AF Spies All Over the Internet
Freethought110
begin hanging on every word and monitoring everything written or stated by
percieved ideological enemies publically. It is also highly indicative of a
totalitarian mindset of fear, not to mention duplicity. It stands to reason
that a group which has nothing to hide and does not operate out of the fear
paradigm, operates more transparently, and therefore does not snoop in every
crevice and hide behind every tree in wait for the "enemy". Since there is
no freedom of information in the Administrative Faith, inc, people should be
made aware that a good portion of the activities of the AF involve
collecting postings and statements of people and to surf the net for where
and what such people are doing and saying anywhere at any time. Susan Manic
in her usual buffoonery has several times disclosed here how wherever yours
truly has posted there lies a Baha'i in waiting ready to send the relevant
post along to her for safekeeping or to the AO. Obviously the same cabal who
train sleazy groups like Campus Watch also train the AF and its hacks.
My contacts have lately been sharing with me the contents of materials they
have obtained from the various dossiers kept by the AO about yours truly,
not to mention the correspondences between the AF and various of its
internet hacks. It is amazing where the AF have lurked and copied messages,
even including boxing NGs and bulletin boards I frequent related strictly to
the sweet science of pugillism, which I have never made a secret of being an
avid fan. One thing is for certain, however, this NITV affair and my posts
are being monitored very closely by the very top and explains the reason for
Dr Manic's recent silence and lack of response. No need to mention that
these messages are greatly impacting the public discourse within the Baha'i
community itself and that many are beginning to ask some very hard questions
of the fascists. Good! It is about time. A recent comparison was made to my
postings on the internet and the tapes of the Ayatollah Khomeini distributed
in Iran which helped topple the Shah. Is this how brittle the hold on power
of the AO really is? Did you people really think your dirty secrets would
remain hidden in the closet forever and you would not be called on the floor
some day -- and I haven't even dislosed anything yet?
Reform and change. There is still time. For your own sakes. Heed
Baha'u'llah's exhortations in the Hidden Words.
Big Brother is watching :) LOL
--
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)
Pat Kohli
Freethought110 wrote:
> A sign of desperation by a group who has something to hide is when they
> begin hanging on every word and monitoring everything written or stated by
> percieved ideological enemies publically.
Nah, in the NITV matter, I was just disgusted the way you spun your story
around, and then pretended taht your changes were really no more than a typo.
In the space of hours you seem to shift back and forth between exposing a former
ABM who now had a show on a station your family watched avidly, to having tapes
of a pedestrian Baha'i shipped to you so that you could monitor what she was
saying on NITV. It is pretty clear that you were spying on someone you didn't
even know. Now it is _no_surprise_ taht you want to condemn spying on
principle.
> It is also highly indicative of a
> totalitarian mindset of fear, not to mention duplicity.
Yeah, let's not forget 'hypocrisy', in your case. When people don't keep track
of the different stories you've told about the same thing, they might mistakenly
presume that your conclusions are valid.
> It stands to reason
> that a group which has nothing to hide and does not operate out of the fear
> paradigm, operates more transparently, and therefore does not snoop in every
> crevice and hide behind every tree in wait for the "enemy".
Yeah, I still laugh when I think about the 'pusallanimity (sic)' thread, and
your 'let the denials begin'. None if it could have been possible if you did
not put total trust on your confidential sources. You and your pals lie in wait
for _any_ excuse to attack the AO, and on a slow day, voila, this bit of
hypocrisy - spies on the internet - but it doesn't take a rocket scientist to
realize that you've got yours, and they are lousy, too.
> Since there is
> no freedom of information in the Administrative Faith, inc, people should be
> made aware that a good portion of the activities of the AF involve
> collecting postings and statements of people and to surf the net for where
> and what such people are doing and saying anywhere at any time.
There is no freedom of information in the Kritikal Deen; you told us that George
Fleming was the original source of the Invisible Directive, and now that I've
virtually seen him, I know that would be bizarre for him to get a US NSA
directive before its public release.
> Susan Manic
> in her usual buffoonery has several times disclosed here how wherever yours
> truly has posted there lies a Baha'i in waiting ready to send the relevant
> post along to her for safekeeping or to the AO.
"Their lies", Nima, not "there lies"
> Obviously the same cabal who
> train sleazy groups like Campus Watch also train the AF and its hacks.
>
> My contacts have lately been sharing with me the contents of materials they
Your spies, Nima, s-p-i-e-s, have been sharing...
>
> have obtained from the various dossiers kept by the AO about yours truly,
> not to mention the correspondences between the AF and various of its
Yeah, you are watching. Somebody gets an account at Beleifnet and goes bonkers,
and presto, you post it on usenet. We already know you are watching. Tell me
something I don't already know.
Best wishes!
- Pat
ko...@ameritel.net
Freethought110
forever. Idiot!
--
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)
"Pat Kohli" <kohliCUT...@ameritel.net> wrote in message
news:3DA62F9F...@ameritel.net...
Freethought110
it, as we say in Persian, beh 'folaanam'.
--
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$hpps3h$8o5$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au...
Dermod Ryder
It's known as escalation and it's a natural process in any conflict.
The AO started its monitoring activities way back when, detected a
"campaign" of internal opposition and moved to counter it.
Unfortunately, for it, the initial strikes failed to gain the desired
objectives so it moved on to further action culminating in the
expulsion of Alison Marshall with Fred's removal being a mopping up
part of the overal campaign. Since then the AO has been quiet. Its
campaign has failed and its arsenal of weaponry exhausted. All that
is left to it is the ultimate deterrent of CB hood and that is a damp
squib as far as most of its opponents are concerned. Even the
Grumpies, not otherwise noted for any discernible brain power, realise
that mass declarations of CBs all round would be even more counter
productive than anything tried to date.
The campaign that the Grumpies mounted and co-ordinated has left
another and potentially more lethal legacy. Those originally cleared
out were soft liberals who had a vestige of respect for the AO - what
some would call wimps, in that they lacked the killer instinct. They
exercised restraint in the face of provocation as their worlds were
torn apart. Now they have either faded from the fight or have been
excluded and their place taken by a more radical, militant element
that detests the current AO with a passion.
The AO actively monitored Internet activity and if it did not insert
spies in certain areas it was nonetheless appreciative of information
volunteered by sympathisers. Little emerged that was of any practical
use so resort was made to quite deliberate misinterpretation blatantly
posted to the Internet. This was a crass error as the original but
misinterpreted posts were simply forwarded to show what a bunch of
prats were so ineffectively trying to misrepresent.
You will not find any directives from liberal/dissidents requiring
persons to monitor the activities of others. The "opposition" arose
spontaineously - it was not at first organised. Nima and I both have
been given information from AO insiders pissed to the teeth with the
way it is run and the direction it is heading because they knew we
would use it to best effect. This is the inevitable reaction to what
the AO initially did - its weapons have been turned on it and are used
by people who are infinitely better at the fight than the AO. What's
more important is that the opposition is now organised. And what is
more important still is that the fight is now going to spill over from
the Internet into every Bahai community throughout the world. But
what is of crucial importance is that the AO hasn't a clue as to who
is in the organised opposition!
What I'm saying here is not new - it has been said before but still it
doesn't seem to have penetrated the "thickos" in the AO that their
days are numbered. They still have a choice - to do things the real
Bahai way (earning some kudos at last) or await their fate at the
hands of an enraged mob.
> Nah, in the NITV matter, I was just disgusted the way you spun your
story
> around, and then pretended taht your changes were really no more
than a typo.
> In the space of hours you seem to shift back and forth between
exposing a former
> ABM who now had a show on a station your family watched avidly, to
having tapes
> of a pedestrian Baha'i shipped to you so that you could monitor what
she was
> saying on NITV. It is pretty clear that you were spying on someone
you didn't
> even know. Now it is _no_surprise_ taht you want to condemn spying
on
> principle.
You cannot spy on something like a TV programme that is in the public
domain. The mistake as to the name of the presenter was part of a
cunning plan by Daddy Mahmoudi who quite clearly saw this situation
arise in the future so he named daughters as HOMA and HODA, knowing he
could readily interchange them so as to encourage A Onions and nonplus
their enemies. Answer the real point - WTF is a "non-political "
faith doing broadcasting on an overtly political TV channel into Iran
and presumably paying for the time thus supporting the channel and its
agenda?
> Yeah, I still laugh when I think about the 'pusallanimity (sic)'
thread, and
> your 'let the denials begin'. None if it could have been possible
if you did
> not put total trust on your confidential sources. You and your pals
lie in wait
> for _any_ excuse to attack the AO, and on a slow day, voila, this
bit of
> hypocrisy - spies on the internet - but it doesn't take a rocket
scientist to
> realize that you've got yours, and they are lousy, too.
Nobody has to wait for any excuse to attack the AO. It provides
plenty of good reason by its own ineptitude. And there's nothing
false in this NITV business. Just look to the lack of reaction from
the DST who, on her own admission, has a direct line to a Counsellor
who in turn has direct access to the NSA which responds to him a lot
faster than it did to Deborah Buchorn. The trouble is that nobody
thought the NITV business through and worked out a plausible
explanation and an exit strategy. The right hand knoweth not what the
right hand is doing.
> There is no freedom of information in the Kritikal Deen; you told us
that George
> Fleming was the original source of the Invisible Directive, and now
that I've
> virtually seen him, I know that would be bizarre for him to get a US
NSA
> directive before its public release.
