquidation of all Bahais ,your henna has no color anymore. Keep your advice
and profanities to yourself and I am sure people are smart enough to figure
out their beliefs and organizations.save your self some time and don't post
" Fuck Yous" .
Ariamehr wonders how backward some futurists can be !
"Sam Ghandchi" <ghan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:iVtl9.488306$_91.7...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
Deev
The Bahai have never harmed those who are not Bahai. Islamic radicals have.
Reading the varous comments here and there, they are trying to keep to a
path that those who do not agree are free to leave.
Try doing that as a Moslem. What rational can you use to compare the two.
Also what document do you have from a Bahai orgasnization in answer to all
the comments made by those who have left.Can you post it if you have such a
document?
If there are in fact many that have left, it shows the Bahai's being more
like a club that you are free to enter and leave. So what is wrong with
that?
The ones that I am talking to doing my research say you are free to do
things and do not have nahy monkar.
"Sam Ghandchi" <ghan...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:iVtl9.488306$_91.7...@rwcrnsc51.ops.asp.att.net...
Freethought110
--
"Deev" <deeve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:B3Gl9.420231$v53.19...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca...
>Sam this is such utter goblee goo, to compare Islamists and Bahaism
Not quite.
>The Bahai have never harmed those who are not Bahai. Islamic radicals have.
Actually they have, and the Baha'is would do far worse than the Islamists if
they should ever take reins of political power, which is what they are
*really* after.
>Reading the varous comments here and there, they are trying to keep to a
>path that those who do not agree are free to leave.
That's for public consumption. The reality is otherwise. I left in November
1996 and until November 1997 and beyond unbeknownst to myself I was being
spied on and reported about to the Baha'i administration. Others have
experienced similar.
>Try doing that as a Moslem. What rational can you use to compare the two.
Much.
>Also what document do you have from a Bahai orgasnization in answer to all
>the comments made by those who have left.
None because they have never responded.
> If there are in fact many that have left, it shows the Bahai's being more
>like a club that you are free to enter and leave. So what is wrong with
>that?
Once again, this is for public consumption. The reality is otherwise.
>The ones that I am talking to doing my research say you are free to do
>things and do not have nahy monkar.
Those ones are lying to you or misinformed, and you can tell them from me
they are liars or misinformed.
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
Deev
examples that I can research. It was after all you that got me to read up on
this matter.
So far I have not found anything in any writings to support your claims.
And for your information a friend of mine talked to me in detail about Juan
Cole. They are apparently friends and his comments also contradict your
claims.
"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
news:newscache$o9183h$onr1$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Freethought110
concrete
>examples that I can research. It was after all you that got me to read up
on
>this matter.
Fine. For the 1000th time look at this website and read all the links and
articles contained therein:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/
>So far I have not found anything in any writings to support your claims.
>And for your information a friend of mine talked to me in detail about Juan
>Cole. They are apparently friends and his comments also contradict your
>claims.
Your friend is a liar and full of it and you can tell him I said that!
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Deev" <deeve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:PcMl9.447085$f05.20...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
Deev
was they were mostly personal opinions about censorship, and not about
threats and virus emails and all the other accusations you have made.
I am surprised at you, calling someone lier, who says something that you
dont like without asking for any details.
I wonder if you should be taken seriously.
Well my friend was a partner in Kalimat press which is mentioned in the site
which you mentioned and if you dont know him and call him a lier, what
conclusion is one to reach about your ways of hearing contradictory
opinions.
His first name is Payam and if you know Juan Cole, then you should ask him
beause he will tell you with the above information that he knows him.
.
"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
news:newscache$78d83h$a1s1$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Susan Maneck
>
>His first name is Payam
Dear Deev,
Tell Payam Afsharian I said hi.
Nima had the kind of virus attack we have probably all had one time or another.
He blamed it on the Baha'is. As for threats one would think if he were actually
getting any he would post them.
warmest, Susan
Susan Maneck
Associate Professor of History
Jackson State University
Freethought110
exactly were it came from, Dr Maniac ;-P
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020930034353...@mb-fp.aol.com...
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Deev" <deeve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:CIQl9.423531$v53.19...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca...
Deev
"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
news:newscache$cpq83h$pgs1$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Deev
I did not think it was appropriate for you to expose his name,I could have
used his whole name but as I did not have his permission I did not.
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020930034353...@mb-fp.aol.com...
>
>
> >
Freethought110
This is why I say Susan Maneck is a snake. She has had it in for both our
friend and his business partner for well over a decade now. How about I send
you a copy of the threatening letter the bayt'ul-jahl-e a'zam sent this
business partner threatening to destroy his life and marriage because
Kalimat Press was under contract with Colombia University Press to
distribute Juan Cole's Modernity and the Millenium.
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Deev" <deeve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Vq_l9.426991$v53.19...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca...
Freethought110
you either misunderstood what he was telling you, because you have little
context for the larger conflicts inside the Baha'i community, or our friend
is doing some serious taqiyyeh. Why don't you speak to his business partner
sometime?
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Deev" <deeve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:cp_l9.444622$Ag2.18...@news2.calgary.shaw.ca...
Freethought110
the fact that he's an honest broker. But that said, you should go talk to
Tony.
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
news:newscache$0kt93h$11u1$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Deev
that he is an honest person.
As for Tony, it is not so important, I am still reading.
"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
news:newscache$10aa3h$5lu1$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Deev" <deeve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MWam9.457012$f05.20...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
Susan Maneck
Sorry, given the fact you gave both his first name and the name of his business
I hardly thought you were trying to protect his anonymity. As for Nima's
assertion that I've had it in for Payam for the last decade I sure don't know
where he gets that from. Five years ago I was in the same camp as Juan Cole and
my exchanges with Payam have never been unfriendly.
Susan Maneck
Yes.
>So what do you mean five years ago I was in his camp?
When Juan Cole initially left the Faith claiming that the Baha'i administration
was persecuting scholars for utilizing academic methods in the study of our
religion, at first I sided with him. Gradually, I came to find out that this
wasn't about scholarship at all, it was more about wanting to make political
changes in the administration. My correspondence with the House which you read
was part of my struggle with these issues.
Deev
privately that you don't want to say in a public forum.
It appears to me reading your posts you have it out for Bahai's in
particular; even though you use the terminology of all religions being
figments of mans imagination and you do not attack other religions so
adamantly.
I started to read this stuff because of your posts and find it fascinating
and cant put it down.
I have yet to see an official Bahai response to any of your posts.Even you
said so yourself. I wonder why? This is my next topic of discussion with
Bahais that I find, I am going to go online to a Bahai Chat room in pall
talk and check it out.
"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
news:newscache$xfga3h$3uu1$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Susan Maneck
>I have yet to see an official Bahai response to any of your posts.Even you
>said so yourself. I wonder why?
