Hoda Mahmudi on NITV?
Freethought110
average rank-and-file Baha'is to an issue which I believe beautifully
underscores the blatant public hypocrisy and power mongering of Baha'i
officials and those who are connected to them, and why especially
non-aligned Iranians should be ever heedful of wools being pulled over their
eyes by the PR machine of the Baha'i administration. 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. 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), 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.
Recently Ms Hoda Mahmudi, who formerly served in an official administraive
capacity as an Auxilliary 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. The station itself, its broadcasts or its specific slant or
political views are not an issue for me, as I avidly watch it myself 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. However, I am not a Baha'i, but Hoda Mahmudi is! 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 Mahmoudi is doing herself in LA. 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.
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. 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 --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. 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.
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
Susan Maneck
Amidst all this verbage you haven't actually told us what she has said.
Susan Maneck
Associate Professor of History
Jackson State University
"And we were gathered in one place, a generation lost in space, with no time
left to start again . . "
Don McLean's American Pie
http://bahaistudies.net/susanmaneck/
Freethought110
Holaaku'i will be her guest.
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020829215757...@mb-ch.aol.com...
Mesbah
| 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.
"In view of the necessity of the Baha'i community to relate to governments, whether for reasons of defending its persecuted members or of responding to opportunities to be of service, a correct understanding of what is legitimate Baha'i action in the face of the policy of non-interference with government affairs is bound to be difficult to achieve on the part of individual friends. The force of circumstances, operating internally and externally, is pressing the Baha'i community into certain relationships with governments. Hence, it is important that decisions as to the conduct of such relationships be made by authorized institutions of the Faith and not by individuals. In matters of this kind, given the utter complexity of human affairs with which the Baha'i community must increasingly cope both spiritually and practically, individual judgement is not sufficient..." [Universal House of Justice]
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
"Mesbah" <mes...@address.com> wrote in message news:R9Bb9.4524$U24.7...@news2.telusplanet.net...
Mesbah
| well known (or, rather, well claimed) principle of the Baha'i faith that
| sectarian political involvement of any sort is to be shunned and is
| therefore categorically prohibited to Baha'is.
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
"Mesbah" <mes...@address.com> wrote in message news:zIBb9.4603$U24.7...@news2.telusplanet.net...
Susan Maneck
>She was talking about the Baha'i faith and on next week's program Dr Farhang
>Holaaku'i will be her guest.
Funny, I thought you were accusing *her* of taking a political stance. I can't
see how the political position of the network is relevant. All networks have
their own editorial policies, none of which are apolitical. Are we supposed to
shut down the media campaign for that reason?
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020830001452...@mb-ch.aol.com...
>Funny, I thought you were accusing *her* of taking a political stance.
Are you totally daft or do you just play dumb for PR purposes? Appearing on
an Iranian opposition satellitte network such as NITV (which is heavily
funded by monarchists in LA) and taking about the Baha'i faith *is* taking
an overt political stance!
> I can't
>see how the political position of the network is relevant.
You can't simply because you are made not to see by those whom you serve in
the Baha'i AO.
> Are we supposed to
>shut down the media campaign for that reason?
That's a different issue under different auspices, so don't intentionally
obfuscate and misdirect by mixing apples and oranges. But, if that is the
case, then why are Iranian Baha'is then sanctioned for appearing on similar
(but nonpolitical Iranian) TV programs simply for reading poetry?
Freethought110
Iran and the securing of freedom, independence and equality for all
Iranians. This is a sentiment shared by all of us Iranians, young and old
alike, but a sentiment that is overtly political as far as the Baha'is are
concerned and one which in the short term, at least, directly imperils the
lives of rank-and-file Baha'is inside Iran when their representatives are
overtly taking a political stance on a network such as this. The question is
why NITV when there are a host of local Iranian broadcasting stations in LA
and elsewhere with cultural programs which can just as easily cater for and
fitr into discussions of the Baha'i religion? The answer is obvious and need
not even be stated.
The station itself is funded ostensibly by one Zia Atabai a former
entertainer/singer-songwriter from the Pahlavi era. Zia's father was a
Baha'i and his mother a Muslim. Like myself he has no religious
affilliations to speak of, but is sympathetic to the plight of the Baha'is
in Iran -- as we all are.
However Zia is related to Farah Diba and openly supports Reza Pahlavi as the
future monarch of Iran. He has conducted many interviews with Farah and Reza
Pahlavi on NITV since its very inception. The station is marred by the lack
of financial resources and many volunteers assist Zia in keeping it going.
It broadcasts through the Telstar satellite network and is broadcast into
Iran itself 24/7 and many of those who can pick up through their satellittes
inside Iran call in to the show all the time. Most companies do not
advertise in NITV because they feel it might jeopordise their trade
relations with the Islamic Republic. So Zia draws on private donations and
subscriptions to keep the show going (a desperate, last minute fund raising
effort earlier this year raised close to a million US dollars). Therefore,
if you pay enough, you can have your own show on NITV on virtually anything
you like. I suspect this is what has happened and that Mahmudi's program
would therefore be bankrolled by the Baha'i administration. If this is the
case, the Baha'i leadership and the LA monarchists both are playing with
fire, and the Baha'i leadership is inserting itself into the political
process of Iran in a manner very much like the days of old when Habib Sabet,
Ayadi and Hojabr Yazdani where in the in with the previous regime. These
relations of high ranking Baha'is, more than any other factor, where what
was ultimately responsible for the wholesale persecution of the many
innocent, average rank-and-file Baha'is who stayed behind under the
Khomeinists. It would seem therefore, and arguably so, that the Baha'i
leadership really doesn't carea fig for the safety of its own people inside
Iran and has used them as a pawn for its own nefarious agendas for decades
now. How incredibly sad!
Bahai Faith
and other incidents may be found at the links below.
Some might want to compare Mahmoudi's tactics with those used against
Kalimat Press and Juan Cole. Below, Mahmoudi is clearly intervening in the
first interest poll voting for talk.religion.bahai the very day when the
RESULTS we're released, revealing over 600 bahais had voted NO to oppose the
formation of the newsgroup, an unprecedented number of NO votes for any poll
on Usenet. Since I was the primary advocate of its creation, Mahmoudi's
intentions below, to anyone familiar with how the bahai administration
regularly operates, was to coerce and silence me and stop the creation of an
unmoderated newsgroup forum uncontrolled by bahai fundamentalists.
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm
(See bottom of page)
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Mahmoudi.htm
See also David Langness on Hoda Mahmoudi.