Why? I was the first to divulge just how long Deborah Buchorn was
awaiting an answer to her letter and, I can assure you, that
information did not come from her but from a completely different
direction. Our late, though barely lamented, poster from Seattle was
quite indignant at the whole affair and tried to tell me that I was
saying things that were not, until the information was deliciously
corroborated, whereupon he spluttered and expired shortly thereafter
if memory serves me correctly.
> > Susan Manic
> > in her usual buffoonery has several times disclosed here how
wherever yours
> > truly has posted there lies a Baha'i in waiting ready to send the
relevant
> > post along to her for safekeeping or to the AO.
>
> "Their lies", Nima, not "there lies"
Nope! It's "there lies" not "their lies"! And the DST has posted
several of my posts and promised more which just never quite seem to
see the light of day. I wonder why! Perhaps because they do not
corroborate her version of them?
> > Obviously the same cabal who
> > train sleazy groups like Campus Watch also train the AF and its
hacks.
> >
> > My contacts have lately been sharing with me the contents of
materials they
>
> Your spies, Nima, s-p-i-e-s, have been sharing...
Not "spies"! They are "sources" or "informants". They are
volunteers, not spies acting under orders from on high to penetrate
secure places and report back on what they find. They are highly
motivated and not for venal prospect of promotion and preferment - not
for them the prospect of small titles and orders; they are
ideologically motivated.
> > have obtained from the various dossiers kept by the AO about yours
truly,
> > not to mention the correspondences between the AF and various of
its
>
> Yeah, you are watching. Somebody gets an account at Beleifnet and
goes bonkers,
> and presto, you post it on usenet. We already know you are
watching. Tell me
> something I don't already know.
You cannot spy on Beliefnet. It's a public place! And let's face
facts. There's more than one BIGS at that place who is utterly
bonkers! And we've had a few here and not in the dim distant past
either, to the immense amusement of at least some of us! But there,
in a nutshell, you have the logical results of AO behaviour -
irrational prejudice and bigotry which sees no immorality in defending
the "faith" by any and all nefarious means. The AO created these
"wallies". Whilst they amuse me I think they sadden and embarrass you
greatly.
Someday I'll tell you why the official A Onion supporters in
Cyberspace and elsewhere are so poor at the job!
Felicitations and Friendliness,
Dermod.
Pat Kohli
Dermod Ryder wrote:
> "Pat Kohli" <kohliCUT...@ameritel.net> wrote in message
> news:3DA62F9F...@ameritel.net...
> Hi Pat,
>
> It's known as escalation and it's a natural process in any conflict.
> The AO started its monitoring activities way back when, detected a
> "campaign" of internal opposition and moved to counter it.
Before or after the Majnun post? As I see it, the conspiracy was in place
before the AO started gathering information about it, and the AO was the
target. In the root message on this thread, someone points the finger at
the AO, and vehemently denounces "information gathering". Then they start
another thread with the fruits of their "information gathering".
>
> Unfortunately, for it, the initial strikes failed to gain the desired
> objectives so it moved on to further action culminating in the
> expulsion of Alison Marshall with Fred's removal being a mopping up
> part of the overal campaign.
As far the information gathering goes, likely someone at the USBNC will be
getting their wrist smacked. There is no mopping up in sight. Juan or
Nima will make up nonsense about the AO, and only a nincompoop wouldn't
even try to keep notes on it. I suspect that Nima simply resents having
the pattern of his inconsistencies pointed out, thus he cries that folks
have paid his earlier claims, any heed at all.
> Since then the AO has been quiet. Its
> campaign has failed and its arsenal of weaponry exhausted. All that
> is left to it is the ultimate deterrent of CB hood and that is a damp
> squib as far as most of its opponents are concerned. Even the
> Grumpies, not otherwise noted for any discernible brain power, realise
> that mass declarations of CBs all round would be even more counter
> productive than anything tried to date.
>
I think we agree that is unlikely to happen.
>
> The campaign that the Grumpies mounted and co-ordinated has left
> another and potentially more lethal legacy. Those originally cleared
> out were soft liberals who had a vestige of respect for the AO - what
> some would call wimps, in that they lacked the killer instinct.
Fred had a respect for the AO? Thou jokest!
> They
> exercised restraint in the face of provocation as their worlds were
> torn apart. Now they have either faded from the fight or have been
> excluded and their place taken by a more radical, militant element
> that detests the current AO with a passion.
>
No, the more militant element is outside the enrolled community. That
they can exploit an old friend at the USBNC, who never comes to TRB, does
not imply that their old pal at the USBNC is more radical or militant. He
is someone who means well, and whose trust is simply being betrayed, much
as they did with Tony Lee, or George Fleming (in May).
>
> The AO actively monitored Internet activity and if it did not insert
> spies in certain areas it was nonetheless appreciative of information
> volunteered by sympathisers.
The AO gets information from volunteers. If they'd had staffers
monitoring actively, this thing with He Whose Name Shall Not Be Uttered
would not have continued to September. Had the AO had active monitoring,
Susan would not be getting emails from the AO answering questions
regarding the NITV controversy and the correct identification of the show
host.
> Little emerged that was of any practical
> use so resort was made to quite deliberate misinterpretation blatantly
> posted to the Internet.
Juan's and Nima's?
> This was a crass error as the original but
> misinterpreted posts were simply forwarded to show what a bunch of
> prats were so ineffectively trying to misrepresent.
>
I am surprised that you would publically refer to Juan and Nima as a bunch
of prats; most likely, I've misunderstood just which crass errors you
were referring to.
>
> You will not find any directives from liberal/dissidents requiring
> persons to monitor the activities of others.
I see it gets done anyway. When Susan tries to contact the AO on NITV, as
one would suspect Nima wanted all good Baha'is to do, she finds out that
Nima went off half-cocked, again. Nima and Juan can not be relied on for
accurate information, so, when it comes to their statements on the AO, of
course the AO gets contacted! The critics have someone at the USBNC
monitoring our activities on TRB, and you seem content with that.
> The "opposition" arose
> spontaineously - it was not at first organised.
Majnun.
> Nima and I both have
> been given information from AO insiders pissed to the teeth with the
> way it is run and the direction it is heading because they knew we
> would use it to best effect.
We'll see.
> This is the inevitable reaction to what
> the AO initially did - its weapons have been turned on it and are used
> by people who are infinitely better at the fight than the AO. What's
> more important is that the opposition is now organised. And what is
> more important still is that the fight is now going to spill over from
> the Internet into every Bahai community throughout the world. But
> what is of crucial importance is that the AO hasn't a clue as to who
> is in the organised opposition!
>
I guess the volunteers had not seen fit to inform the AO? Really though,
there is no point in identifying those who seem sympathetic. The
discussion is about ideas. Critics regularly present stories which cast
the AO in a bad light, and often the facts of the story are wrong.
"Question Authority" is an excellent motto, one which need not be
discarded after the old boss is gone. Have you forgotten, "We won't be
fooled again"?
>
> What I'm saying here is not new - it has been said before but still it
> doesn't seem to have penetrated the "thickos" in the AO that their
> days are numbered.
Inshallah!
> They still have a choice - to do things the real
> Bahai way (earning some kudos at last) or await their fate at the
> hands of an enraged mob.
>
> > Nah, in the NITV matter, I was just disgusted the way you spun your
> story
> > around, and then pretended taht your changes were really no more
> than a typo.
> > In the space of hours you seem to shift back and forth between
> exposing a former
> > ABM who now had a show on a station your family watched avidly, to
> having tapes
> > of a pedestrian Baha'i shipped to you so that you could monitor what
> she was
> > saying on NITV. It is pretty clear that you were spying on someone
> you didn't
> > even know. Now it is _no_surprise_ taht you want to condemn spying
> on
> > principle.
>
> You cannot spy on something like a TV programme that is in the public
> domain.
True, but when one has someone else make a tape, and forward it, it is not
casual activity, but deliberate surveillance in that another party is
involved, and, in advance, a permenant record is sought. It certainly is
not the case that the entire Hazini family is simply entralled by NITV and
are all watching it avidly.
> The mistake as to the name of the presenter was part of a
> cunning plan by Daddy Mahmoudi who quite clearly saw this situation
> arise in the future so he named daughters as HOMA and HODA, knowing he
> could readily interchange them so as to encourage A Onions and nonplus
> their enemies. Answer the real point - WTF is a "non-political "
> faith doing broadcasting on an overtly political TV channel into Iran
> and presumably paying for the time thus supporting the channel and its
> agenda?
>
How did NITV get to be overtly political?!?!? That is the question! When
Nima introduced the topic he provided various links, some of which
described NITV as a particularly competent station. NITV claims to be
independent, and Nima was the one who claimed it was overtly monarchist.
Mind you, this was plausible at the moment I was still visualizing the
whole Hazini family enrapt with hour after hour of fun-filled Farsi
broadcasting from NITV. Then it turned out that Nima's consumption of
NITV is a) the tapes of pedestrian Bahai'i HOMA Mahmoudi's show, and b)
casual glimpses when he is off the internet, and happens to be visiting a
certain friend, and happens to not be distracted by his social obligation
of _visiting_ his hosts. So, I don't believe that NITV is overtly
monarchist on the say so of the same guy who said that former ABM HODA
Mahmoudi was hosting a show on that station.