Dear Deev,
The Baha'i institutions don't respond to attacks made against them on internet
postings, however if individuals have questions regarding matters that come up
in internet discussions they can certainly write those institutions and ask
them.
>This is my next topic of discussion with
>Bahais that I find, I am going to go online to a Bahai Chat room in pall
>talk and check it out.
You also might check out soc.religion.bahai. I find discussions in chat rooms
hard to follow myself. You can certainly ask any questions you want on
soc.religion.bahai and the environment is a little less chaotic. Also, because
it is a moderated newsgroup the flame throwing is kept to minimum. You can
check out their archives here:
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&group=soc.religion.bahai
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021001093328...@mb-fi.aol.com...
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Deev" <deeve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:n0jm9.432526$v53.19...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca...
This is getting more confusing by the minute.
Are you a Bahai?
I went to your site and read your correspondence and there is so much to
read.
You did have a link to Juan Cole which I have not followed yet.
So what do you mean five years ago I was in his camp?
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021001093328...@mb-fi.aol.com...
Freethought110
the letter the uhj sent Tony Lee threatening to destroy him, his business
and his marriage because he was distributing Juan Cole's book MODERNITY AND
THE MILLENIUM. "Political changes" is Maneck's cult-speak.
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
---
August 3, 1999
Mr. Anthony Lee
1600 Sawtelle Boulevard
Suite 34
Los Angeles, CA 90025-3314
U.S.A.
Dear Baha'i Friend,
The Universal House of Justice has reviewed the letter of 8 May 1999
to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States,
signed by you on behalf of Kalimat Press and copied for the House of
Justice, on the subject of the manner in which Kalimat has promoted to
Baha'is Dr. Juan Cole's book, Modernity and the Millennium. We have been
asked to write as follows.
A good deal of the work of Kalimat Press, which you have ably directed
during the twenty or so years of the firm's existence, has constituted a
significant contribution to the advancement of the Cause we all love and
seek to serve. It is clear, too, that, beyond the administration of
Kalimat's activities, this valued contribution owes a great deal to your
own creativity and professional talents. These circumstances move the House
of
the Justice to share with you candidly the deep concern it feels regarding
your relationship with the Baha'i Faith.
As you are aware, such concern prompted earlier efforts, including
those made by Counsellor Stephen Birkland and Dr. Pierre-Yves Mocquais, a
member of the Auxiliary Board, in their interview with you and your wife,
Dr. Flor Lee Geola, in May of 1996, to draw to your attention the serious
dangers of the course you have long been following. At that time, you
expressed to Mr. Birkland your deep regret over actions on your part that
were seen by the House of Justice to be clearly in conflict with the beliefs
you profess as a follower of Baha'u'llah, as well as your firm assurance
that your actions
would not again give cause for such intervention.
It is impossible to reconcile professions of this kind with the
arguments made by you in the 8 May letter. The inappropriateness of the
promotional statements and of the approach taken in the letter serves as an
illustration of the attitude and behavior on your part that have long been a
source of difficulty. It is these personal elements that the House of
Justice has asked us to address.
Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and
publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone
questioned the right of a Baha'i who is interested in such a book to
purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise would
be to seriously misconstrue the nature of its concern. The book itself is
incidental to the problem of attitude on your part that the National
Assembly was asked to raise with you. As a participant in various Internet
discussion groups over the past five years, and particularly in the last
year or two, you cannot but be aware from these exchanges that Dr. Cole has
embarked on a deliberate assault against the Baha'i Cause, in which he has
not hesitated to attack its institutions, to misrepresent its fundamental
teachings, and to abuse the trust of Baha'is who had been led to believe
that they were engaged with him in a detached and scholarly search for the
truth. These same Internet exchanges exposed you, like other participants,
to a flood of calumny and invective against a great many of your fellow
believers, on the part of Dr. Cole, that is scarcely credible in rational
discourse.
Had such a book as Modernity and the Millennium been written by a
disinterested non-Baha'i scholar, its misconception of the nature of
Baha'u'llah's Mission and its other shortcomings would have represented no
more than understandable weaknesses of an honest attempt to explore a
religious phenomenon as yet little understood in the West. Indeed, in this
context, such an attempt to make the Baha'i Faith comprehensible to the
Western academic mind, however inadequate it might appear to knowledgeable
Baha'i
scholars, would surely have earned its author a measure of genuine Baha'i
appreciation
for the writing and research skills deployed in devising it.
As you -- like other participants in certain Internet discussion
groups -- are well aware, however, the book's author is not a disinterested
scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book was
in preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an
apparent twenty-year allegiance to Baha'u'llah, in the wake of a failed
attempt on his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Baha'i
community's study of Baha'u'llah's Message. Modernity and the Millennium
represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running
scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization.
What is this rationalization? Although distorted by its evasion of
Baha'i Texts that contradict its main assertions, and blurred by reliance on
speculations peculiar to its author's purpose, the thesis appears to run
somewhat as follows: Baha'u'llah's work and Writings represent essentially
one of several efforts by Middle East thinkers to work out a
"response" to the challenges posed by European modernity in the form of
rationalism, revolution, nationalism, economic upheaval, feminism and other
contemporary developments. Although Oriental in origin, this particular
"response", in contrast to
various others, was unusually "progressive", "liberal", "idealistic", even
"radical.” Because it "grew up" in a congenial modernist era, its Author was
able gradually to adjust and revise the ideas with which He had been
"grappling", through benefiting (in a manner generally insinuated rather
than explicitly stated) from successive interactions with other thinkers and
movements. By 1862, apparently in order to deal with the problem of
religious exclusivity in the Muslim world, and in response to some form of
"private
mystical experience", He "decided to make a prophetic claim of his own".
As mentioned above, if such a view had represented the interpretation
of Baha'u'llah's Mission arrived at by a non-Baha'i as the result of his
objective study of the sources, no Baha'i institution could have an
objection. Its relevance to the concern of the House of Justice about your
behavior arises rather from your long-standing and widely recognized
involvement with a few present and former members of the Faith who seek to
foist this
caricature of the Cause on the Baha'i community, and your perceived
identification with
their purpose.
The Covenant, the distinguishing feature of Baha'u'llah's Revelation,
has
been made the central target of this effort (a maneuver that Dr. Cole's
book is at particular pains to shore up). Although forced to acknowledge
the appointments of `Abdu'l-Baha and the Guardian as Interpreters of
Baha'u'llah's Message, every effort has been made to call such authoritative
interpretation into question wherever it presents a problem for the notions
being promoted. Similarly, although ostensibly acknowledging that the
Universal House of Justice is Head of the Baha'i Faith today, this
opposition has
tried by every means possible to undermine the broad authority conferred in
Baha'u'llah's own words and emphasized in the Master's Will and Testament.