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Langness.htm
--
Frederick Glaysher
The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/
"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
news:newscache$kcum1h$388$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Bahai Faith
bahai - Hoda Mahmoudi - Coercion of Conscience -
Notice first that Dave Fiorito's distortions during August of 2001
didn't work so enter Maneck in the fall of 2001.... To whose claims I ask,
if a letter or message had been sent by me to Hoda Mahmoudi, auxiliary
board member, why and how would Maneck know anything about it?
The Mahmoudi message was sent to me the very morning of the day
that the first voting period for talk.religion.bahai ended and the
RESULTS was posted, when over 600 fundamentalists followed
the advice of fanatic Mark Towfiq and others to oppose free speech
and open discussion.
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Towfiq.htm
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/1stRESULT.htm
If a letter was sent to Mahoudi, it addressed only that context.
It's a well known fact that Maneck is Gharidian's sycophant. If
she has been given a letter intended for the context of Hoda
Mahmoudi's interferring in the free and unfettered voting for
talk.religion.bahai, thereby violating the very Words of
Abdu'l-Baha extolling freedom of speech and conscience and
which led me to appeal to the uhj for an explanation of Mahmoudi's
deceitful interference, let her post a copy of it on talk.religion.bahai,
though it is tantamount to backbiting and further slander, in my
opinion, to distort a communication in one context to fit the evil
designs of a corrupted fundamentalist administration in another.
See Mahmoudi's deceitfully sugarcoated, intimidating letter at the
bottom of the link below. Note that Mahmoudi never asked to
meet with me but to telephone her. The other claims along these
lines are false, i.e., that if a letter or message was sent to Mahmoudi
it was posted to Usenet. Further note that the administration is definitely
interferring in free speech and conscience here on talk.religion.bahai
and other online venues through their various sycophants in
contradistinction to Abdu'l-Baha's elevating vision.
To the Universal House of Justice - March 31, 1997
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/To-UHJ1.htm
To the Universal House of Justice - July 24, 1998
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/UHJ72498.htm
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/uhj12-10-99.htm
I reiterate that I am under no obligation to believe the claims of
vulgar liars and slanderous pseudo-academicians distorting
past events and communications to fit a now different agenda.
http://groups.google.com/groups?selm=f0853486.0109141001.2fd2b8c%40posting.g
oogle.com&output=gplain
I notified the nsa of my declaration of belief in Baha'u'llah in
1976. They acknowledged my declaration by sending me back
the ID card available for viewing on my homepage and by
accepting monetary contributions from me for years, not to
mention many personal sacrifices. Further details of my participation
in the bahai faith, in sundry ways, may be found in my uhj letters
also accessible from my homepage. If the nsa has unilaterally
changed my status as a member of the bahai faith, the obligation
resides with them to notify me to that effect, which they have
never done....
I urge the non-bahai looking in on this exchange to investigate
and reflect carefully on the issues involved and on what they
reveal about the bahai faith in practice versus theory.... Consider
too that the real target of the fundamentalist attack on me may
actually be the bahai community at large, to strike fear and
obedience in their hearts in order to control them and to insure
their submission, lest they too become the object of such a ferocious,
incessant onslaught of slander and abuse....
Other relevant messages and details at
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/nsa1996.htm
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/images/Bahai-IDgif.gif
For those who think this smear campaign is something new, Google
archives my being hounding by the fundamentalists along these lines for
years:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Mahmoudi&hl=en&group=talk.religion.bahai&f
ilter=0
I place my trust in Baha'u'llah. And I am a Baha'i in *Perfectly* Good
Standing.
I repeat that if a letter was written to Mahmoudi and Maneck has a copy of
it, let her post it to talk.religion.bahai....
Maneck stated I had written and posted a message to Mahmoudi
on google. I've neither acknowledged nor denied that I wrote a
letter to her but rather that if one exists she's free to post it to
talk.religion.bahai. If such a letter ever existed, it never appeared
on my website.
Note: Maneck has again revealed the extent to which she works
behind the scenes with the fundamentalist elements of the
administration.
Her obvious game here is merely to discredit and smear me
with malicious charges based on distortions taken out of context.
I've answered her distortions sufficiently below. Her personal
insults reveal much about her and the tactics of her fellow
fundamentalists who have also betrayed Abdu'l-Baha's great
Words, "in the world of religion there should be the right of
unrestricted individual belief."
The link below demonstrates no such message from me to Mahmoudi
exists on Google:
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=Mahmoudi&hl=en&group=talk.religion.bahai&f
ilter=0
And it's not on my website. Since you're the one claiming it exists and was
posted on my website, it's up to you to prove it. If your bosses have given
you a copy, post it here on talk.religion.bahai.
Or are you a liar, who can only slander, smear, and discredit other bahais
who don't share your fundamentalist interpretations with bogus claims,
attempting to drive them out since you can't tolerate anyone who doesn't
mirror back to you your literal-minded views....
More insight on Hoda Mahmoudi by Paul Dodenhoff who resigned from
the bahai faith and his position as an Assistant to the Auxiliary Board :
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/srb95.htm
--
Frederick Glaysher
The Bahai Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/
See too David Langness, author of the suppressed "Modest Proposal,"
on Hoda Mahmoudi:
"I would advise you to be careful about any meetings, calls orcorrespondence
with Hoda Mahmoudi, who used to be an ABM here in Southern California. She
is quite conservative, and sees herself -- as do many of the appointed
branch, sadly -- as a staunch defender of the Faith and the faithful, able
and more than willing to marginalize people like you and I to discredit our
ideas. This cultlike practice of shunning and casting out any dissidents
has unfortunately become the chief tactic of those fundamentalist Baha'is
bent on maintaining the current leadership. My worry is that the more
progressive Baha'is like Juan Cole and Steve Scholl and yourself will all
leave the Faith and thereby increase the power of the conservatives."
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Langness.htm
"Bahai Faith" <BI*P*G...@liberty.com> wrote in message
news:aknmg5$1jv4co$1...@ID-75545.news.dfncis.de...
RefugeeDeveloper
Best way of dealing with dickheads is (a)Respond (b)Ignore, I guess........
Refugee (not a dickhead).
"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message news:<newscache$ud2n1h$5f8$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au>...
Susan Maneck
>an Iranian opposition satellitte network such as NITV (which is heavily
>funded by monarchists in LA) and taking about the Baha'i faith *is* taking
>an overt political stance!
Is there another Persian network TV they could appear on which is apolitical?
Susan Maneck
to give them free Television time.