>
> > Yeah, I still laugh when I think about the 'pusallanimity (sic)'
> thread, and
> > your 'let the denials begin'. None if it could have been possible
> if you did
> > not put total trust on your confidential sources. You and your pals
> lie in wait
> > for _any_ excuse to attack the AO, and on a slow day, voila, this
> bit of
> > hypocrisy - spies on the internet - but it doesn't take a rocket
> scientist to
> > realize that you've got yours, and they are lousy, too.
>
> Nobody has to wait for any excuse to attack the AO. It provides
> plenty of good reason by its own ineptitude. And there's nothing
> false in this NITV business.
> Just look to the lack of reaction from
> the DST who, on her own admission, has a direct line to a Counsellor
> who in turn has direct access to the NSA which responds to him a lot
> faster than it did to Deborah Buchorn.
Read the letter from the USBNC, she was asked to back off.
"The National Assembly feels, therefore, that in this case it would be
best if you simply not respond to his postings and let the matter of NITV
rest."
- From a letter recently posted by Nima Hazini
> The trouble is that nobody
> thought the NITV business through and worked out a plausible
> explanation and an exit strategy. The right hand knoweth not what the
> right hand is doing.
>
The AO figured out who was hosting the show before Nima did.
>
> > There is no freedom of information in the Kritikal Deen; you told us
> that George
> > Fleming was the original source of the Invisible Directive, and now
> that I've
> > virtually seen him, I know that would be bizarre for him to get a US
> NSA
> > directive before its public release.
>
> Why?
Fleming had no connection to the USBNC - he had no way of knowing in
advance - he was _not_ a credible source for that information. When folks
can't even sort out the credible stories from the incredible ones, they
can hardly challenge the kid next door at marbles.
> I was the first to divulge just how long Deborah Buchorn was
> awaiting an answer to her letter and, I can assure you, that
> information did not come from her but from a completely different
> direction. Our late, though barely lamented, poster from Seattle was
> quite indignant at the whole affair and tried to tell me that I was
> saying things that were not, until the information was deliciously
> corroborated, whereupon he spluttered and expired shortly thereafter
> if memory serves me correctly.
>
That does not make the Invisible Directive a real one.
>
> > > Susan Manic
> > > in her usual buffoonery has several times disclosed here how
> wherever yours
> > > truly has posted there lies a Baha'i in waiting ready to send the
> relevant
> > > post along to her for safekeeping or to the AO.
> >
> > "Their lies", Nima, not "there lies"
>
> Nope! It's "there lies" not "their lies"! And the DST has posted
> several of my posts and promised more which just never quite seem to
> see the light of day. I wonder why! Perhaps because they do not
> corroborate her version of them?
>
> > > Obviously the same cabal who
> > > train sleazy groups like Campus Watch also train the AF and its
> hacks.
> > >
> > > My contacts have lately been sharing with me the contents of
> materials they
> >
> > Your spies, Nima, s-p-i-e-s, have been sharing...
>
> Not "spies"! They are "sources" or "informants". They are
> volunteers, not spies acting under orders from on high to penetrate
> secure places and report back on what they find. They are highly
> motivated and not for venal prospect of promotion and preferment - not
> for them the prospect of small titles and orders; they are
> ideologically motivated.
>
Sure, sources of information is fine, but it is sources of information all
around. If someone wants to denounce spying, let them clean their hands
of all confidential sources of information. If they are going to post the
latest goods from their own spy, they are hardly in any position to
denounce 'spying'.
>
> > > have obtained from the various dossiers kept by the AO about yours
> truly,
> > > not to mention the correspondences between the AF and various of
> its
> >
> > Yeah, you are watching. Somebody gets an account at Beleifnet and
> goes bonkers,
> > and presto, you post it on usenet. We already know you are
> watching. Tell me
> > something I don't already know.
>
> You cannot spy on Beliefnet. It's a public place!
Sure, and in the same token, one can not 'spy' on usenet. You've got it,
Dermod.
> And let's face
> facts. There's more than one BIGS at that place who is utterly
> bonkers! And we've had a few here and not in the dim distant past
> either, to the immense amusement of at least some of us! But there,
> in a nutshell, you have the logical results of AO behaviour -
> irrational prejudice and bigotry which sees no immorality in defending
> the "faith" by any and all nefarious means. The AO created these
> "wallies". Whilst they amuse me I think they sadden and embarrass you
> greatly.
>
Come now, Dermod, haven't you ever played a "wallie" yourself, though not
nearly as whacked out as the ninestars character?
>
> Someday I'll tell you why the official A Onion supporters in
> Cyberspace and elsewhere are so poor at the job!
Some day, yes.
Slan!
- Pat
Randy Burns
Pat! It was much earlier than the Majnun post (which in fact was late in
the game anyway). Apparently the entire network of Counselors and ABM's was
set up just for this purpose, and in fact I don't think the BAO would even
bother to deny this.
Cheers, Randy
--
Pat Kohli <ko...@ameritel.net> wrote in message
news:3DA6DEBA...@ameritel.net...
Pat Kohli
Randy Burns wrote:
> It might surprise you to learn when the monitoring activities really began
> Pat! It was much earlier than the Majnun post (which in fact was late in
> the game anyway). Apparently the entire network of Counselors and ABM's was
> set up just for this purpose, and in fact I don't think the BAO would even
> bother to deny this.
>
Randy, the Counsellors and ABMs have been in place long before email lists.
Would you care to guess again?
Michael McKenny
You shared with us:
"Randy Burns" (randy....@gte.net) writes:
> It might surprise you to learn when the monitoring activities really began
> Pat! It was much earlier than the Majnun post (which in fact was late in
> the game anyway). Apparently the entire network of Counselors and ABM's was
> set up just for this purpose, and in fact I don't think the BAO would even
> bother to deny this.
What is very interesting on this topic is that one of the people of
capacity who came to the Peace Talks held at my place more than ten years
ago told me that he had encountered the Baha'i Faith back in the 60s in
Toronto, checked it out and refused to join, precisely because he "smelled
a rat" in this system of Counsellors and ABMs. Because he knew me so well,
and I was so articulate and sincere he gave me the benefit of the doubt and
responded to my invitations to the Peace Talks. Of course, like the rest,
he ceased coming when the word got out that Baha'is are hypocrits who say
they believe in equality of women and men, but really have a male
supremecist leadership.
The actual quotes describing the members of the institution of the
learned describe the diffusion of the divine fragrances, etc. Doing this
is a full time job and doesn't permit any spare time for straying into such
areas as seeking to suppress the freedom of thought and expression, to say
nothing of spying. If they'd been really living spiritual lives and
promoting open-minded search for truth, understanding, listening
respectfully to the variety of valid opinions, the freedom of thought and
expression, the equality of women and men, the harmony of reason and
faith, etc. then Baha'i would be as if indeed divine fragrances had been
and continued to be wafted. Since they have failed to live up to the job
description, and preferred to oppose the essential principles of
Baha'u'llah, the consequences stare us all in the face.
To a Better Future, Michael.
> Cheers, Randy
>
--
"My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard."
(Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2)
Milissa
hope you can clarify something for me.
(snippage)
> As far the information gathering goes, likely someone at the USBNC will be
> getting their wrist smacked.
(snippage)
Am I understanding this correctly? Did Nima have someone at the USNBC
forward him a copy of private correspondence between the NSA and an
individual believer? Or did Susan post this somewhere else and this
is a cut-and-paste job from that message?
Please tell me its the latter! Otherwise, the AF *is* full of spies,
both for and against the AO. This really, really sucks.
Peace,
Milissa
Susan Maneck
>set up just for this purpose, and in fact I don't think the BAO would even
>bother to deny this.
Only if you see that as the reason the Hands of the Cause were set up as well.
warmest, Susan
Susan Maneck
Associate Professor of History
Jackson State University
Randy Burns
internet began. They have always been monitoring these things, that is one
of the key purposes for the organization. It predates the internet but one
can assume that it continues on the internet as well.
Cheers, Randy
--
Pat Kohli <ko...@ameritel.net> wrote in message
news:3DA7188B...@ameritel.net...
Freethought110
>both for and against the AO. This really, really sucks.
It's the former and there are as many people now against as for the AO
within the system. The far-right has brought this on itself requiring people
to take desperate measures.
--
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)
"Milissa" <mili...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e37a2ae4.02101...@posting.google.com...
Sekhmet
>Am I understanding this correctly? Did Nima have someone at the USNBC
>forward him a copy of private correspondence between the NSA and an
>individual believer? Or did Susan post this somewhere else and this
>is a cut-and-paste job from that message?
Susan has not posted the letter anywhere. So far as I know, she has shared it
with only three individuals, at least two of whom (IMHO) respect the privacy of
personal correspondence.
--Sekhmet
Pat Kohli
Milissa wrote:
> Hi Pat and Nima--
>
> hope you can clarify something for me.
>
> (snippage)
> > As far the information gathering goes, likely someone at the USBNC will be
> > getting their wrist smacked.
> (snippage)
>
> Am I understanding this correctly? Did Nima have someone at the USNBC
> forward him a copy of private correspondence between the NSA and an
> individual believer? Or did Susan post this somewhere else and this
> is a cut-and-paste job from that message?
I doubt that Susan left this laying about, and I strongly suspect that Nima has
friends, or his friends have friends who will send private correspondence out of
the US BNC, to people other than the addressees. By posting this, Nima lets
everyone see the consequences of checking up on the stories he's told; he will
see what they've been up to, and post it here!
Randy Burns
Cheers, Randy
--
Sekhmet <sekhm...@aol.com.nz> wrote in message
news:20021011171150...@mb-ck.aol.com...