(In Dr. Cole's book, this agenda makes its appearance in the conclusion:
namely, that the Faith founded by Baha'u'llah has failed in its mission
because, like "the Khomeinist state in Iran", it has been somehow captured
by "fundamentalists", by which term Dr. Cole has repeatedly characterized
the members of the Universal House of Justice.)
Why would a Baha'i or a Baha'i publisher who is genuinely devoted to
advancing Baha'i scholarship and to encouraging confirmation of believers in
Baha'u'llah's Covenant seek to persuade his Baha'i readers that a device
intended as the mainspring of an attack on their Faith is "an indispensable
book for any serious student of Baha'i history"? How could an effort to
represent to the Baha'i community such a work as "a brilliant, scholarly
analysis of the life and teachings of Baha'u'llah" serve the Cause of God?
What moral benefit do you imagine a Baha'i reader could conceivably derive
from taking seriously the theories of an individual whose apparently
ungovernable malice has made his activities the focal point of contention
and disharmony among any believers unwise enough to be influenced by him?
Indeed, what relevance do Dr. Cole's academic credentials, so strongly
emphasized in your letter of 8 May, have to the moral and spiritual issue
raised in the letter from the National Spiritual Assembly? Clearly, no
reader, Baha'i or otherwise, would be interested in reading a supposedly
scholarly study whose author lacked the relevant scholarly qualifications.
Nor, presumably, would any publisher, Baha'i or otherwise, promote a
work from such an unqualified source. It is both meaningless and
disingenuous to argue that these qualifications, however valid in
themselves, assure that a publication meets the moral and spiritual
standards that are made explicitly clear in the Writings of the Faith whose
interests Kalimat's activities are ostensibly designed to serve.
The assumption of Baha'i institutions is that the purpose motivating a
group of believers to create a publishing house that enjoys privileged
access to the Baha'i community is in order to promote the advancement of the
Baha'i Cause. The House of Justice has always assumed -- as is no doubt the
case with Baha'is generally -- that this was the desire that motivated you
and your associates to create Kalimat Press. If some different conception
of purpose underlies the Kalimat enterprise, then it is essential that you
advise the United States National Spiritual Assembly of the facts of the
situation, frankly, unequivocally, and without delay.
The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the
questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the
relationship that binds you to your Lord. Does not the Master in His Will
and Testament itself, specifically warn: "According to the direct and
sacred command of God we are forbidden to utter slander, are commanded to
show forth peace and amity, are exhorted to rectitude of conduct,
straight-forwardness and harmony with all the kindreds and peoples of the
world"? Does He not, in that same foundation document of the Cause, counsel
all of us: "O ye beloved of the Lord! Strive with all your heart to shield
the Cause of God from the onslaught of the insincere, for souls such as
these cause the straight to become crooked and all
benevolent efforts to produce contrary results"?
The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with Flor's
loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid that so
precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the House
of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course on which
you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady spiritual
deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this world and the
next. As you will recall, because the matter was of direct concern to her,
Flor asked urgently to be included in your discussion with Mr. Birkland and
Dr. Mocquais. Because these issues continue to bear so immediately on the
well-being of your family, you need to recognize your moral obligation to
take her fully into your confidence also on the contents of this present
letter.
In the past, you have expressed bewilderment that your actions should
have required the intervention of senior Baha'i institutions. The House of
Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake and
that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course you
have, alas, been pursuing.
The House of Justice will pray ardently at the Holy Threshold that
you will be granted the courage and will to meet the spiritual challenge
you face.
With loving Baha'i greetings,
Department of the Secretariat
Freethought110
letter I just posted the uhj sent Tony Lee threatening his business and
family.
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Deev" <deeve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:qNkm9.433310$v53.19...@news3.calgary.shaw.ca...
Deev
I read this letter and did not see the same thing as you did. I would like
someone else who reads this to also comment on your points. May be I missed
it.
I read more of an appeal to him to use his senses and whoever wrote it never
spoke despairingly of Juan Cole. It referred to Juan Cole always as a Dr.
Cole and used proper etiquette putting the onus on Tony to use his judgment
to proceed. I read this more as a letter from a dean to a student to use his
wisdom and make the proper decison to not effect his course of study. My
examples follow;
Regards,
Deev
This paragraph does not censor reading nor publishing this book.
"Clearly, no one would dispute the right of Dr. Cole to write and
> publish whatever work a publisher is prepared to handle. Nor has anyone
> questioned the right of a Baha'i who is interested in such a book to
> purchase it. To suggest that the House of Justice is saying otherwise
would
> be to seriously misconstrue the nature of its concern."
In this paragraph they state their reaosning and appeal to Tony's
experience;
"As you -- like other participants in certain Internet discussion
> groups -- are well aware, however, the book's author is not a
disinterested
> scholar. Rather, he is a deeply embittered individual who, as his book was
> in preparation, had just denounced in the most intemperate language an
> apparent twenty-year allegiance to Baha'u'llah, in the wake of a failed
> attempt on his part to impose his private ideological agenda on the Baha'i
> community's study of Baha'u'llah's Message. Modernity and the Millennium
> represents an effort to provide the current stage of this long-running
> scheme with the underpinnings of scholarly rationalization."
They ask him to think and meditate, and BTW who is the Master?
"The House of Justice calls on you to meditate profoundly on the
> questions raised in the foregoing, as these issues bear directly on the
> relationship that binds you to your Lord. Does not the Master in His Will
> and Testament itself, specifically warn: "According to the direct and
> sacred command of God we are forbidden to utter slander, are commanded to
> show forth peace and amity, are exhorted to rectitude of conduct,
> straight-forwardness and harmony with all the kindreds and peoples of the
> world"? Does He not, in that same foundation document of the Cause,
counsel
> all of us: "O ye beloved of the Lord! Strive with all your heart to
shield
> the Cause of God from the onslaught of the insincere, for souls such as
> these cause the straight to become crooked and all
> benevolent efforts to produce contrary results"?"
And finally I assume Flor is Tony's wife They say she was concerned and they
are involved becasue of her beliefs
"> The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with
Flor's
> loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid that
so
> precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the
House
> of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course on which
> you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady spiritual
> deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this world and
the
> next. As you will recall, because the matter was of direct concern to
her,
> Flor asked urgently to be included in your discussion with Mr. Birkland
and
> Dr. Mocquais. Because these issues continue to bear so immediately on the
> well-being of your family, you need to recognize your moral obligation to
> take her fully into your confidence also on the contents of this present
> letter."
"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
news:newscache$6hob3h$a5w1$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Susan Maneck
>
>I read more of an appeal to him to use his senses and whoever wrote it never
>spoke despairingly of Juan Cole. It referred to Juan Cole always as a Dr.
>Cole and used proper etiquette putting the onus on Tony to use his judgment
>to proceed. I read this more as a letter from a dean to a student to use his
>wisdom and make the proper decison to not effect his course of study.