Susan Maneck
>intentions below, to anyone familiar with how the bahai administration
>regularly operates, was to coerce and silence me and stop the creation of an
>unmoderated newsgroup forum uncontrolled by bahai
Oh, nonsense. Hoda likely wished to discuss your behavior not because you
wanted to start an unmoderated newsgroup but the fact you were using the tactic
of constantly denouncing the administration and slandering people in order to
do it.
Susan Maneck
>if a letter or message had been sent by me to Hoda Mahmoudi, auxiliary
>board member, why and how would Maneck know anything about it?
Because you yourself posted it, genious. That is how I found out. And the only
thing in that letter is a request to talk to you.
>If the nsa has unilaterally
>changed my status as a member of the bahai faith, the obligation
>resides with them to notify me to that effect, which they have
>never done....
Not when you tell members of the Institutions not to contact you.
>
>Maneck stated I had written and posted a message to Mahmoudi
>on google.
Said nothing of the sort, Freddy. Google didn't exist at the time. But you did
post something on the internet.
Randy Burns
LSA, and if she did, did she fully explain the nature of the TV network and
the fact that it broadcasts into Iran itself and not just southern
California? I think this is Nima's point.
Cheers, Randy
--
Susan Maneck <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020830154524...@mb-ba.aol.com...
Freethought110
keep in the Baha'i NG.
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020830145647...@mb-ba.aol.com...
>Is there another Persian network TV they could appear on which is
apolitical?
Yes. There's over a dozen of them in LA as well as the Bay Area including
several cable public access channels. They could start with Jaam-e Jam. Let
me ask you, so you can take this question back to your superiors so they may
"instruct" you on your response: if a Baha'i were to go on another
politically oriented television network belonging to, let's say, the Iranian
Communist Party or the National Front and did the same thing and especially
brought prominent Iranian Baha'i guests such as Dr Mishkin (as Mahmudi did
in her last show) and Dr Holaaku'i (which is going to happen in this week's
coming show), would the AO respond the same way? I think not. With Reza
Pahlavi's star shining among the current topsy-turvy fermement of the
Iranian political scene, it would seen that certain old moneyed Iranian
Baha'is are self-servingly and gratutiously rekindling connections from 23
years ago! And these are the same people who were once fond of quoting
Shoghi Effendi's prediction about the fate of his father, Mohammad Reza
Pahlavi: a sweeping indictment Rabbani had made in the mid 1950s about the
Shah and his fate after the CIA funded coup against Mohammad Mossadeq. But
this hasn't stopped people like Shapour Raasekh - who was Pahlavi's tutor in
the Sa'daabad Palace btw - and others from re-inserting themselves back into
relationship with the Pahlavi circle now that the mullahs are on the out and
out. The crude, self-serving political opportunism of you in the Baha'i
elite is truly staggering! But this time you have seriously been caught with
your pants down.
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020830154524...@mb-ba.aol.com...
>It sounds more like to me that Zia's sympathies towards the Faith motivated
him
>to give them free Television time.
First you were denying, now you out come with this BS. Zia Atabay can't
afford to give his own mother free air time, let alone the Baha'is. But let
us assume for the sake of argument that he did, and what, this is supposed
to somehow make it better?
Robin Peters
>keep in the Baha'i NG.
Susan and I are both AOL subscribers. AOHell newsreaders won't let us crosspost
- even if we wanted to.
Robin Peters
http://www.epinions.com/content_2821103748/stf_~1
"Record casualties - my wits, as in 'frightened out of.'"
Leonard McCoy, MD, ship's surgeon, USS Enterprise
http://www.epinions.com/user-kidnykid
http://www.epinions.com/content_2796003460
paul saunders-priem
> cc-ing to SCI so that others may also read the conversation Maneck wishes
to
> keep in the Baha'i NG.
>
>
> "Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20020830145647...@mb-ba.aol.com...
>
> >Is there another Persian network TV they could appear on which is
> apolitical?
>
> Yes. There's over a dozen of them in LA as well as the Bay Area including
I notice you steer well clear of talking about your religious beliefs
particularly its history:-)
Warmest regards,
Paul Saunders Priem
www.bahai.org
Freethought110
"paul saunders-priem" <saun...@priem.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:akp3nh$quc$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
>I notice you steer well clear of talking about your religious beliefs
>particularly its history:-)
Because I no longer have any religious beliefs ;-P
paul saunders-priem
>
>
> "paul saunders-priem" <saun...@priem.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:akp3nh$quc$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
> >I notice you steer well clear of talking about your religious beliefs
> >particularly its history:-)
>
> Because I no longer have any religious beliefs ;-P
So please tell everybody what you're beliefs are :-)
Dermod Ryder
Similar to mine no doubt - waxing the tails of loony tune BIGS fundies
and watching them go down in flames!
Freethought110
"paul saunders-priem" <saun...@priem.freeserve.co.uk> wrote in message
news:akp4ne$ro8$1...@news8.svr.pol.co.uk...
>So please tell everybody what you're beliefs are :-)
Gladly. See the quote below ;-P
Dermod Ryder
> >Since I was the primary advocate of its creation, Mahmoudi's
> >intentions below, to anyone familiar with how the bahai
administration
> >regularly operates, was to coerce and silence me and stop the
creation of an
> >unmoderated newsgroup forum uncontrolled by bahai
>
> Oh, nonsense. Hoda likely wished to discuss your behavior not
because you
> wanted to start an unmoderated newsgroup but the fact you were using
the tactic
> of constantly denouncing the administration and slandering people in
order to
> do it.
Not only can the Blessed Mediatrix not spell "genious", it also does
not know that it is not possible to "slander" anybody on a newsgroup.
Still that's par for the course and to be added to the "common law"
blooper, the assertion that "Anglican" is redundant and the allegation
that it has kill-filed the saintly Michael and the dreadful Reaper.
Fred, you really will have to revise that list of yours. There must
be quality out there that deserves to at the top of it! Sure Fred, I
know it's hard to find that quality among the loony tunes but it can't
be too difficult to find one better deserving of top place. Hint!
Think of players of musical instruments!
Freethought110
The eedjits in the AO are most probably funding the whole thing and the
enterprise has their blessing all the way. Moreover Baha'is of the elite
inner circles, such as Mahmudi, do not need to go through LSAs, RCs, NSA or
uhjs. They make the rules.
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Randy Burns" <randy....@gte.net> wrote in message
news:jcQb9.4691$VW5...@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
Susan Maneck
>
>The eedjits in the AO are most probably funding the whole thing and the
>enterprise has their blessing all the way.
What? The program or the station?
Susan Maneck
>us assume for the sake of argument that he did, and what, this is supposed
>to somehow make it better?
To make what better? Using his air time? I don't see the big deal.