Michael McKenny
You shared with us:
Milissa (mili...@yahoo.com) writes:
> Am I understanding this correctly? Did Nima have someone at the USNBC
> forward him a copy of private correspondence between the NSA and an
> individual believer? Or did Susan post this somewhere else and this
> is a cut-and-paste job from that message?
>
> Please tell me its the latter! Otherwise, the AF *is* full of spies,
> both for and against the AO. This really, really sucks.
Milissa, your terminology, just like anyone else who uses it, is
inexact. It is not a question of people being either for or against the
Administrative Order of Baha'u'llah. Even the people posting here from
other Baha'i sects, people who believe there continues living guardianship
of the Faith, are for the Administrative Order. The concept of
democratically elected leadership is in theory very good, and democratic
governments around the world show that human frailties and imperfections
included, warts and all, such democratic functioning is superior to
attempts to govern by fiat and decree.
So, what you are describing within the largest Baha'i sect is that
people working at the Haifan administrative centres see so much that just
drives them to want to do something to help get the religion out of the
ditch. It is not a question of opposing the Administrative Order; it is a
question of seeking for the existence of the Administrative Order. In the
days when there was despotic and oppressive domination by individuals in
such places as alas have suffered such, those opposing dictatorship and
oppression were not opposing the concept of leadership and order in their
homelands. The Soviet dissidents were not opposed to leadership and order;
they opposed the abuses of power they witnessed. It is identical within
Baha'i.
I will say yet again that the ideal solution is for those holding the
reins of power themselves, while alive, to begin to guide as called for by
their Prophet, not dictating that any command soever is to be viewed as
being infallibly from the All-Highest, but humbly submitting to the
universal and world harmonizing principles of the religion. These are the
guys who had they done their duty in the past would have now provided the
world with a truly embryonic global community, the leading edge of the
future, a vibrant, vital, energizing entity, open-minded, all-embracing,
forward thinking, in the forefront of current issues, able to prove the
validity of Islam and of national patriotism within a world community at
peace, an antidote to particularism, to intolerance, to fanaticism, to
imperialism, to fundamentalism. Instead, they are an example of
monotheistic intolerance, narrow-mindedness, extremism, fundamentalism
and division. Is there not a quote about the salt losing its savour?
If these misguided individuals cannot do it themselves, if they lack
for advisers able to tell it like it is, or if, alas, they refuse to heed
such advice, then it becomes the duty and responsibility of every Baha'i
to ensure the election of members to the UHJ who will guide befittingly.
In my personal opinion, everyone who has failed to contribute to the list
of NSA members, Auxiliary Board Members and Counsellors, etc, as a guide
to the electors has failed in his duty. Perhaps, I'm just clueless, and
already this is being taken care of and the NSA members know who the
replacements are, without the publicity of cyberspace. I would be
delighted to be surprised. However, I believe it more likely that just
going along as it now is simply returns the present demonstrably
inadequate members in their inflexible domination of the right wing ditch.
Anyway, I'll conclude by reiterating, people sickened by their exposure
to the absence of Baha'i spirituality at Baha'i centres are not opposed to
the Baha'i Administrative Order as spiritually envisioned by the Baha'i
Prophet. They are not against the AO; they are in favour of its birth,
appearance and vigorously healthy growth.
To a Better Future, Michael.
>
> Peace,
> Milissa
Dermod Ryder
> Before or after the Majnun post? As I see it, the conspiracy was in
place
> before the AO started gathering information about it, and the AO was
the
> target. In the root message on this thread, someone points the
finger at
> the AO, and vehemently denounces "information gathering". Then they
start
> another thread with the fruits of their "information gathering".
The Majnun post is a big red herring! And if it is contextualised
both as to the response to it and the circumstances surrounding it,
that is quite obvious. The big difference twixt then and now is that
the organisation is now a reality and those who scoffed and put down
the Majnun post are now of little relevance. That's why I talked of
escalation.
> As far the information gathering goes, likely someone at the USBNC
will be
> getting their wrist smacked. There is no mopping up in sight. Juan
or
> Nima will make up nonsense about the AO, and only a nincompoop
wouldn't
> even try to keep notes on it. I suspect that Nima simply resents
having
> the pattern of his inconsistencies pointed out, thus he cries that
folks
> have paid his earlier claims, any heed at all.
Everything that is out there is a figment of people's imagination -
and George Fleming didn't exist! Yeah! Sure!
> > Since then the AO has been quiet. Its
> > campaign has failed and its arsenal of weaponry exhausted. All
that
> > is left to it is the ultimate deterrent of CB hood and that is a
damp
> > squib as far as most of its opponents are concerned. Even the
> > Grumpies, not otherwise noted for any discernible brain power,
realise
> > that mass declarations of CBs all round would be even more counter
> > productive than anything tried to date.
> >
>
> I think we agree that is unlikely to happen.
But not impossible! If the situation approaches meltdown, who knows
what will then go down!
u
> Fred had a respect for the AO? Thou jokest!
At one time he did - he was a committed BIGS once. But he was
converted by the AO! Just like Nima, Juan a multitude of others and
me!
> No, the more militant element is outside the enrolled community.
That
> they can exploit an old friend at the USBNC, who never comes to TRB,
does
> not imply that their old pal at the USBNC is more radical or
militant. He
> is someone who means well, and whose trust is simply being betrayed,
much
> as they did with Tony Lee, or George Fleming (in May).
No Pat - the more militant element is within! The old liberals were
thrown out but those who had been quiet and remained within,
recognising they were in danger, organised for self protection and to
build a platform from which to repulse the fundie attack and
take-over.
The maturity of that organisation is now reflected in the way that
information is pouring out of the AO.
> The AO gets information from volunteers. If they'd had staffers
> monitoring actively, this thing with He Whose Name Shall Not Be
Uttered
> would not have continued to September. Had the AO had active
monitoring,
> Susan would not be getting emails from the AO answering questions
> regarding the NITV controversy and the correct identification of the
show
> host.
Yur Man was reported to them in August when he started and again when
he was on the anti-Catholic rant. They did nothing out of sheer utter
stupidity and the same is true of the NITV affair. You're not really
reading this letter and you're certainly not analysing it in any way.
You're fixated on the identity of the host and missing the rest of it
as a result.
> > Little emerged that was of any practical
> > use so resort was made to quite deliberate misinterpretation
blatantly
> > posted to the Internet.
>
> Juan's and Nima's?
Nice one! Worthy of me but out of context! I was referring to Foster
and Maneck and the infamous "advocating and promoting schism" posts of
mine from Zuhur.
> I see it gets done anyway. When Susan tries to contact the AO on
NITV, as
> one would suspect Nima wanted all good Baha'is to do, she finds out
that
> Nima went off half-cocked, again. Nima and Juan can not be relied
on for
> accurate information, so, when it comes to their statements on the
AO, of
> course the AO gets contacted! The critics have someone at the USBNC
> monitoring our activities on TRB, and you seem content with that.
Nima has not gone off half cocked on the NITV or Taheri business.
Granted it would have been neater had there not been the typo in the
forename but that typo does not negate the fact that a Bahai programme
is airing on a politically oriented channel being beamed into Iran.
And it does not negate the fact that Mr Taheri has been sanctioned for
appearing on a cultural programme that is not about the BF and is not
beamed into Iran. His appearance was not approved by the AO and he
has suffered the consequences of that. Presumably therefore
Mahmoudi's appearances are approved. So WTF is the agenda of the AO in
approving her but not him?
A few years ago the AO tried to stop Mrs Reaper appearing on the BBC -
because it was a joint interview with me and it feared that I might
divulge a few home truths about it. Can you spot the questions before
I pose them?
> > The "opposition" arose
> > spontaneously - it was not at first organised.
>
> Majnun.
Indicated that somebody proposed organising but his suggestion was
rejected by all and sundry.
<SNIP>
> > The trouble is that nobody
> > thought the NITV business through and worked out a plausible
> > explanation and an exit strategy. The right hand knoweth not what
the
> > right hand is doing.
> >
>
> The AO figured out who was hosting the show before Nima did.
Obviously as it had approved the project!
<SNIP>
> > I was the first to divulge just how long Deborah Buchorn was
> > awaiting an answer to her letter and, I can assure you, that
> > information did not come from her but from a completely different
> > direction. Our late, though barely lamented, poster from Seattle
was
> > quite indignant at the whole affair and tried to tell me that I
was
> > saying things that were not, until the information was deliciously
> > corroborated, whereupon he spluttered and expired shortly
thereafter
> > if memory serves me correctly.
> >
>
> That does not make the Invisible Directive a real one.
No! But it blows your theory that Fleming could not have the source
of the directive on the grounds you enumerated.
<SNIP>
> Sure, sources of information is fine, but it is sources of
information all
> around. If someone wants to denounce spying, let them clean their
hands
> of all confidential sources of information. If they are going to
post the
> latest goods from their own spy, they are hardly in any position to
> denounce 'spying'.
The AO never denounced spying - well, not so long as it was the
recipient of its products. Now that the tables are turned .....
>
<SNIP>
>Come now, Dermod, haven't you ever played a "wallie" yourself,
>though not
> nearly as whacked out as the ninestars character?
Of course I've played the "wallie" and that's the difference - I've
played it; they aren't playing. those gomers believe that tosh!
Felicitations,
Dermod.
Randy Burns
the AO wishes to stamp out. Maybe someday they will gather so much
information that they will have a change of heart and join us!