Dear Deev,
There is more involved being said than you apparently see, though less than
what Nima is saying. The Universal House of Justice is not so much upset
because Kalimat carried Juan Cole's book rather they were appalled at the way
it was being promoted within the Baha'i community especially given the fact
that Dr. Cole launched into a rather nasty attack against the Universal House
of Justice in the book itself.. They are telling Tony that if he continues to
pursue a course in support of those who are attacking the Baha'i institutions
and misrepresenting its teachings it would eventually result in his being
considered a Covenant breaking. Since Tony publishes books for the Baha'i
community this would have ramifications for his business, but the House is not
concerned with that and does not mention it in this letter. Giiven the fact
that Tony is married to Iranian Baha'i woman being considered a Covenant
breaeker would undoubtedly have consequences to Tony's marriage and the House
is asking him to consider that. But the real purpose of this letter is to warn
Tony of the spiritual consequences of the course he is pursuing, not to
threaten his family or his business. Kalimat doesn't really make any money
anyhow. Payam can tell you that.
Freethought110
it of a Baha'i institution to be telling an independent publisher what bok
he can or cannot be distributing as part of his business? Second, what
business is it of a Baha'i institution to be threatening, strong-arming and
bullying an individual, his life in the hereafter and his family? Are you
crazy??
I don't think PA is the liar here, but I will say this, you are yet another
Baha'i sleeper on SCI just like Aryeezaamehr and are lying through your
teeth about you 'true' affiliations. You, sir or madam, are indeed a Baha'i
and your reaction to this letter alone is the firm evidence, and I am glad
that these cultists are outing themselves right, left and center.
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Deev" <deeve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:12sm9.460500$f05.20...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
Freethought110
cabal of religious fascists and god bless Juan Cole for pointing out the
fact that they are mirror images of the Khomeinists in Iran. Kalaam-e haqq.
And you, Maneck, think you are scoring points here on an Iranian newsgroup
by advancing this propagandistic Baha'i cultists drivel "about the way the
book was being promoted" and that Juan Cole "had a political agenda"? By
stating this transparent and cultist Baha'i groupthink nonesense here you
are making a hero out of Cole to an audience who have been suspicious of the
organization you have come here representing for a very long time. Cole
should be commended for his efforts at reforming this run away train of a
Scientology-cum-Stalinist Administrative Faith, inc, cult the Baha'i
religion has been transformed into by your lot since 1921.
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021001223756...@mb-fi.aol.com...
Deev
not.Maybe in the future upon further study and verification.
My name is Farid and I am a he, my mother lives in Jeddah and that says it
all.
Second, I did not make a comment about why the Bahai groups should or should
not make it thie rbusines to comment on individual rights.
My comment had to do with what you said about threats and intimidation as
well as threats to destroy someones life.
Finally why would Bahai's need a sleeper? They have never hidden their
comments. I wondered if Aryamehr was a Bahai and he never answered me, are
they not supposed to say it if they are a Bahai?
I think you are a little paranoid, and did not like what I said. But I take
being a Bahai as a compliment for I have not seen anything bad from them and
thier actions, and comments in all questions I have asked them even about
you and Cole have been beyond approach. They are the only good thing to come
out of Iran in a very Long time and they consider Iran holy ground. So thats
good enough for me.
Thanks for turning me on to Bahaism.
End of this discussion with you,
Second, I did not make a comment about
"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
news:newscache$6t2c3h$gmw1$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Deev
I was also called a Jew by Pacifist :~) Now a Bahai.
Who do you have to kill to be born a Moslem? or Swear at to be Zoroastrian?
Sirknight HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPP
"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
news:newscache$6t2c3h$gmw1$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Deev
I was wondering who you were at first when I saw you jump in I was a little
surprised.
I will carry the rest of this discussion with Payam off line.
Cheers,
Deev
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021001223756...@mb-fi.aol.com...
> >
> >
La6red9nec
>From: Farhad Abdolian farhad_abdolian@removethis_first_hotmail.com
>Date: 10/1/2002 10:46 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <9u1lpusvrtcvg0sha...@4ax.com>
Commit suicide. It's the only honorabel way out for these cultists.
Freethought110
"Deev" <deeve...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:U8vm9.462696$f05.20...@news1.calgary.shaw.ca...
>First of all I wish I was a Bahai from what I have read so far. I am
>not.Maybe in the future upon further study and verification.
>My name is Farid and I am a he, my mother lives in Jeddah and that says it
>all.
You are an Arab?
>Second, I did not make a comment about why the Bahai groups should or
should
>not make it thie rbusines to comment on individual rights.
>My comment had to do with what you said about threats and intimidation as
>well as threats to destroy someones life.
What do you call this then?
"The impressive services that you have rendered the Faith, with
Flor's loving support, represent for you a spiritual treasure. God forbid
that
so precious a capital should be squandered. While there is yet time, the
House of Justice earnestly appeals to you to turn away from the course on
which
you have long been set, a course that has been marked by steady spiritual
deterioration and that will lead to grievous loss in both this world and
the next. As you will recall, because the matter was of direct concern to
her Flor asked urgently to be included in your discussion with Mr. Birkland
and Dr. Mocquais. Because these issues continue to bear so immediately on
the
well-being of your family, you need to recognize your moral obligation to
take her fully into your confidence also on the contents of this present
letter."
"In the past, you have expressed bewilderment that your actions
should have required the intervention of senior Baha'i institutions. The
House
of Justice expects that you have now understood clearly what is at stake and
that you will resolve, unambiguously and at once, to abandon the course
you have, alas, been pursuing."
You are a blind fool with clear cultist tendencies of your own if you don't
see the CLEAR threat being made to this person's livelihod and family in the
above.
>Finally why would Bahai's need a sleeper?
Because it is a cult like Scientology and there are more spies in the Baha'i
community than SAVAK under the Shah.
>They have never hidden their
>comments. I wondered if Aryamehr was a Bahai and he never answered me, are
>they not supposed to say it if they are a Bahai?
They are not supposed to deny. But if you hang out with Maneck she'll teach
about the Baha'i version of taqiyyeh, which she calls "hikmat."
>I think you are a little paranoid,
I think you need to have your head examined if you can't see a spade for a
spade, or unless you have an agenda.
>and did not like what I said.
Because what you say is complete errant nonesense. Very simple.
> But I take
>being a Bahai as a compliment for I have not seen anything bad from them
and
>thier actions, and comments in all questions I have asked them even about
>you and Cole have been beyond approach.
??? Beyond approach? You mean beyond reproach. So what have they told you
about Juan and I?
> They are the only good thing to come
>out of Iran in a very Long time and they consider Iran holy ground. So
thats
>good enough for me.