Susan Maneck
>LSA,
Dear Randy,
As I recall there was some policy that came out some years ago permitting the
Persian Baha'is to do this on these stations.
> if she did, did she fully explain the nature of the TV network
She may not share Nima's perception of the aim of that station.
Susan Maneck
>Yes. There's over a dozen of them in LA as well as the Bay Area including
>several cable public access channels.
And all of those stations will accept Baha'i programing?
>Let
>me ask you, so you can take this question back to your superiors so they may
>"instruct" you on your response:
oooh, here comes the paranoia again.
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831001106...@mb-fc.aol.com...
Susan Maneck
>Susan and I are both AOL subscribers. AOHell newsreaders won't let us
>crosspost
>- even if we wanted to.
Actually, I didn't even know this was part of a thread on another list. AOL
doesn't tell us that.
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831001021...@mb-fc.aol.com...
>As I recall there was some policy that came out some years ago permitting
the
>Persian Baha'is to do this on these stations.
Post it! Because there is a stated policy that Iranian Baha'is are to do
just the opposite, not what you claim.
>She may not share Nima's perception of the aim of that station.
Her "perception" is irrelevant.
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831001207...@mb-fc.aol.com...
>To make what better? Using his air time? I don't see the big deal.
No, dopey. It is using air time on an explicitly political network such as
NITV which is *explicitly* pro-monarchist. Which part of "pro-monarchist"
eludes your understanding?
Ariamehr
Ariamehr
"Bahai Faith" <BI*P*G...@liberty.com> wrote in message
news:uXJb9.292686$m91.11...@bin5.nnrp.aus1.giganews.com...
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831002011...@mb-fc.aol.com...
>
>Yes. There's over a dozen of them in LA as well as the Bay Area including
>several cable public access channels.
>And all of those stations will accept Baha'i programing?
Have you people even tried? But let us assume they don't for the sake of
argument, is running to a politically explosive, openly pro-monarchist
network such as NITV at a particularly charged and sensitive political
climate in Iran's history supposed to somehow compensate for the lack of air
time granted by apolitical Iranian cultural television networks? This makes
it ok! LOL :)) Great (misdirecting) reasoning there, ""Dr" Maneck.
>oooh, here comes the paranoia again.
All your answers here are obviously scripted and rehearsed, and I am not the
only person who thinks so. Paranoia schmaranoia, until you prove otherwise
;-P
Susan Maneck
>Keep your BS out of SCI .
>
>Ariamehr
Ah, now I get it. So this is what Nima wants to do, use my post to spam another
newsgroup.
Susan Maneck
>Have you people even tried?
"You" people? News flash, Nima. I don't live in L.A. How would I know? Ask
Tony.
>
>All your answers here are obviously scripted and rehearsed,
Answers? Seemed to me I asked more questions. And scripting doesn't allow for
open-ended questions.
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831003908...@mb-fc.aol.com...
>
>Keep your BS out of SCI .
>
>Ariamehr
>Ah,
Another moment of Manic-ian confusion or just an exclamation of misplaced
relief, hmmmmm?
> now I get it. So this is what Nima wants to do, use my post to spam
another
>newsgroup.
No, dopey. I am posting very much on topic to SCI.
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
Susan Maneck
Susan Maneck
>>As I recall there was some policy that came out some years ago permitting
>the
>>Persian Baha'is to do this on these stations.
>
>Post it! Because there is a stated policy that Iranian Baha'is are to do
>just the opposite, not what you claim.
Sorry, I've never seen an e-copy of this, I just remember reading it. But if
you have a recent document which states quite the opposite, go ahead and put it
up.
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831004225...@mb-fc.aol.com...
>
>Have you people even tried?
>"You" people? News flash, Nima. I don't live in L.A. How would I know? Ask
>Tony.
Dearest dopey, why are you playing so dumb today. By *you people* I mean the
BIGS and AO loyalists as a generic plural.
>Answers? Seemed to me I asked more questions.
Your questions aren't REALLY questions but official lines masked as whatever
you're claiming them to be. You keep forgetting, I know you all too well ;-P
>And scripting doesn't allow for
>open-ended questions.
Sure it does. But that's not the point here, dopey, is it? You know EXACTLY
what I'm talking about but continue to play dumb and let me have fun with
you making you and the policies you are obviously put up to defend look
totally and transparently ridiculous to the fair minded observer. Please
keep `em coming on this thread. I am having a field day with this!
Susan Maneck
>inner circles, such as Mahmudi, do not need to go through LSAs, RCs, NSA or
>uhjs. They make the rules.
Au contraire. I gave an unfavorable review to a book written by Hoda's father
many years ago. It was not published for that reason, at least not by the
Publishing Trust.
Susan Maneck
>BIGS and AO loyalists as a generic plural.
Because you are greating essentialism that don't exist in real life.
>Your questions aren't REALLY questions but official lines masked as whatever
>you're claiming them to be. You keep forgetting, I know you all too well ;-P
You know nothing about me, Nima. You've never even met me. What you 'know' is
your own imagination.
Besides, given the volume of stuff I post, do you really think the AO could
keep up and feed me it this quickly? Or maybe I have this microphone inside my
head . . .
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831004959...@mb-fc.aol.com...
>Sorry, I've never seen an e-copy of this,
Just as I thought. How like your
>I just remember reading it.
Then find it, get off your doctorial butt, type it out and post it!
> But if
>you have a recent document which states quite the opposite, go ahead and
put it
>up.
Nope. I am talking about the well known directive from the uhj that Persian
Baha'is are to have nothing to do with Iranian cultural forums, let alone
political ones. I am talking about Persian Baha'is "discouraged" from
attending non-Baha'i Persian Naw-Ruz celebrations where such forums and
events are evident. I am talking about Mr Naisan Faizi, Bijan Samali of the
OZ NSA and the Australasian Counsellors -- Sirus Naraghi, Manijeh Rayhani
and David Chittleborough -- going through every Persian Baha'i community in
Australia in 1999 and telling the Persian Baha'is point blank not to
associate with Muslims or non-Baha'i Iranians, not to bring their Muslim and
non-Baha'i spouses and relatives to gatherings, in short to completely
separate and dissociate themselves from the larger non-Baha'i Persian
community. Why don't you go ask the individuals named about this 1999 talk
circuit.
Susan Maneck
>No, dopey. I am posting very much on topic to SCI.
Funny. I just heard the man say he didn't want to see our fights there.
Randy Burns
the project, one way for Hoda's "guests" to promote their campaigns to get
elected to something or other. Didn't there use to be a special Persian
teaching committee or something, perhaps they are involved, Hoda is probably
the head of that so only has to ask herself for permission to do this.