Randy
--
Dermod Ryder <Grim_Re...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:ao7t8r$k0i4e$2...@ID-84503.news.dfncis.de...
Susan Maneck
>is a cut-and-paste job from that message?
>
Dear Milissa,
I sent copies of this message only to three people; Pat, Sekhmet and
You-Know-Who. All three insist that they did not forward it elsewhere. I do not
believe they are lying which leaves two possibilities:
1) Some did forward the letter from the USBNC
2) Nima was behind the recent virus attack on Baha'i Studies and used it to
hack into my computer.
Right now, I am inclined to believe the latter.
Susan Maneck
>This one has the name "George Fleming" written all over!
He tells me he didn't and I'm inclined to believe him on this point.
Susan Maneck
>forward him a copy of private correspondence between the NSA and an
>individual believer?
Dear Milissa,
Rather ironic information to come out in a thread on the Baha'i administration
supposedly having spies, don't you think?
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:20021011215952...@mb-md.aol.com...
Freethought110
vasaa'il-e vosul beh hosn-e khaatemeh majhul -- `Abdu'l-Baha
--
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:20021011220547...@mb-md.aol.com...
Sekhmet
You can't sue someone for what they believe.
Dermod Ryder
> >
> >This one has the name "George Fleming" written all over!
>
> He tells me he didn't and I'm inclined to believe him on this point.
Why? Don't you believe him on any other points?
Freethought110
computer. Here you can sue for libel for this allegation and her statement
is far worse than me justifiably calling Susan a nut two years ago.
--
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)
"Sekhmet" <sekhm...@aol.com.nz> wrote in message
news:20021011222225...@mb-fg.aol.com...
Dermod Ryder
> >Or did Susan post this somewhere else and this
> >is a cut-and-paste job from that message?
> >
>
> Dear Milissa,
>
> I sent copies of this message only to three people; Pat, Sekhmet and
> You-Know-Who. All three insist that they did not forward it
elsewhere. I do not
> believe they are lying which leaves two possibilities:
>
> 1) Some did forward the letter from the USBNC
>
> 2) Nima was behind the recent virus attack on Baha'i Studies and
used it to
> hack into my computer.
Does this mean you were behind the recent virus attacks on my
computers? I wouldn't assume that for a minute.
>
> Right now, I am inclined to believe the latter.
You stupid woman! You have made an elementary mistake in assuming
that the letter was leaked directly to Nima and not to somebody else
who, much impressed by its contents, decided to forego the undoubted
pleasure of exposing it him/herself and allowed of the celebrity named
therein to enjoy it instead. A perfectly reasonable, rational and
logical possibility - would you not agree?
A much more suitable explanation than paranoid delusions that Nima, or
indeed, somebody else, had assailed and stripped out your hard drive.
Unless of course there's a string of such letters to come in the
future ...... Now that would be fun!
Dermod Ryder
"Randy Burns" <randy....@gte.net> wrote in message
news:d8Lp9.1116$dc....@nwrddc04.gnilink.net...
> What is the Conspiracy? Why to follow Baha'u'llah of course, that
is what
> the AO wishes to stamp out. Maybe someday they will gather so much
> information that they will have a change of heart and join us!
Ssssh, Randy! Don't tell them too much about the organisation!
Pat Kohli
Dermod Ryder wrote:
> "Pat Kohli" <ko...@ameritel.net> wrote in message
> news:3DA6DEBA...@ameritel.net...
> > Before or after the Majnun post? As I see it, the conspiracy was in
> place
> > before the AO started gathering information about it, and the AO was
> the
> > target. In the root message on this thread, someone points the
> finger at
> > the AO, and vehemently denounces "information gathering". Then they
> start
> > another thread with the fruits of their "information gathering".
>
> The Majnun post is a big red herring!
It is a classic example of someone trying to talk sense to Nima. I'm
quite surprised you would categorize it as a "red herring"!
> And if it is contextualised
> both as to the response to it and the circumstances surrounding it,
> that is quite obvious.
Obviously not a red herring; obviously someone trying to restrain Nima
Hazini from doing doing as a Baha'i what he is now doing as a resignee.
> The big difference twixt then and now is that
> the organisation is now a reality and those who scoffed and put down
> the Majnun post are now of little relevance. That's why I talked of
> escalation.
>
There is no organization. There is no discipline. There is no order.
There is a common target, though. If there were an organization, Nima
would not have named that source in May, and you didn't just get organized
over the summer. If yo believe you are organized right now, go ahead and
believe it. Two months from now, when Nima is purging enemies within the
movement, and next year when he is cleaning it out again, you might see a
rare pattern in your organization - chaos trumps - and that, my friend,
means it is _not_ an organization.
>
> > As far the information gathering goes, likely someone at the USBNC
> will be
> > getting their wrist smacked. There is no mopping up in sight. Juan
> or
> > Nima will make up nonsense about the AO, and only a nincompoop
> wouldn't
> > even try to keep notes on it. I suspect that Nima simply resents
> having
> > the pattern of his inconsistencies pointed out, thus he cries that
> folks
> > have paid his earlier claims, any heed at all.
>
> Everything that is out there is a figment of people's imagination -
> and George Fleming didn't exist! Yeah! Sure!
>
I'm not going to touch that one directly, suffice it say, there was no
Invisible Directive, the unnamed one certainly did not provide it to Juan
Cole, there is no whisper campaign to dissuade American Baha'is from
reciting certain prayers in public, and NITV does not have a TV show
hosted by a former ABM.
>
> (snip)
> > > is left to it is the ultimate deterrent of CB hood and that is a
> (snip)
> >
> > I think we agree that is unlikely to happen.
>
> But not impossible! If the situation approaches meltdown, who knows
> what will then go down!
> u
> > Fred had a respect for the AO? Thou jokest!
>
> At one time he did - he was a committed BIGS once. But he was
> converted by the AO! Just like Nima, Juan a multitude of others and
> me!
>
That is what happens when you complain that your popcorn is cold. You get
up during the previews - all okay. Complain about the popcorn and talk
them into giving you warm fresh popcorn, you come back and you don't mind
that you missed the boring minute when the camera pans around looking for
the star with the pre-credits flashing by - but you missed the first
scene! You watch the show, not making sense out of it, and when you go
out in the car and ask your wife to explain the plot, she says, "but
honey, it was a surreal movie, it didn't have a plot, you just watch the
character development in the scenes". Now, if you say you were a
committed BIGS, profoundly loyal to the LSA, the NSA, the UHJ, I can not
doubt that in some way it is completely so. But, from my perspective,
looking at the Majnun post, seeing "Portrait of Nima as a Young Critic", I
say to myself, "Dubliners bedaft, he don't _look_ so loyal to me". Now,
if you say you Fred, and Nima were all loyal, okay, but consider how hard
it is to see that from the current perspective (even to include email from
ten years ago).
>
> > No, the more militant element is outside the enrolled community.
> That
> > they can exploit an old friend at the USBNC, who never comes to TRB,
> does
> > not imply that their old pal at the USBNC is more radical or
> militant. He
> > is someone who means well, and whose trust is simply being betrayed,
> much
> > as they did with Tony Lee, or George Fleming (in May).
>
> No Pat - the more militant element is within!
Mensheviks, Bolsheviks, introverts extroverts; we are all people.
> The old liberals were
> thrown out but those who had been quiet and remained within,
> recognising they were in danger, organised for self protection and to
> build a platform from which to repulse the fundie attack and
> take-over.
?????
>
> The maturity of that organisation is now reflected in the way that
> information is pouring out of the AO.
>
Oh my gosh! And look at how it is used!!!!! Nima starts a thread
accusing the AO of spying, and hours later starts another thread with the
fruits of his, umm err, 'information-gathering'. Dermod, the info just
gets used to make Nima look like a snoopy hypocrite, someone who is up
Susan's ass while she is finding out how he went off half cocked. You say
that the AO put Homa up to the show, but how come your 'information
shower' doesn't tell anyone in your organization about it? Instead, we
get some story about a former ABM having a TV show!
>
> > The AO gets information from volunteers. If they'd had staffers
> > monitoring actively, this thing with He Whose Name Shall Not Be
> Uttered
> > would not have continued to September. Had the AO had active
> monitoring,
> > Susan would not be getting emails from the AO answering questions
> > regarding the NITV controversy and the correct identification of the
> show
> > host.
>
> Yur Man was reported to them in August when he started and again when
> he was on the anti-Catholic rant. They did nothing out of sheer utter
> stupidity and the same is true of the NITV affair.
Ergo, can we agree that they do not actively monitor?
> You're not really
> reading this letter and you're certainly not analysing it in any way.
What letter am I not reading? The one Susan showed me almost two weeks
ago to explain why she was letting Nima off after she nailed him, that
letter? I already read it and Susan already let Nima off. But, now that
the letter is posted, I don't feel the least bit discouraged in putting
the facts out.
>
> You're fixated on the identity of the host and missing the rest of it
> as a result.
>
Well, the identity of the host was part of the conclusion, or was that
only in the original conclusion (??), that Baha'is of some status in the
AO get favorable treatment. Remember? Since HOMA was not a former ABM,
that conclusion collapses. Furthermore, the mis-identification also
collapses your wish to impress me that all US BNC staffers are in Nima's
pocket.
>
> > > Little emerged that was of any practical
> > > use so resort was made to quite deliberate misinterpretation
> blatantly
> > > posted to the Internet.
> >
> > Juan's and Nima's?