As they say, yek murid-e khar az deh-e shish tongi behtar ast. Sadly a
murid-e khar and one who isn't using his shu'ur as well has been found in
you. Please go become a Baha'i right away if that is how you really feel. It
is unfortunately sincere and gullible people like you whom they populate
this cult with. But, alas, in time you will see for yourself what I am
talking about and you will vividly remember this conversation. That I
promise you. Meanwhile my only advice to you is to use you brain, open up
your eyes, and don't be taken in by false appearances.
>End of this discussion with you,
Whatever......
Freethought110
This is what these owbaash are essentially saying to this guy. Stop
distributing the book you are under contract to distribute or we will
declare you a covenant breaker (naaqiz-e misaaq) and force your wife to
divorce you and your children to shun you. Of course it is a well known fact
that cults use the family as tool of blackmail and coercion of actual and
potential dissidents.
Distribute this letter far and wide as an example of the kind of clear and
imminent danger the leadership of this cult represents to decent, sincere,
secular and democratic loving Iranians. These guys are Khomeinists x 2.
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Farhad Abdolian" <farhad_abdolian@removethis_first_hotmail.com> wrote in
message news:9u1lpusvrtcvg0sha...@4ax.com...
Voooaa,
So basically you say here, that you can give a fatva, take this guy
"religion"
from him and his wife will be "haram" to him?
Man you guys are good, that was the most sofisticated description of Fatwa I
have ever read!
Can you take someones religion away?
Very interesting, thank you for helping us understand your logic,
/Farhad
Happy Camper
Dear Freethought,
I do not wish to get in the middle of a Bahaii conflict, and as
I write this, I'm hoping that it will be my first and last comment
with regards to the "House of whatever", and Bahaii issues in
general.
For what its worth, I think the letter you posted strongly
corroborates your assertions. I thought that it maybe of some
comfort to you to hear that from someone who is uninterested in
this issue.
I don't think that Mr. Deev's failure to see the "blatantly obvious"
threat in this letter has anything to do with hidden motives.
I think that he has made the same mistake that we ALL make
from time to time. That is, we make up our minds before seeing
the evidence, and from that point on, no matter what is put before
us, we only look for that which "supports" our preconceptions and
disregard the rest. Its a natural human weakness that we all have!
(We often care more about being right, than see(k)ing the truth!)
The letter threatens your friend, Mr. Tony, and Ms Susan's post,
which I have appended below, explains in what way the intended
harm will be inflicted upon your friend, should he choose not to
comply with the demands that were put to him.
From Ms. Susan's post:
"Since Tony publishes books for the Baha'i community
this would have ramifications for his business......"
I also noted that the "warning letter" did not offer a specific
objection to any falsehood in the content of the book in question.
Rather, it complains about the author's state of mind, and motives
for writing the book, which are totally irrelevant!
Frankly, if someone writes a letter like that to me, I go down and
tear them a new ass hole, but here's what I think your friend
should do:
First, he should continue to fight for what he believes. Second,
at least in the US, there are several statues that protect people
against such bullying. One in particular, that pertains to your friend's
situation is called "Tortious Interference". What this particular statue
says is that it is unlawful to do something, anything, that harms a
person's business and means of support. Your friend needs to take
the letter, along with a print out of Ms. Susan post, which explains
what's at stake, to an able attorney. The attorney will know what to
do from then on. Of course, as long as there has been no harm
done to his business, your friend has no case. But, from the looks
of things, especially if he chooses to ignore the warning, the harm
is soon to come!
And, please give this advice to your friend from me.
Tell him: "joloyeh gooz bAyad reed."
(that works for me)
PS
I like to ask you a question to which I do not expect a reply.
It's just for you to ponder:
Your efforts are characteristic of someone who cares deeply
about Bahaiism and its path under a corrupt leadership.
If you no longer consider yourself a Bahaii, then why do you
even waste your time with Bahaii issues?
Surely, there is no shortage of corrupt leaderships that affect
our lives more profoundly than the "House of Bahaii's"!
And, if you are still a Bahaii at heart, then good luck to you for
fighting the "oo'bAsh" who think of themselves as the custodians
of your religion!
(piss on them, in the Bahaii newsgroup of course. :-))) )
=================Ms. Susan's Post===================
Dear Deev,
There is more involved being said than you apparently see, though less than
what Nima is saying. The Universal House of Justice is not so much upset
because Kalimat carried Juan Cole's book rather they were appalled at the way
it was being promoted within the Baha'i community especially given the fact
that Dr. Cole launched into a rather nasty attack against the Universal House
of Justice in the book itself.. They are telling Tony that if he continues to
pursue a course in support of those who are attacking the Baha'i institutions
and misrepresenting its teachings it would eventually result in his being
considered a Covenant breaking. Since Tony publishes books for the Baha'i
community this would have ramifications for his business, but the House is not
concerned with that and does not mention it in this letter. Giiven the fact
that Tony is married to Iranian Baha'i woman being considered a Covenant
breaeker would undoubtedly have consequences to Tony's marriage and the House
is asking him to consider that. But the real purpose of this letter is to warn
Tony of the spiritual consequences of the course he is pursuing, not to
threaten his family or his business. Kalimat doesn't really make any money
anyhow. Payam can tell you that.
Deev
"Happy Camper " <o...@net.com> wrote in message
news:h8bmpu42q7eprpov8...@4ax.com...
Freethought110
As always, nail hammer head! What can I say other than say with Hafiz,
keh eshq avval aasaan namud, vali oftaad doshvaarihaa!
;-)
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Happy Camper " <o...@net.com> wrote in message
news:h8bmpu42q7eprpov8...@4ax.com...
Susan Maneck
>for writing the book, which are totally irrelevant!
Dear Org,
The motives of an author writing a book to be vigorously marketed *within* a
religious community is hardly irrelevant. If the book in question is
deliberately antithetical to that religion one would not expect that a believer
would be representing the book to other believers as the best thing going. How
long would a student in a madarasah remain there if he was hawking Warraq's
works inside the seminary? And Modernity and the Millenium is basically the
equivalent of Ibn Warraq's *Quest for the Historical Muhammad.*
Mind you, this is not about Baha'is having the right to own or read the book. I
have a copy of it myself. But it is about the way such a book was being
promoted by a Baha'i publisher within the Baha'i community itself.
>Your friend needs to take
>the letter, along with a print out of Ms. Susan post, which explains
>what's at stake, to an able attorney. The attorney will know what to
>do from then on.
I'm quite sure that no court is going to interfere with the free exercise of
religion within the Baha'i community. This publisher chose to market his books
within the context of that community. If he now chooses to carry books which
attack that community, he is certainly free to do so, but he shouldn't expect
the community in question to purchase his books anymore under those
circumstances.
Freethought110
of
>religion within the Baha'i community.