Classic case here, those who are on the inside can act without asking
permission but those on the outs can never get permission or get into
trouble for even asking!
Typical.
Randy
--
Freethought110 <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
news:newscache$stuo1h$ezb$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831010013...@mb-fc.aol.com...
>Because you are greating essentialism that don't exist in real life.
This is not an abstract philosophical exercise in nominalism vs
essentialism, dopey. Quit playing dumb. You know exactly what I'm talking
about.
>You know nothing about me, Nima. You've never even met me. What you 'know'
is
>your own imagination.
I have touched several nerves, I see. Seemingly Dr. Manic has been caught
with a big left-hook to the chinny-chin-chin and is staggerring on the
ropes. I know you better than you think, and what you have done in
cyberspace is there in the full light of day for all to see.
>Besides, given the volume of stuff I post, do you really think the AO could
>keep up and feed me it this quickly?
Yes.
>Or maybe I have this microphone inside my
>head . . .
Now there's a thought ;-P
Freethought110
Mahmudi's at the time.
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831005711...@mb-fc.aol.com...
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831010126...@mb-fc.aol.com...
Robin Peters
>keep up and feed me it this quickly? Or maybe I have this microphone inside
>my
>head . . .
>
Well, Susan, this is a point I can speak to based on my own observations.
What I noticed when I was active was that the Baha'is I knew started to sound
alike after a while - I got to the point where I actually had to tune them out,
and I was *active* at the time. They didn't *need* to check everything out with
the AO or have the AO keep up with their public utterances. Peer pressure, and
a simple knowledge of the consequences of sounding different from everyone
else, would be sufficient to keep them in line and sounding just like each
other.
You have to remember, as well, that in my community, there was also a lot of
pressure to check literally every public remark with Wilmette's PR department.
There was actually one fellow that got chastised for simply mentioning to a
local reporter that the Baha'i faith meant a great deal to him - a remark for
which Cardinal George would kiss my feet had I been referring to the
Archdiocese of Chicago. Even that kind of simple remark *had* to be cleared
with Wilmette, according to our LSA.
Robin Peters
http://www.epinions.com/content_2821103748/stf_~1
"Record casualties - my wits, as in 'frightened out of.'"
Leonard McCoy, MD, ship's surgeon, USS Enterprise
http://www.epinions.com/user-kidnykid
http://www.epinions.com/content_2796003460
Robin Peters
>doesn't tell us that.
Depends on whether or not you have your Preferences set to accept headers. I
put my headers on the bottom, and in those headers, the NGs to which a message
is posted will appear. AOHell software allows you to choose whether or not you
get Headers and if you want the headers at the top of the post or the bottom.
Email me backchannel - Snoop81485 - for instructions if you wish.
Robin Peters
>
Nima, he's usually pretty good about specifying whether or not he wants Fred
out of there. What you xposted doesn't specify who he's trying to stop from
xposting.
Freethought110
to shake that out of him yet, for the life of me. He was not referring to
yours truly. Trust me on that one. Also he was replying right above Fred's
header, or don't you see that on AOL?
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Robin Peters" <snoop...@aol.comspamness> wrote in message
news:20020831100013...@mb-mt.aol.com...
Randy Burns
How many people here knows what that means?
Was this his Persian dictionary book?
Cheers, Randy
--
Susan Maneck <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831005711...@mb-fc.aol.com...
Susan Maneck
>the project,
Dear Randy,
You live in the LA area, don't you? Did you hear of any such fund raising
yourself?
>one way for Hoda's "guests" to promote their campaigns to get
>elected to something or other.
Ah, so now we have another campaign election conspiracy.
>Didn't there use to be a special Persian
>teaching committee or something, perhaps they are involved
Yes, there was a Persian committee appointed to create these kinds of
broadcasts for Persian speaking networks. That is why I know they were given
permission to create such broadcasts, as I mentioned before.
>Hoda is probably
>the head of that so only has to ask herself for permission to do this.
Classic case here
Look at the language used to fabricate this conspiracy. On top of the
'possibly' we have a campaign to get elected to 'something or other.' Put a
'probably' on top of this and we now have a 'classic case.' A classic case of
paranoid delusions that is.
>
>Typical.
>
Quite. Of what Baha'u'llah referred to as 'idle fancies and vain imaginings.'
Susan Maneck
>Yeah, but you're not exactly in the top elite, and neither were probably the
>Mahmudi's at the time.
Gee, from the way you've been describing my supposed relationship with the
Institutions you'd certainly think I was! As for the position of the Mahmudis
at the time, Dr. Mahmudi was certainly part of the 'top elite' and had been for
as long as I was a Baha'i. He was an Auxiliary Board Member who relatives
served on the NSA of Iran. The fact that I, as a nobody, could nix his book
because of inaccuracies suggests that the system was working and they weren't
playing favorites. And that is precisely my point.
Susan Maneck
>Email me backchannel - Snoop81485 - for instructions if you wish.
>
Thanks, Robin, but I hate all that extra stuff at the beginning and end of
messages. And clearly, all this cross-posting to other groups is only creating
problems anyhow.
Susan Maneck
>Was this his Persian dictionary book?
No, it was a reprint of an ealier book written in verse on progressive
revelation which he had done for Naturegraph press; I forget the name of the
book. My recollection is that he had added a bunch of material and wanted it
reprinted by the Publishing Trust. Unfortunately, there were a lot of errors in
this new material involving primarily his treatment of Hinduism and
Christianity. Dr. Mahmoudi was getting up in years at the time, and IMO, this
manuscript reflected it.
Susan Maneck
Associate Professor of History
Jackson State University
"And we were gathered in one place, a generation lost in space, with no time
Susan Maneck
>Baha'is are to have nothing to do with Iranian cultural forums, let alone
>political ones.
Dated when?
> I am talking about Mr Naisan Faizi, Bijan Samali of the
>OZ NSA and the Australasian Counsellors -- Sirus Naraghi, Manijeh Rayhani
>and David Chittleborough -- going through every Persian Baha'i community in
>Australia in 1999 and telling the Persian Baha'is point blank not to
>associate with Muslims or non-Baha'i Iranians, not to bring their Muslim and
>non-Baha'i spouses and relatives to gatherings, in short to completely
>separate and dissociate themselves from the larger non-Baha'i Persian
>community. Why don't you go ask the individuals named about this 1999 talk
>circuit.
I can't answer for what is going on in Australia. But I can say this has not
been the policy here for years.
Susan Maneck
>The man in question for some reason has it in for Fred, not I.