>
> Nice one! Worthy of me but out of context! I was referring to Foster
> and Maneck and the infamous "advocating and promoting schism" posts of
> mine from Zuhur.
>
Okay, I think I was on Zuhur, but I did not follow it closely most of the
time, so I did not see such accusations. I'd thought you were contrasting
the AO and your organization. Since I'm not aware that Mark or Susan hold
any office in the AO, beyond possible membership on LSAs, I don't think of
them as being the AO.
>
> > I see it gets done anyway. When Susan tries to contact the AO on
> NITV, as
> > one would suspect Nima wanted all good Baha'is to do, she finds out
> that
> > Nima went off half-cocked, again. Nima and Juan can not be relied
> on for
> > accurate information, so, when it comes to their statements on the
> AO, of
> > course the AO gets contacted! The critics have someone at the USBNC
> > monitoring our activities on TRB, and you seem content with that.
>
> Nima has not gone off half cocked on the NITV or Taheri business.
I haven't looked into the Taheri business, but it is quite clear that he
tried to fool us all along on NITV. He said he watched the station avidly
- this gave him credibility to decree that the station was monarchist and
that the host of the show was a former ABM. Susan found it that the show
is _not_ hosted by a former ABM, and you and Nima want to sweep that under
the rug like a typo. It is not a typo, it was a central point to Nima's
first conclusion. As it happens, Nima changes conclusions to fit the
currently known set of facts. At one point, it would seem like the AO
should ahve investigated the show, and they are hypocrites for not having
done that, and then, when he has spun up the AO into investigating the
show, he is foaming mad that guests from the show will be questioned by
the AO. But you want me to think this performance was deliberate??
Saints preserve me!!!!!!!
>
> Granted it would have been neater had there not been the typo in the
> forename but that typo does not negate the fact that a Bahai programme
> is airing on a politically oriented channel being beamed into Iran.
Not a typo, Dermod. Not a typo; not a typo. Allow me to quote:
"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."
Homa Mahmoudi did not call Frederick Glaysher, and did not interview Terry
Culhane.
"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.
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."
Originally Nima was complaining about a double standard: that as a former
ABM Hoda Mahmoudi could do things that rank and file Baha'is could not.
Since it turned out that the hose of the show really is a rank and file
Baha'i, the point collapses, and that was supposed to be Nima's specific
issue - double standards. When it it completely crystal clear that there
was no double standard, do you see Nima apologize and withdraw the
complaint? No! Like you, he refuses to revisit the allegations; instead
it is 'big deal, an editorial correction'.
>
> And it does not negate the fact that Mr Taheri has been sanctioned for
> appearing on a cultural programme that is not about the BF and is not
> beamed into Iran.
Maybe Mr. Taheri was sanctioned. I do not know. At this point, I know
that Nima reported that he had. Last year Nima reported an Invisible
Directive. In May he said that Juan had gotten it from 'you-know-who'.
In September Nima says that former ABM Hoda Mahmoudi is on TV and it is a
classic case of Baha'i double standards. So Nima says there is a wolf in
Western Oz; don't be surprised if I don't strain myself, okay?
> His appearance was not approved by the AO and he
> has suffered the consequences of that.
Do you have any reliable source for this?
> Presumably therefore
> Mahmoudi's appearances are approved. So WTF is the agenda of the AO in
> approving her but not him?
>
1) I do not know much about the details of the Mahmoudi thing beyond the
snare of contradictions which Nima has posted himself. 2) I do know that
the US community is making more extensive use of TV than it has in the
past. Thus, it does not surprise me that American Baha'is are on TV, even
Farsi language satellite TV. 3) I don't assume that the NSA was directly
involved; I don't know that we even have any Persians on our NSA at the
time. Homa may have been approved at a much lower level, like LSA, as if
she were on local cable, which she was not.
>
> A few years ago the AO tried to stop Mrs Reaper appearing on the BBC -
> because it was a joint interview with me and it feared that I might
> divulge a few home truths about it. Can you spot the questions before
> I pose them?
>
No. Clearly this would be the big faux pas. Everyone knows that behind
every successful woman, is a man driving her along. Mrs. Reaper w/o you
would be a day w/o sunshine on the BBC. Seriously, though, my experience
has been that when regular people smell media, they go a bit overboard,
over-reacting, micro-managing, and in all ways trying to botch up a rather
meaningless thing. The human interest story will be pushed off of the six
o'clock news when a ferry sinks, or OJ takes a ride on the freeway, or
Prince William goes to the Riviera, or a tree grows in Brooklyn. Then, at
eleven, when you've stayed up late to watch yourself on TV, they show the
part where you are trying so hard not to pick your nose, and, instead, you
just lightly brush your nose to alleviate that itch, and you see yourself
as a man who really wanted to pick his nose, but, yes, BUTT, since he knew
his wife's friends were WATCHING, he settled for a quick scratch, and now,
at 11:27, on a work night, your wife's friends are long gone to bed, and
you realize that ultimately, you embarassed only yourself, and that by
showing you really wanted to PICK, but you settled for a scratch for the
sake of the camera and the mistaken belief that your wife's friends would
think you were the one civilized man. Trust me, I speak from experience!
>
> > > The "opposition" arose
> > > spontaneously - it was not at first organised.
> >
> > Majnun.
>
> Indicated that somebody proposed organising but his suggestion was
> rejected by all and sundry.
>
Aren't you saying he is doing it now?
>
> <SNIP>
> > > The trouble is that nobody
> > > thought the NITV business through and worked out a plausible
> > > explanation and an exit strategy. The right hand knoweth not what
> the
> > > right hand is doing.
> > >
> >
> > The AO figured out who was hosting the show before Nima did.
>
> Obviously as it had approved the project!
Let's see that letter.
>
> <SNIP>
> > > I was the first to divulge just how long Deborah Buchorn was
> > > awaiting an answer to her letter and, I can assure you, that
> > > information did not come from her but from a completely different
> > > direction. Our late, though barely lamented, poster from Seattle
> was
> > > quite indignant at the whole affair and tried to tell me that I
> was
> > > saying things that were not, until the information was deliciously
> > > corroborated, whereupon he spluttered and expired shortly
> thereafter
> > > if memory serves me correctly.
> > >
> >
> > That does not make the Invisible Directive a real one.
>
> No! But it blows your theory that Fleming could not have the source
> of the directive on the grounds you enumerated.
>
Whoa! _You_Dermod Ryder, might talk birds out of trees, sell ice to
eskimoes, and engender trust in US BNC staffers such that _you_ might get
such a letter. The other fellow, no, not in a million years, no way! How
could you even suggest he could get coals from Newcastle?
>
> <SNIP>
> > Sure, sources of information is fine, but it is sources of
> information all
> > around. If someone wants to denounce spying, let them clean their
> hands
> > of all confidential sources of information. If they are going to
> post the
> > latest goods from their own spy, they are hardly in any position to
> > denounce 'spying'.
>
> The AO never denounced spying - well, not so long as it was the
> recipient of its products. Now that the tables are turned .....
It was Nima who denounced spying, and did so hours before posting his
'confidential information'.
>
> >
> <SNIP>
> >Come now, Dermod, haven't you ever played a "wallie" yourself,
> >though not
> > nearly as whacked out as the ninestars character?
>
> Of course I've played the "wallie" and that's the difference - I've
> played it; they aren't playing. those gomers believe that tosh!
So it would seem. What was interesting to me, was that ninestar showed
up, started posting the stuff, Nima copied, and by the time the Baha'is at
Beliefnet really understood what ninestar was saying, and telling them how
seriously wrong they were, I might add, Nima seemed to have left the
scene. It looks peculiar to me, very peculiar, and not in a 'playing'
kind of way.
Peace, prosperity, and pick something else, too,
- Pat
ko...@ameritel.net
Freethought110
The main point of my NITV expose is about systematic AF cavorting with
pro-monarchists and chucking the political non-involvement principle by the
wayside. Geddit? No!
Duffus!
--
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)
"Pat Kohli" <kohliCUT...@ameritel.net> wrote in message
news:3DA79342...@ameritel.net...
Pat Kohli
Freethought110 wrote:
> LOL :)) How about I post a certain letter on NITV that will shut you up
> forever. Idiot!
How about it. I've definitely weared of you posting stuff that shows you up to
be a lying hypocrit. Please do post anything on NITV that might prove your
allegations of a double standard. Show that HOMA Mahmoudi is a former US NSA
member, a Counsellor, a former ABM member; go ahead; make my day!
"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."
"The station itself, its broadcasts or its specific slant or
political views are not an issue for me, as I avidly
watch it myself..."
"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.
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."
Do you mind if I don't hold my breathe while you prove these with NITV and HOMA
Mamoudi?
Randy Burns
"George Fleming?" If so, which "George Fleming" did you send it to? There
are two, you know.
Cheers, Randy
--
Susan Maneck <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021011220118...@mb-md.aol.com...
Sekhmet
>computer. Here you can sue for libel for this allegation and her statement
>is far worse than me justifiably calling Susan a nut two years ago.
Okay, then everybody in the AO can sue you for accusing them of sending you a
virus a few weeks ago when you had what appeared to be the Klez virus, right?
BTW, I believe that here in the US you could be sued for calling Susan (and
Pat, and by implication Robin) a nut, but then this is an overly litigious
society. ;-)
--Sekhmet
Freethought110
ear.
--
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)
"Pat Kohli" <kohliCUT...@ameritel.net> wrote in message
news:3DA796CF...@ameritel.net...