Not if it blatantly violates a persons civil rights, and arguably the uhj
letter negates Mr Lee's free exercise of religion. The Scientologists have
tried that argument before and the courts both in the US and the
Commonwealth are now increasingly wisening up to it.
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021003014417...@mb-md.aol.com...
Happy Camper
>>Rather, it complains about the author's state of mind, and motives
>>for writing the book, which are totally irrelevant!
>
>Dear Org,
>
>The motives of an author writing a book to be vigorously marketed *within* a
>religious community is hardly irrelevant.
Dear Susan,
I have neither read this book, nor intend to read it in the future.
But, when I open a book, and in it I read that "A is equal to B", all I
care about is the veracity and accuracy of that statement.
If the statement is accurate, then the author gains more credibility
with me. If the statement is erroneous, then the author loses some
credibility. Now, why in world would I care whether the author
was having a fight with his wife the day that he wrote
"A is equal to B?"
Whether the author of the book in question was on friendly terms
with the Bahaii organization, or at war with it, does not make his
"false" statements true anymore than it makes his "true" statements
false. The author's motives for writing the book are, therefore,
irrelevant to the credibility of the book itself.
If you have read this book, and know that there are falsehood within,
then why not simply address that which is false, instead of acting like
a gangster and coerce people into doing their business under your
terms (ie promote, or not promote, a book according to your whim)?
>If the book in question is deliberately antithetical to that religion one
>would not expect that a believer would be representing the book to
>other believers as the best thing going.
Why not?
YOU have obviously read this book, to have come to the conclusion
that it is "deliberately antithetical" towards Bahaii religion.
Why can't other people to do the same and make their own judgement?
I presume you don't like this book. So, now you don't want anybody
else to read the book either. Isn't that a bit "Cultish", not to mention
"Fascistic", of you?
I don't mean to be disrespectful, but are the believers of Bahaii
faith such imbeciles who cannot read a book for themselves and
decide whether they agree or disagree with your conclusions?
>How long would a student in a madarasah remain there if he
>was hawking Warraq's works inside the seminary? And Modernity
>and the Millenium is basically the equivalent of Ibn Warraq's
>*Quest for the Historical Muhammad.*
Are you saying that Muslims are just as "cultish" as Bahaii's?
OK......But what's your point?
>Mind you, this is not about Baha'is having the right to own or
>read the book. I have a copy of it myself. But it is about the way
>such a book was being promoted by a Baha'i publisher within the
>Baha'i community itself.
Dear Susan, do you realize what you are saying, above?
First you say, Bahaii's have the right to read this book.
Then you say, that the publisher should not promote the book!
That is, the publisher must not advertize and make Bahaii's
aware that such a book "exists", for sale!
In other words, people have the right to read the book,
but they don't have the right to know that the book exists!
Now, that is an impeccable logic, I can't argue with it!
I give up. :-)))))
>>Your friend needs to take
>>the letter, along with a print out of Ms. Susan post, which explains
>>what's at stake, to an able attorney. The attorney will know what to
>>do from then on.
>
>I'm quite sure that no court is going to interfere with the
>free exercise of religion within the Baha'i community.
These Catholic priests who molest children also think so.
But the church is paying up very large sums of money to
settle cases out of court. You should talk to them before
you make a statement like:
"I'm quite sure that no court is going to interfere..."
Trust me, my friend, if you're in the US of A and you break the
law, a court can and will interfere if charges or complaints
are filed.
>This publisher chose to market his books within the context
>of that community.
That is correct.
The publisher does have the right to choose the market in which to
promote his book, and that includes "your community". Especially if
the book was written with the specific intentions to cause some sort
of an awareness within "your community". As such, "your community"
is the only logical market for this book to be promoted in. It follows
that the publisher's choice was the only logical choice for him to
make!
> If he now chooses to carry books which attack that community,
>he is certainly free to do so, but he shouldn't expect the community
>in question to purchase his books anymore under those circumstances.
I think that its fair to assume that people of your community are
buying this book. Otherwise, the Bahaii leadership would not have
acted so nervously, as to send Mr. Tony such an ultimatum.
(not a very smart move)
One can even argue that the content of that "letter", not only
communicates to Mr. Tony as to what's being demanded of him,
but also warns others, in the Bahaii community who may read this
letter, as to the action they are expected to take with respect to
Mr. Tony, should he refuse to comply.
So, if, say tomorrow, people stop buying from Mr. Tony and his
sales drop, it would be reasonable to conclude that the Bahaii
administration has coerced its fellowship into shunning Mr. Tony
to cause financial harm to his business as a form of punishment
for his non-compliance.
That's against the Law, and there is no such thing as "religious
immunity", and religious authorities are not considered diplomats!
You break the Law, the courts can and will interfere (that is if Mr.
Tony decides to files a complaint).
>warmest, Susan
nice talking to you, Susan.
PS
The Law is the Law.
Don't be distracted by the fact that "child molesting" is a
"criminal offense" and "tortious interference" is a
"civil offense". In one, you pay to the state, in the other,
you pay to the Plaintiff. That's the only difference.
You break the Law, YOU PAY. :-)
PPS
The name is "Happy Camper" (HC)!
But you can call me "Org", if you like. :-)
gyAth-Abadi
> On 03 Oct 2002 05:44:17 GMT, sma...@aol.com (Susan Maneck ) wrote:
>
> >>Rather, it complains about the author's state of mind, and motives
> >>for writing the book, which are totally irrelevant!
> >
> >Dear Org,
> >
> >The motives of an author writing a book to be vigorously marketed *within* a
> >religious community is hardly irrelevant.
>
> Dear Susan,
> I have neither read this book, nor intend to read it in the future.
> But, when I open a book, and in it I read that "A is equal to B", all I
> care about is the veracity and accuracy of that statement.
bah bah bah. Cheh kamAlAti :-) "A is equal to B" ghalat nakonam shomA
bAyad az baro bacheh hAyeh GyAth-Abad bAshi :-) gorbAneh har chi
gyAth-Abadieh. hAlet xobeh bAbAm jAn? :-)
salAmat bAshi
mash_ghasem
CTG
you. ;)
Khosh Omadi Mash Ghasem
Ruh Goom Kardi?
"gyAth-Abadi" <mash_...@mailandnews.com> wrote in message
news:cf321157.02100...@posting.google.com...
Happy Camper
> bah bah bah. Cheh kamAlAti :-) "A is equal to B" ghalat nakonam shomA
> bAyad az baro bacheh hAyeh GyAth-Abad bAshi :-) gorbAneh har chi
> gyAth-Abadieh. hAlet xobeh bAbAm jAn? :-)
>
> salAmat bAshi
> mash_ghasem
>
*******WHAT A PLESEANT SURPRIZED*******
>>> bAbAm jAn <<<
:-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
ey mardeh mo'meneh masched nadeedeh,
ma'loom hast kojAee tow? :-)))))
chesh-mam-ro rowshan kardee bAbAm jAn. :-)
Are you going to hang around a while?