I heard him asking us to keep our Baha'i **** off the newsgroup. I presume that
is what you are posting there.
Susan Maneck
>a simple knowledge of the consequences of sounding different from everyone
>else, would be sufficient to keep them in line and sounding just like each
>other.
Dear Robin,
In case you haven't noticed, I *do* sound different. Do you really think the
NSA wanted me here criticizing their policy of eliminating consultation at Unit
Convention?
> that in my community, there was also a lot of
>pressure to check literally every public remark with Wilmette's PR
>department.
A policy which never applied to cyberspace.
Randy Burns
Susan Maneck <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831122141...@mb-ba.aol.com...
>
> You live in the LA area, don't you? Did you hear of any such fund raising
> yourself?
Not recently, but you do hear of lot's of fund raising among expatriate
groups, including the Persians in LA. It would not be a surprise if someone
was helping the station on the side and this was a quid pro quo.
>
> Ah, so now we have another campaign election conspiracy.
You might want to acquaint yourself with the past activities of Dr. Holaakui
(sp?) if this is the same guy I remember. If it isn't then I apologize in
advance. I would guess that he might be planning to go back to Iran and
campaign for a seat on the NSA there. I doubt he would ever recent an
appointed post anywhere. Does he have a UHJ member in his pocket, anyone
know? I'm surprised that he is still a member in good standing.
> >Hoda is probably
> >the head of that so only has to ask herself for permission to do this.
> Classic case here
>
> Look at the language used to fabricate this conspiracy. On top of the
> 'possibly' we have a campaign to get elected to 'something or other.' Put
a
> 'probably' on top of this and we now have a 'classic case.' A classic case
of
> paranoid delusions that is.
Hoda is not the person I would be worried about.
Cheers, Randy
Susan Maneck
>was helping the station on the side
Dear Randy,
Here we go again. No evidence but "it would not surprise me."
>You might want to acquaint yourself with the past activities of Dr. Holaakui
>(sp?) if this is the same guy
Yes, he lost his voting rights and it wasn't for campaigning.
> I would guess that he might be planning to go back to Iran and
>campaign for a seat on the NSA there.
Once again, no evidence but "he might be planning." This is the way we prove
corruption in the AO.
> I doubt he would ever recent an
>appointed post anywhere.
And why would you doubt that? Do you suppose the Institutions might actually do
the right thing?
>Does he have a UHJ member in his pocket, anyone
>know?
If not, we can ask the question and raise suspicions about that anyway.
> I'm surprised that he is still a member in good standing.
Last I heard he wasn't, though since this was many years ago I suppose he
probably has them back by now.
>
>Hoda is not the person I would be worried about.
I'm not worried about Hoda. What bothers me is this deliberate campaign to cast
aspersions on the Faith on the basis of nothing more than pure speculation.
Occasionally one or two of your speculations might accidently even prove to be
right. But the overall picture you are attempting to paint on the basis of them
clearly has a malicious intent and constitutes backbiting at its worst.
Robin Peters
>header, or don't you see that on AOL?
AOHell doesn't pick up every post but automatically filters everything over a
certain size even after you tweak your preferences.
Pat Kohli
Robin Peters wrote:
> >Also he was replying right above Fred's
> >header, or don't you see that on AOL?
>
> AOHell doesn't pick up every post but automatically filters everything over a
> certain size even after you tweak your preferences.
I think Susan killfiled Fred, and did not see that Ariamehr was really replying
to Fred.
Fred saw Hoda's name in the header, so he top posted a regurgipost from his
stack, one on Hoda Mahmoudi, and then he followed up to that w/ more top posting
of regurgispam again condemning HM, and adding in condemnations of Susan Maneck.
Then Ariamehr posts in to Fred to buzz off w/ his regurgi-spam, again top
posted. So, when Susan sees the thread w/o Fred's spamming, it looks like
Ariamehr is telling Nima to buzz off.
BTAIM, the matter of who is on what Iranian TV station _is_ relevant to SCI, no
matter what Ariamehr, or anyone else says.
Teh bellyaching was just about Fred piling on some old spam.
Freethought110
>Dated when?
Circa 1980s.
> I am talking about Mr Naisan Faizi, Bijan Samali of the
>OZ NSA and the Australasian Counsellors -- Sirus Naraghi, Manijeh Rayhani
>and David Chittleborough -- going through every Persian Baha'i community in
>Australia in 1999 and telling the Persian Baha'is point blank not to
>associate with Muslims or non-Baha'i Iranians, not to bring their Muslim
and
>non-Baha'i spouses and relatives to gatherings, in short to completely
>separate and dissociate themselves from the larger non-Baha'i Persian
>community. Why don't you go ask the individuals named about this 1999 talk
>circuit.
>I can't answer for what is going on in Australia. But I can say this has
not
>been the policy here for years.
It's an on again off again policy of the AO as a whole. You guys have no
consistency in any case, so your policies, as we say in Persian, is good for
your aunt/be dard-e ammatun mikhoreh.
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831124409...@mb-ba.aol.com...
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831162105.05649.00000524@mb-
>I'm not worried about Hoda. What bothers me is this deliberate campaign to
cast
>aspersions on the Faith on the basis of nothing more than pure speculation.
Oh, blow it out your backside with that one. I and a dozen Iranians here
have taped the NITV programs with Mahmudi. Once again, NITV is an openly
pro-monarchist network. Mahmudi is a Baha'i. A supposed principle of the
Baha'i faith is political non-involvement. Local Baha'is here have been
recently sanctioned and threatened, their loyalty to the covenant
questioned, their family lives destroyed, because they were reading poetry
for a televised local Iranian cultural program. How many more times do you
need the dots connected for you, dopey? The 'Faith' you represent is merely
a cabal of power-hungry fascists within the offiocracy. You are protecting
their territory, not "the Faith" (whatever that is).
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831122635...@mb-ba.aol.com...
>Gee, from the way you've been describing my supposed relationship with the
>Institutions you'd certainly think I was!
One does not have to be in the inner circle to be an enforcer for that
elite. You are a foot soldier who takes orders and who merely *thinks* they
are independent, nothing more.
>As for the position of the Mahmudis
>at the time, Dr. Mahmudi was certainly part of the 'top elite' and had been
for
>as long as I was a Baha'i. He was an Auxiliary Board Member who relatives
>served on the NSA of Iran.
That doesn't make him top elite.
>The fact that I, as a nobody, could nix his book
>because of inaccuracies suggests that the system was working and they
weren't
>playing favorites. And that is precisely my point.