Freethought110
sent out to me ;-)
--
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)
"Sekhmet" <sekhm...@aol.com.nz> wrote in message
news:20021012012605...@mb-fa.aol.com...
Sekhmet
>sent out to me ;-)
They'll just laugh-- or they should if they know anything about how the Klez
virus works (that's the one I suspect you were getting). Both Klez and the
BugBear virus (the new one that I believe hit Baha'i Studies) "borrow"
addresses from the infected person's address book to put in the "from" field
_and_ the "to" field, so the virus doesn't come to you from the person it looks
like it's from, but from somebody else. So the only thing that can be
guaranteed in an investigation is that the virus did NOT come from the people
you've pegged as senders, but from somebody else who has both you and them in
their address book (or from several somebody elses, since both Klez and BugBear
spread very rapidly).
Luckily I don't use Windows, so I don't have to deal with Windows viruses
except on a professional level (helping poor pathetic Windows users remove said
viruses from their systems).
--Sekhmet
Rabia1844
>cunning plan by Daddy Mahmoudi who quite clearly saw this situation
>arise in the future so he named daughters as HOMA and HODA, knowing he
>could readily interchange them so as to encourage A Onions and nonplus
>their enemies.
LOL. The rest of your arguments make just about as much sense.
>Just look to the lack of reaction from
>the DST who, on her own admission, has a direct line to a Counsellor
Yeah, and getting a direct line to a Counsellor is really difficult. You have
to get a hold of their email address.
>
>Not "spies"! They are "sources" or "informants". They are
>volunteers, not spies acting under orders from on high to penetrate
>secure places and report back on what they find.
You don't 'get it' do you, Dermod. Anyone who has penetrated you guy's lists
did so in good faith. If later they reported what was happening there to anyone
it was because they were so utterly shocked by what they saw going on there.
Certainly no one asked them to say anything.
>You cannot spy on Beliefnet. It's a public place!
Gee, but Nima's thread is entitled AF Spies All Over the Internet, presumably
in reference to the fact Baha'is might visit these public places and report
what they find as Nima has done here.
Rabia1844
>Does this mean you were behind the recent virus attacks on my
>computers? I wouldn't assume that for a minute.
Well, Nima was assuming that only two weeks ago. Or did you forget?
Rabia1844
>thrown out
Gee, you mean there were only three liberals in the Baha'i Faith?
Susan Maneck
>"George Fleming?
He had already mentioned that letter in this forum. Or did you forget?
Freethought110
the Orthodox Baha'is got the same ones with a source from a Baha'i
administrative body in New South Wales.
--
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)
"Sekhmet" <sekhm...@aol.com.nz> wrote in message
news:20021012015934...@mb-fa.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)
"Rabia1844" <rabi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021012025520...@mb-fp.aol.com...
Sekhmet
>that
>the Orthodox Baha'is got the same ones with a source from a Baha'i
>administrative body in New South Wales.
Then I would suspect that the infected computer that originally sent the virus
belonged to somebody who communicates with (or at least has addresses of) both
the Orthodox Bahai's and the NSW administrative body. Who do you know who would
be on speaking terms with both groups? Another "dissident", perhaps?
--Sekhmet
Freethought110
Remeyites and the AF-ers! I sure don't and neither do any of my friends. But
there is the case of a AF IT meistro here in OZ who took down the page and
domain of dissident Grand Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri two years ago
because the page was illegally using a Persian font application they had
written. This is why the OZ NCA is taking the virus attack against me
seriously because such a person would be capable of doing just that. But
more than that, what do you say about the death threats I got on my cellular
phone from silent numbers right after I exposed the NITV affair?
--
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)
"Sekhmet" <sekhm...@aol.com.nz> wrote in message
news:20021012045012...@mb-mg.aol.com...
Dermod Ryder
> Luckily I don't use Windows, so I don't have to deal with Windows
viruses
> except on a professional level (helping poor pathetic Windows users
remove said
> viruses from their systems).
So you have mutated from human form into anti-viral software!
Hmmmm! Things are becoming clearer to me now! That Egyptian Goddess's
name! This liking for raw red meat! The ability to mutate at will
(Poor Will!) between human form and a computer programme! And they
tried to tell me that "The Mummy" was fiction!
So how did you build the Pyramids?????
Dermod
Dermod Ryder
> >
> >Does this mean you were behind the recent virus attacks on my
> >computers? I wouldn't assume that for a minute.
>
> Well, Nima was assuming that only two weeks ago. Or did you forget?
Funny! I thought he was assuming that on the basis of a sustained
assault on him and the Orthodox Bahai community. The only people who
would have an interest in planning and co-ordinating such an assault
would appear to be the BIGS. It's circumstantial but strong enough
upon which to build an hypothesis which has to proven by fuller
examination.
Dermod Ryder
Or yet another BIGS about to "convert"!
Dermod.
Dermod Ryder
> > The old liberals were
> >thrown out
>
> Gee, you mean there were only three liberals in the Baha'i Faith?
If the answer to that question is in the affirmative, it sends your
theory that you are a "liberal" right down the sewer where it belongs.
Dermod Ryder
> >The mistake as to the name of the presenter was part of a
> >cunning plan by Daddy Mahmoudi who quite clearly saw this situation
> >arise in the future so he named daughters as HOMA and HODA, knowing
he
> >could readily interchange them so as to encourage A Onions and
nonplus
> >their enemies.
>
> LOL. The rest of your arguments make just about as much sense.
Knowing just how much emphasis you have put on the "name" of the
presenter rather than the substance of the fact that Bahai type
programmes that are presumably approved, are aired on this NITV
channel, wasn't it grand that I could reveal the "divine"
foreknowledge of this event as revealed in the naming of these
children many moons ago.
>
> >Just look to the lack of reaction from
> >the DST who, on her own admission, has a direct line to a
Counsellor
>
> Yeah, and getting a direct line to a Counsellor is really difficult.
You have
> to get a hold of their email address.
I feel no need to have the e-mail address of any Counsellor, never
mind that of Counsellor Godzilla or whoever. He who was quoted in the
letter is renowned as your mentor - the one who led you to the light
of darkness in the AF.
> >Not "spies"! They are "sources" or "informants". They are
> >volunteers, not spies acting under orders from on high to penetrate
> >secure places and report back on what they find.
>
> You don't 'get it' do you, Dermod. Anyone who has penetrated you
guy's lists
> did so in good faith. If later they reported what was happening
there to anyone
> it was because they were so utterly shocked by what they saw going
on there.
> Certainly no one asked them to say anything.
It's a plausible cover story! Zuhur, being a hive of malcontents,
carries a health warning. Fundies who go there do so that they be
shocked. There is no good faith in penetration of a list where one
knows one is going to see things that will shock! But I don't buy it
as a realistic cover story.
Had the pirated posts been faithfully represented you might get away
with it. But in my case they weren't. Foster misrepresented posts of
mine in which I stated that future schism within Bahai, was, IMO,
inevitable, to instead assert that I was openly and actively
advocating and promoting schism. The DST has stated she has posts of
mine in which I was egging somebody on to get himself declared a CB
yet has not produced them. Why? Because they don't exist!
Have you forgotten that Alison Marshall was summarily dismissed on the
basis of her e-mail correspondence to a private list with a
no-forwarding policy. In other words BIGS went along there, knowing
in advance they were going to be "shocked" and in full cognisance of
the fact that they would dishonestly break the rules. Such rectitude
of conduct is most impressive and illuminating!
So your cover story is bullshit and even more apparently bullshit in
light of the directives from the AO to observe and report back on
people's behaviour. For at least ten years before I came online, the
story went around the local community here that I was a CB and
therefore to be shunned. There is such hatred within Bahai for any
who do not wholeheartedly subscribe to the Covenant thumping that
spying and name calling are not merely inevitable - they are necessary
to promote, protect and promulgate that narrow sectarianism. And of
course, your protege, he who shall not be mentioned, treated us to a
spectacular "defence" of the Covenant in recent weeks in a form and
manner heavily redolent of that hatred and of spying, albeit that his
results were highly inaccurate.
> >You cannot spy on Beliefnet. It's a public place!
>
> Gee, but Nima's thread is entitled AF Spies All Over the Internet,
presumably
> in reference to the fact Baha'is might visit these public places
and report
> what they find as Nima has done here.
You cannot spy on Beliefnet or any other public places but you can
conduct surveillance on them, to monitor what any one person or
persons has to say. Given the emphasis on steadfastness in the
Covenant, the existence of a corps of sticky beaks to enforce that; it
is inevitable that dossiers are drawn up on enemies of the Faith. I'm
hoping to see mine shortly. I think I'll have to put in a bit more
work to merit a grade as high as Nima's.
aelyria
> > The old liberals were
> >thrown out
>
> Gee, you mean there were only three liberals in the Baha'i Faith?
Perhaps that is true. Have just discovered I am a conservative in that I
want to see what Baha'u'llah wanted implemented.
Pat Kohli
Freethought110 wrote:
> Dear (snip) Duffus!
>
That is what you say today. Back then, it was about the double standard. Read
your drivel like you expected others to.
"Recently Ms Hoda Mahmudi, who formerly served in an official
administrative capacity as an Auxiliary Board Member for
Protection ... has been a regular commentator on and
contributor to the satellite opposition Iranian Television
broadcasting station NITV."
"The specific issue in question relates to ...
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 ...
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."
Now, if you are going to argue that NITV is pro-monarchist, make your case!