(you better!)
HC (nowkareh tamAmeh gyAth-AbAdi-hA)
PS
I emailed you a while back, to see how you've
been doing. Did you ever get that mail?
Freethought110
dobaareh tashrif overdid beh in baaghevahsh-e SCI. Baba, kojaa'i rafti
Mashti jun? delemun shadidan tang shod. sharmandeh'im az huzur-e geraan
maayeh shomaa. khayli khub kardi bargashti aziz ;-)
ghorbaanat
--
Freethought110
...The human family will never make the journey to wisdom while chained to
the dogma of zealots.
If the good, the tolerant, the compassionate and god-free do not speak up
soon, evil is going to win.
--Tim Akey (TIME Magazine, September 23, 2002)
"gyAth-Abadi" <mash_...@mailandnews.com> wrote in message
news:cf321157.02100...@posting.google.com...
gyAth-Abadi
> bah, bah! Jenaab-e aghaa-ye Mashghasem-e geraami. besiar khub kardind
> dobaareh tashrif overdid beh in baaghevahsh-e SCI. Baba, kojaa'i rafti
> Mashti jun? delemun shadidan tang shod. sharmandeh'im az huzur-e geraan
> maayeh shomaa. khayli khub kardi bargashti aziz ;-)
>
> ghorbaanat
ghorbAneh har chi adameh bA ma'refateh Nima'yeh aziz :) You are a credit
to this mahfel and I enjoy your posts. dar zemen doshmanAt "sharmandeh"
bAshan bAbAm jAn :) az in beh ba'bad xodeto sharvand eftexArieh gyAth-Abad
hesAb kon bAbAm jAn :)
salamt bAshi
Mash_Ghasem
ps. gorbAneh adameh cheez fahm o bA ma'refat again :-)
gyAth-Abadi
> If you had not signed your name , I could have sworn that it has to be from
> you. ;)
> Khosh Omadi Mash Ghasem
>
> Ruh Goom Kardi?
Thanks Cyrus jAn :) Good to see you :) How is New Zealand chelo kebab
these days? :-) Hope all is well.
fadA
Mash_Ghasem
gyAth-Abadi
> On 3 Oct 2002 18:31:53 -0700, mash_...@mailandnews.com (gyAth-Abadi) wrote:
>
> > bah bah bah. Cheh kamAlAti :-) "A is equal to B" ghalat nakonam shomA
> > bAyad az baro bacheh hAyeh GyAth-Abad bAshi :-) gorbAneh har chi
> > gyAth-Abadieh. hAlet xobeh bAbAm jAn? :-)
> >
> > salAmat bAshi
> > mash_ghasem
> >
>
> *******WHAT A PLESEANT SURPRIZED*******
> >>> bAbAm jAn <<<
> :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-) :-)
>
> ey mardeh mo'meneh masched nadeedeh,
> ma'loom hast kojAee tow? :-)))))
>
> chesh-mam-ro rowshan kardee bAbAm jAn. :-)
>
> Are you going to hang around a while?
> (you better!)
>
>
> HC (nowkareh tamAmeh gyAth-AbAdi-hA)
>
aab dar kozeh vo mA teshneh labaan migardim
Happy Camper aziz dar SCI-AbAd o mA gerdeh jahAn migardim :-)
chetori bAbAm jAn :))))) gorbAneh har chi baro bacheh hAyeh
bA ma'refateh :) dar zemn cheshmet rowsahn and ey beh chashm :)
I will be around :)
salamt bAshid
Mash_Ghasem
Pat Kohli
Sam Ghandchi wrote:
> Dear Friends,
>
> (snip)
> Those who sincerely want to know about the
> reality of the Bahaiist organization, should go
> to the Baha'is who left the faith and ask them
> about the fears and threats they have had to
> endure and see how scared all those people
> are if asked to speak publically. I saw the
> same type of fear only among people who
> had dissneted from Communist Party of
> Soviet Union. If Iranian dissidents can tell you best
> about hezbollAh organization, the Baha'i dissidents
> are the best to tell you about the Bahaiist
> organization which is a very very large
> enterprise with strong funding and big
> membership.
Though I admire your motivation to help people, I think you might be
misled
yourself. Some of these former Baha'is will make up, and embellish
stories
simply to cast the organization in a bad light. For instance, you have
a
story on your web site from Nima Hazini. Let's look at his statments
from
your web page, I've noted his remarks with his intials, and mine with
"PK"
http://iona.ghandchi.com/NimaHazini/mahmudi.htm
NH: To begin with, it is a well known (or, rather, well claimed)
principle
of the Baha'i faith that sectarian political involvement of any sort is
to
be shunned and is therefore categorically prohibited to Baha'is.
PK: Perhaps Mr. Hazini alludes to non-involvment in _partisan_ politics?
"There is no objection to the Baha'is associating with such
organisations
as the World Government Organisation. The instructions he gave to the
British Baha'is may be followed. However, great care should be taken to
make sure these organisations are absolutely non-partisan in their
political views and lean neither to East or West."
http://bahai-library.org/writings/shoghieffendi/dnd/2/sec-201.html
NH: While this principle has not always been meticulously adhered to
either
by officials or those connected to them (i.e. Sabet, Yazdani, Ayadi, et
al), ...
PK: What role did Yazdani and Ayadi have w/in the BF? A HoC, a
Counsellor,
ABM, Assistant to ABM, LSA member, rank and file? Did Ayadi have to be
a
member of the 'right party' to be Shah's doctor? These people did not
have
partisan problems, and AFAIK, w/in the BF, they had no special offices.
Sabet was on the NSA, but beyond showing hospitality to his king, what
was
his crime?
PK: The BF has not discouraged its members from holding significant
posts
w/in government, but with involvment in party politics which high office
often entails.
NH: ... nevertheless it is an issue which has been used repeatedly to
either sanction or strong-arm less well connected (and average) Baha'is
by
the Baha'i leadership into compliance with its dictates.
PK: Perhaps when the BF discourages partisan involvement, it really
does
discourage partisan involvement?
NH: Recently Ms Hoda Mahmudi, who formerly served in an official
administrative capacity as an Auxiliary Board Member for Protection (and
the person sent on the failed mission to interrogate Fredrick Glaysher
for
his views and then briefly Terry Culhane), has been a regular
commentator
on and contributor to the satellite opposition Iranian Television
broadcasting station NITV.
PK: No, Ms Hoda Mahmudi, the former Auxiliary Board Member, is _not_ on
NITV. Apparently Mr. Hazini has confused Dr. Homa Mahmoudi with Ms.
Hoda
Mahmudi. Dr. Susan Maneck tried to ask Baha'is about the involvment of
Ms.