Your point is meaningless in the larger topsy-turvy, quixotic universe of AF
politics.
Freethought110
"a cabal of power-hungry fascists within the offiocracy."
Should be include:
a cabal of power-hungry fascists [with vested interests] within the
officiocracy.
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Freethought110" <Freetho...@bohemian.org> wrote in message
news:newscache$nmdq1h$rld$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Randy Burns
news:newscache$nmdq1h$rld$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
>
> have taped the NITV programs with Mahmudi. Once again, NITV is an openly
> pro-monarchist network. Mahmudi is a Baha'i. A supposed principle of the
> Baha'i faith is political non-involvement.
My own feeling on this is that Baha'i is rapidly approaching the status of
other fundamentalist religious groups that operate on a votes for hire basis
if there is a quid pro quo available. Both Jewish and Christian
fundamentalist groups have been operating on this basis for a number of
years. Eventually the expected payoff is in the form of preferment for
schools and institutional grants in lieu of cash.
Cheers, Randy
>
Randy Burns
> >You might want to acquaint yourself with the past activities of Dr.
Holaakui
> >(sp?) if this is the same guy
>
> Yes, he lost his voting rights and it wasn't for campaigning.
Does this mean his rights have been restored?
> Once again, no evidence but "he might be planning." This is the way we
prove
> corruption in the AO.
I am not using this to prove corruption in the AO, I feel this is
originating elsewhere. It is Nima that feels it is in the AO. I simply
think that some people might be back on the campaign trail again, that is
all. If Holaakui didn't lose his rights for campaigning then he got lucky,
maybe next time.
> And why would you doubt that? Do you suppose the Institutions might
actually do
> the right thing?
You never know.
> I'm not worried about Hoda. What bothers me is this deliberate campaign to
cast
> aspersions on the Faith on the basis of nothing more than pure
speculation.
> Occasionally one or two of your speculations might accidently even prove
to be
> right. But the overall picture you are attempting to paint on the basis of
them
> clearly has a malicious intent and constitutes backbiting at its worst.
The problem is that there is no where else to ask questions. Oh I suppose I
could raise them at Unit Convention but then they have canceled that sort of
thing, and even if they hadn't you would never ever actually expect an
answer.
Cheers, Randy
Freethought110
Dr Farhang Holaaku'i gots his rights back some several years ago and is
currently being actively rehabilitated by the powers that be. He is now a
prominent Iranian TV personality in LA with his own weekly syndicated talk
show in Persian, and has been since the mid 90s. You and I were probably
still in LA when this guy was active in the late 70s, early 80s right before
the NSA took his rights. You might to talk to some old timers in LA about
him. He is without a doubt one of the most corrupt, sleazy individuals to
ever grace the Baha'i faith. He embezzled quite a lot of LA Iranian Baha'is'
money in the 80s for a failed ESL venture which the Afsharians later took
over .
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Randy Burns" <randy....@gte.net> wrote in message
news:AZcc9.2092$lG5...@nwrddc03.gnilink.net...
Susan Maneck
>recently sanctioned and threatened, their loyalty to the covenant
>questioned, their family lives destroyed, because they were reading poetry
>for a televised local Iranian cultural program.
Nima,
I can hardly answer for what is being done in Australia nor do I have any idea
about what the Baha'is in question were reading on that television show, and
what objections may have been raised to it or why. But I do know what Persian
Baha'is in the US have been told for the last several years; that they may
proclaim the Faith on these Iranian stations. If you need documentation I will
contact one of the Counselors and ask for it.
Susan Maneck
>"a cabal of power-hungry fascists within the offiocracy."
>
>Should be include:
>
>a cabal of power-hungry fascists [with vested interests] within the
>officiocracy.
Yes, get your rhetoric straight, Nima.
Susan Maneck
we might be getting some kind of 'payoff in the form of preferment for schools
and institutional grants in lieu of cash."
make such charges? Or is casting aspersions just something you do because you
feel like it?
Freethought110
>Yes, get your rhetoric straight, Nima.
Rhetoric schmetoric. Axiomatically it is a self-evident fact ;-P
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831214031...@mb-fo.aol.com...
>I can hardly answer for what is being done in Australia nor do I have any
idea
>about what the Baha'is in question were reading on that television show,
Rumi and Hafiz.
>and
>what objections may have been raised to it or why. But I do know what
Persian
>Baha'is in the US have been told for the last several years; that they may
>proclaim the Faith on these Iranian stations. If you need documentation I
will
>contact one of the Counselors and ask for it.
Please do so and post it here.
Susan Maneck
>Does this mean his rights have been restored?
Dear Randy,
I don't know. But normally a person's administrative rights are restored once
they demonstrate remorse for what they have done and taken the necessary
actions to rectify the situation. Since he lost his rights a number of years
ago he has had plenty of time to clean the situation up if he is sincere in his
faith.
>I am not using this to prove corruption in the AO, I feel this is
>originating elsewhere.
Then I apologize. But you still need evidence to make these kinds of
accusations. Otherwise it is backbiting.
I've heard that sometimes there are problems with campaigning in Southern
California which is perhaps where some of this is coming from. I know for
instance, of cases where some mutual acquaintances did discuss strategies as
how to get elected to an LSA there and later it happened exactly that way. I
would prefer not to mention their names however, as they are already enough
trouble with the Institutions as it is. One has had his voting rights removed
while the other has been warned regarding his relationship to the Covenant. Do
I need to say more?
>
>The problem is that there is no where else to ask questions.
You don't have Auxiliary Board Members in Southern California? Questions are
one thing. Baseless speculations are quite another. Open ended questions are
more likely to get you answers.
Susan Maneck
>money in the 80s for a failed ESL venture which the Afsharians later took
>over .
Did he do any better at it?
Susan Maneck
>
>Circa 1980s.
There have been other directives issued since which indicated the opposite.
>It's an on again off again policy of the AO as a whole. You guys have no
>consistency in any case,
Or maybe different NSAs have formulated different policies. Hitch hiking is
contrary to Baha'i law in Canada. I don't know any other NSA that ever said so.
Susan Maneck
>are independent, nothing more.
>
I 'take orders' and 'think' I'm independent, huh? You mean I don't know when
I'm getting orders? How would I carry them out then?
>
>Your point is meaningless in the larger topsy-turvy, quixotic universe of AF
>politics.
Meaningless in the topsy-turvy imaginary world you are living in.
Susan Maneck
>I think Susan killfiled Fred, and did not see that Ariamehr was really
>replying
>to Fred.
Actually, I haven't killfiled Fred, I just don't read his posts. They are so
easy to spot without opening them there is no reason to killfile them. And it's
not like he ever actually tries to participate in threads.