Hoda Mahmudi, the former Auxiliary Board Member, about her involvement
with
the LA based network. She discovered that Ms. Hoda Mahmudi, the former
Auxiliary Board Member, was out of the country for some time, and would
remain outside for some time, such that it was impracticable that she
could
be on a weekly TV show.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=newscache%24lksv1h%243d%241%40elise.onthenet.com.au&output=gplain
NH: The station itself, its broadcasts or its specific slant or
political
views are not an issue for me, as I avidly watch it myself ...
PK: Apparently, Mr. Hazini does not really watch NITV avidly. Had he
watched NITV avidly, 1) he would have known already who is on what show,
as
described above, and 2) he wouldn't be waiting on a tape to find out, as
he
says he did in this message.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=newscache%241pzw1h%240t1%241%40elise.onthenet.com.au&output=gplain
NH: ... as well as include myself firmly within the camp of opposition
to
the illegitimate fascist totalitarian Islamist regime in Tehran which I
hope will be toppled in short order.
PK: I think this is an area where Mr. Hazini, and many many other
Iranians,
are in honest agreement, even Baha'u'llah, who, anticipating a _real_
republic, wrote, "Let nothing grieve thee, O Land of Ta, (Tihran) for
God
hath chosen thee to be the source of the joy of all mankind. He shall,
if
it be His Will, bless thy throne with one who will rule with justice,
who
will gather together the flock of God which the wolves have scattered.
... Erelong will the state of affairs within thee be changed, and the
reins of power fall into the hands of the people. . . . The day is
approaching when thy agitation will have been transmuted into peace and
quiet calm."
http://bahai-library.org/provisionals/aqdas/aqdas091-093.html
NH: However, I am not a Baha'i, but Hoda Mahmudi is!
PK: And a former ABM, and not a regular on NITV, but, perhaps her
sister,
Dr. Homa Mahmoudi is a rank and file Baha'i?
NH: The specific issue in question relates to --and one which in due
time I
will disclose the full details relating thereunto to SCI, TRB and other
Iranian groups and boards on the internet -- the double standards
regularly
employed by Baha'i officials to dupe a non-Baha'i public audience, on
the
one hand; and the authoritarian bullying of average individual Baha'is
internally who sincerely engage in association and fellowship with other
Iranians who are non-aligned, locally and on a smaller scale, in no
different terms than what Ms Mahmudi is doing herself in LA.
PK: So, if Dr. Homa Mahmoudi is on NITV, and has not been a Baha'i ABM,
which double standard would that be - someone who is a rank and file
Baha'i, and who happens to be on NITV, and caught your interest because
you
mistook her for someone else?
NH: Baha'i officials regularly admonish rank-and-file Baha'is to keep
far
and away from their compatriots, but then actively seek celebrity status
in
the name of the Baha'i faith to advance some dubious agenda of their own
with the larger Iranian community.
PK: So, what Baha'i office does Dr. Homa Mahmoudi hold, sister of former
ABM? That is not an office.
NH: That said, it has been claimed for two decades now by Baha'i
officials
that any overt acts of alignment or fellowship with various non-Baha'i
groups with stated political platforms will have adverse repercussions
for
the Baha'is of Iran.
PK: I think conventional wisdom w/in the Baha'i community has been to
show
some discretion. Baha'is have asked various national governments to
apply
pressure to the IRI in specific cases, and regarding the general
situation
of the Baha'is in Iran.
NH: To any unbiased observer, Hoda Mahmudi's activities in any capacity
on
the NITV network do just that -- it also gives the lie away and a useful
weapon to the IR itself to use against the Baha'is inside Iran --
PK: Dr. Homa's CV, indicates that she does a TV show, "She has a weekly
television program on psychological issues of immigrant families and is
a
regular guest on one of the Los Angeles radio talk shows." Please
explain
how a TV show addressing psychological issues of immigrant families,
would
be so dangerous, if done on NITV by someone who might be the sister of a
former Baha'i ABM?
http://www.knowledgedialogue.com/t_leaders/tl_display.cfm?tl_id=109
PK: NITV claims to be an independent TV station, rather than a
mouthpiece
of the Pahlavis.
http://www.nitv.tv/aboutus.html
NH: ... and as such it is highly irresponsible of the Baha'i leadership
at
this time to be foisting Ms Mahmudi on the INTV network and upon the
larger
Iranian community, given the potential fallout such activities will most
definitely have for their co-religionists back home.
PK: Mr. Hazini has asserted that the Baha'i leadership is pushing Dr.
Homa
(originally Hoda) Mahmoudi upon NITV, as if such a person would not be
of
interest to NITV such that they might seek her out. What potential
fallout
is there if someone on NITV is the sister of a Baha'i ABM, and might
offer
psychological advice for immigrants?
NH: Rank-and-file Baha'is have been sanctioned and thus humiliated by
the
Baha'i leadership for far less than what Ms Mahmudi is being led to do
right now representing the Baha'i leadership as she is on NITV.
PK: Mr. Hazini demands that the Baha'i leadership take steps against
this
TV show; and when they do, he complains about that as well!
------------------------------------------------------
In the same vein, you could look at Juan Cole's claim that last year the
US
Baha'i organization ordered American Baha'is not to recite certain
prayers
in public.
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&selm=9qt2to%241uh%241%40gnamma.connect.com.au
It was nonsense. When confronted, Juan Cole claimed he did not have to
see
any such letter, that the organization directed Baha'is to comply
through a
whisper campaign. Any logical question of how such a directive could be
implemented via innuendo is simply left up to the reader to imagine.
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl759727060d&hl=en&selm=619f1452.0202080010.658ac0de%40posting.google.com
Any claims these people make should be checked. When you accept them on
trust, you are their fool. I know; they fooled me, too.
Khoda Negahdar,
Pat
ko...@ameritel.net
La6red9nec
>From: mash_...@mailandnews.com (gyAth-Abadi)
>Date: 10/7/2002 6:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time
>Message-id: <cf321157.02100...@posting.google.com>
>
>"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
>news:<newscache$vgqh3h$cw22$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au>...
>> bah, bah! Jenaab-e aghaa-ye Mashghasem-e geraami. besiar khub kardind
>> dobaareh tashrif overdid beh in baaghevahsh-e SCI. Baba, kojaa'i rafti
>> Mashti jun? delemun shadidan tang shod. sharmandeh'im az huzur-e geraan
>> maayeh shomaa. khayli khub kardi bargashti aziz ;-)
>>
>> ghorbaanat
>
> ghorbAneh har chi adameh bA ma'refateh Nima'yeh aziz :) You are a credit
> to this mahfel
mashti kiram to loppet, nago mahfel in sag bahi filesh yAdeh hendestoon mikone
dobAreh :))))))
AHAHAHAHAHH
!O!!L!L!L!L!L