But I knew Ariamehr was responding to one of Fred's post, anyhow. Still what he
said was he doesn't want Baha'i stuff being crossposted there and his wishes
should be respected by everyone, not just Freddy.
Randy Burns
Cheers, Randy
--
Susan Maneck <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831214440...@mb-fo.aol.com...
Randy Burns
eighties.
Randy
--
Susan Maneck <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831220106...@mb-fo.aol.com...
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831221843...@mb-fo.aol.com...
>You are a foot soldier who takes orders and who merely *thinks* they
>are independent, nothing more.
>
>I 'take orders' and 'think' I'm independent, huh? You mean I don't know
when
>I'm getting orders? How would I carry them out then?
Manic playing dumb again. You brag all the time about your high connections
to the AO and how you have their ear. The fact of the matter is, however,
that you're a nobody who merely takes orders but thinks they are somebody.
>Meaningless in the topsy-turvy imaginary world you are living in.
Nope. Only meaningless in the cult-laden world you inhabit.
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831220247...@mb-fo.aol.com...
>He embezzled quite a lot of LA Iranian Baha'is'
>money in the 80s for a failed ESL venture which the Afsharians later took
>over .
>Did he do any better at it?
At the business, no. But that's because he let others take over the
operation of the school. And I kknow this because I worked there.
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Randy Burns" <randy....@gte.net> wrote in message
news:r7gc9.8794$XU....@nwrddc01.gnilink.net...
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831221615...@mb-fo.aol.com...
.
>There have been other directives issued since which indicated the opposite.
Well, then, post them here because the OZ AO seems to be under the "perhaps
mistaken" impression that there aren't any new directives and thus are
taking punitive actions upon innocent individuals.
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20020831222316...@mb-fo.aol.com...
Freethought110
it for several months back in 96-97 and I couldn't stand it again when I got
back on briefly in 99. There's nothing like having a REAL IP where things
actually make sense.
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Robin Peters" <snoop...@aol.comspamness> wrote in message
news:20020831165524...@mb-cd.aol.com...
>Also he was replying right above Fred's
>header, or don't you see that on AOL?
AOHell doesn't pick up every post but automatically filters everything over
a
certain size even after you tweak your preferences.
Robin Peters
http://www.epinions.com/content_2821103748/stf_~1
"Record casualties - my wits, as in 'frightened out of.'"
Leonard McCoy, MD, ship's surgeon, USS Enterprise
http://www.epinions.com/user-kidnykid
http://www.epinions.com/content_2796003460
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
All religions are sick men's dreams, false -- demonstrably false -- and
pernicious .
- Ibn Warraq
"Robin Peters" <snoop...@aol.comspamness> wrote in message
news:20020831095628...@mb-mt.aol.com...
>Besides, given the volume of stuff I post, do you really think the AO could
>keep up and feed me it this quickly? Or maybe I have this microphone
inside
>my
>head . . .
>
Well, Susan, this is a point I can speak to based on my own observations.
What I noticed when I was active was that the Baha'is I knew started to
sound
alike after a while - I got to the point where I actually had to tune them
out,
and I was *active* at the time. They didn't *need* to check everything out
with
the AO or have the AO keep up with their public utterances. Peer pressure,
and
a simple knowledge of the consequences of sounding different from everyone
else, would be sufficient to keep them in line and sounding just like each
other.
You have to remember, as well, that in my community, there was also a lot of
pressure to check literally every public remark with Wilmette's PR
department.
There was actually one fellow that got chastised for simply mentioning to a
local reporter that the Baha'i faith meant a great deal to him - a remark
for
which Cardinal George would kiss my feet had I been referring to the
Archdiocese of Chicago. Even that kind of simple remark *had* to be cleared
with Wilmette, according to our LSA.
John R MacLeod
what he
> said was he doesn't want Baha'i stuff being crossposted there and his
wishes
> should be respected by everyone,
Why? Does he own the newsgroup or is he a moderator or what?
paul saunders-priem
Robin Peters <snoop...@aol.comspamness> wrote in message
news:20020831095628...@mb-mt.aol.com...
> >Besides, given the volume of stuff I post, do you really think the AO
could
> >keep up and feed me it this quickly? Or maybe I have this microphone
inside
> >my
> >head . . .
> >
>
> Well, Susan, this is a point I can speak to based on my own observations.
>
> What I noticed when I was active was that the Baha'is I knew started to
sound
> alike after a while
Nonsense Bahai's do not sound like each other. I can honestly say that one
problem the Bahai Faith has in the UK is there are many ideas about how to
implement the plans of the Universal House of Justice . Bahai's have to many
ideas sometimes :-)
> You have to remember, as well, that in my community, there was also a lot
of
> pressure to check literally every public remark with Wilmette's PR
department.
Public statements about the Bahai Faith have to be checked . It is
interesting that in the UK New Labour has caught up with the Bahai Faith
and now does "news management " . This is a good thing to do, even so the
democratically elected Bahai Administration does not spin events . What it
does do is concentrate on positive news which I think is not always a good
thing to do but who am I to tell the democratically elected Bahai
Administration how they should conduct their affairs . I think the good news
reporting only to the Bahai's is not good by the way I am quite happy with
the public profile the democratically elected Bahai Administration exhibits
because I know it to be more or less true in terms of reflecting how the
Bahai community actually is .
> There was actually one fellow that got chastised for simply mentioning to
a
> local reporter that the Baha'i faith meant a great deal to him - a remark
for
> which Cardinal George would kiss my feet had I been referring to the
> Archdiocese of Chicago. Even that kind of simple remark *had* to be
cleared
> with Wilmette, according to our LSA.
I think the Local Spiritual Assembly got that wrong :-) Local Spiritual
Assembly's are not infallible only the Universal House of Justice is :-)
Warmest regards,
Paul Saunders Priem
www.bahai.org
paul saunders-priem
> Corrigenda:
>
> "a cabal of power-hungry fascists within the offiocracy."
You are in a fantasy land
Susan Maneck
>will
>>contact one of the Counselors and ask for it.
>
>Please do so and post it here.
I've put in a request. I'll let you know when I hear from him.
Susan Maneck
>Why? Does he own the newsgroup or is he a moderator or what?
Dear John,
I don't see why anybody would want other people's fights on their newsgroup. I
sure don't like it.
Susan Maneck
>You guys need to get yourselves new IPs.
I have other IPs. In fact I get to AOL via Roadrunner. I simply find AOL the
easiest way to access newsgroups. I found doing it directly from the web to be
a drag.