Originally you got a pass on that charge since you _claimed_ to watch the
station avidly. Now that it is clear you don't watch avidly, use sources which
can be objectively verified! Do I have to explain _everything_ to you on what
a credible argument ought to _eventually_ look like????
Keep coming back!
- Pat
ko...@ameritel.net
Pat Kohli
Sekhmet wrote:
No, he specifically excluded Robin who has been taking Prednisone for years, but
he did seem to be saying that since I took Prednisone for a few days, under
competent physician's direction, I was a nut, a rather bizarre inference to make
given that Prenisone is an anti-inflammatory medication. If I took tylenol,
would that mean I was clinically depressed, in Nima's world? Nima just says
stuff w/ no thought beyond, 'will it sound bad for bahais?'
Nima one minute: Those bad bad bad bahais have spies. Anyone who uses spies is
a LOOSER!
Nima the next minute: Hmmm, let's see what my spy at the BNC says, hmm, great,
he got Susan to get off my ass after my NITV screw-up, what a releif! It sure is
great having friends in Wilmette, to cover for my ever-screwing-up.
So, he calls people 'nuts'. Who could really be surprised about that?
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)
"Pat Kohli" <kohliCUT...@ameritel.net> wrote in message
news:3DA823F6...@ameritel.net...
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)
"Pat Kohli" <kohliCUT...@ameritel.net> wrote in message
news:3DA81E30...@ameritel.net...
Rabia1844
>> Gee, you mean there were only three liberals in the Baha'i Faith?
>
>If the answer to that question is in the affirmative, it sends your
>theory that you are a "liberal" right down the sewer where it belongs.
I was just pointing out the stupidity of your assertion, Dermod.
Rabia1844
>mind that of Counsellor Godzilla or whoever. He who was quoted in the
>letter is renowned as your mentor - the one who led you to the light
>of darkness in the AF.
And that is really the reason Nima is out to get him, isn't it? This fighting
factions business is just a smoke screen.
>It's a plausible cover story!
More plausible than your guy's story. But then I don't really think there are
so many moles in the Baha'i administrative centers as you would have us
believe. In fact your own statement that you originally received this letter
leads me to think there is another more plausible explanation. That letter
would likely have been available to the LSA that persuaded YOU-KNOW-WHO to get
off the internet at your wife's request I believe. Doesn't she serve on this
LSA? Might she have gotten a copy of this letter?
>Have you forgotten that Alison Marshall was summarily dismissed on the
>basis of her e-mail correspondence to a private list with a
>no-forwarding policy.
Nonsense. Neither Talisman I or Talisman II had a no-forwarding policy. And
none of her posts here would have been forwarded. What she had posted in those
places was quite enough to hang her. Certainly no one ever forwarded me
anything from your top-secret lists. And I never forwarded anything from Irfan.
>For at least ten years before I came online, the
>story went around the local community here that I was a CB and
>therefore to be shunned.
Gee, that couldn't have anything to do with your behavior could it?
Rabia1844
>would have an interest in planning and co-ordinating such an assault
>would appear to be the BIGS.
And who would be interested in planning and coordinating such an assault on
Baha'i Studies?
Sekhmet
>
>Hmmmm! Things are becoming clearer to me now! That Egyptian Goddess's
>name! This liking for raw red meat! The ability to mutate at will
>(Poor Will!) between human form and a computer programme! And they
>tried to tell me that "The Mummy" was fiction!
>
>So how did you build the Pyramids?????
We used a skyhook.
Don't tell anybody.
;-)
--Sekhmet
Sekhmet
>more than that, what do you say about the death threats I got on my cellular
>phone from silent numbers right after I exposed the NITV affair?
I would say that death threats are beyond the pale (even worse than threatening
to come over and beat somebody up), but if "silent numbers" means the calls
were anonymous, you can't be sure who you offended enough to elicit that kind
of response, since you posted your NITV insinuations to a number of lists, not
all of which are populated by Baha'is.
Could be a fundieloonie who doesn't pay attention to Baha'u'llah's writings re
nonviolence, or could be an NITV fan or associate disturbed by your assertions
regarding the political slant of the station, or could even be someone among
your compatriots, the "enemies of the Baha'i AO" whom you say are within the
AO, who you say are way nastier than you are, and who might be mildly annoyed
with you for prematurely crowing about their existence.
Or it could be all of the above!
--Sekhmet
Sekhmet
>> Then I would suspect that the infected computer that
>> originally sent the virus
>> belonged to somebody who communicates with (or at least has
>> addresses of) both
>> the Orthodox Bahai's and the NSW administrative body. Who do
>> you know who would
>> be on speaking terms with both groups? Another "dissident", perhaps?
>
>Or yet another BIGS about to "convert"!
Who knows...
My point is that the infected party could be virtually anybody _except_ whoever
is listed in the "from" field of the email containing the virus.
Anybody who uses Windows, that is-- those of us who use Linux, Mac OS or other
non-MicroSoft products are completely safe from Klez, BugBear, or any of the
other viruses that have been causing so much trouble lately.
--Sekhmet
Susan Maneck
>regarding the political slant of the station,
Dear Sekhmet,
More likely it could be pro-monarchist upset with his attempt to associate the
Baha'i Faith his group.
Sekhmet
>>basis of her e-mail correspondence to a private list with a
>>no-forwarding policy.
>
>Nonsense. Neither Talisman I or Talisman II had a no-forwarding policy.
>And
>none of her posts here would have been forwarded. What she had posted in
>those
>places was quite enough to hang her. Certainly no one ever forwarded me
>anything from your top-secret lists. And I never forwarded anything from
>Irfan.
The first Talisman not only did not have a no-forwarding policy, but a
Counsellor and several other Administrative folks openly subscribed to the list
at various times, and posted often enough that everybody knew it (or should
have known it, if they were paying attention).
Anybody desiring to express an opinion that they wanted to keep secret from the
AO would have been wise not to post it there.
--Sekhmet
Dermod Ryder
> >Now I have a lawsuit for libel against you.
>
> You can't sue someone for what they believe.
But you can if that belief is expressed and is libellous!
Dermod Ryder
> Nima one minute: Those bad bad bad bahais have spies. Anyone who
uses spies is
> a LOOSER!
>
> Nima the next minute: Hmmm, let's see what my spy at the BNC says,
hmm, great,
> he got Susan to get off my ass after my NITV screw-up, what a
releif! It sure is
> great having friends in Wilmette, to cover for my ever-screwing-up.
>
> So, he calls people 'nuts'. Who could really be surprised about
that?
Tut, tut, Pat,
This is beginning to sound like sour grapes! It looks as if our spies
are better than your spies, albeit we had one or two teething
problems. We're new to this game but I think we're off to a promising
start. Certainly there's a lot of very interesting stuff still to
come.
Dermod.
>
>
Dermod Ryder
Anybody who has a regard for truth, accuracy, civilised discourse,
intelligence, informed debate, the fruits of academia, beauty, the
arts, historical accuracy and normal human standards would have motive
enough to want to see BS eradicated from the face of the earth.
Michael McKenny
Does one really have grounds for a lawsuit if one says "I'm inclined to
believe X ?"
Peace, Michael
"Freethought110" (Freetho...@bohemian.org) writes:
> Now I have a lawsuit for libel against you.
>
> --
> 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:20021011215952...@mb-md.aol.com...
>>Or did Susan post this somewhere else and this
>>is a cut-and-paste job from that message?
>>
>
> Dear Milissa,
>
> I sent copies of this message only to three people; Pat, Sekhmet and
> You-Know-Who. All three insist that they did not forward it elsewhere. I do
> not
> believe they are lying which leaves two possibilities:
>
> 1) Some did forward the letter from the USBNC
>
> 2) Nima was behind the recent virus attack on Baha'i Studies and used it to
> hack into my computer.
>
> Right now, I am inclined to believe the latter.
> warmest, Susan
>
> Susan Maneck
> Associate Professor of History
> Jackson State University
>
> http://bahaistudies.net/susanmaneck/
>
>
>
--
"My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard."
(Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2)
Michael McKenny
You (or someone) shared with us:
Sekhmet (sekhm...@aol.com.nz) writes:
>>Not when they impute a malicious cybercrime such as hacking into their
>>computer. Here you can sue for libel for this allegation and her statement
>>is far worse than me justifiably calling Susan a nut two years ago.
>
> Okay, then everybody in the AO can sue you for accusing them of sending you a
> virus a few weeks ago when you had what appeared to be the Klez virus, right?
> BTW, I believe that here in the US you could be sued for calling Susan (and
> Pat, and by implication Robin) a nut, but then this is an overly litigious
> society. ;-)
What do you mean, "Here in the US" ? I thought you lived in New
Zealand? Could be that nz at the end of your e-address. Americans don't
really sue each and every person who calls someone a nut do they? I bet
people are even smarter in New Zealand.
Peace, Michael
> --Sekhmet
Michael McKenny
Humans back then were just as smart (uhm, or whatever word should be
used) as humans today. As I understand it there is adequate description in
surviving records (these old papyrus scrolls) to enable people today to
realize how it was done, notwithstanding prejudices by some Westerners
today. After all, how did the Baha'i Temple in India get built? If you
didn't have that on film, I bet you'd have aliens credited with that one,
too.
Thrice Three Blessings, Michael.
Sekhmet
>
>More likely it could be pro-monarchist upset with his attempt to associate
>the
>Baha'i Faith his group.
>warmest, Susan
That's possible too.
But my paragraph would have become intolerably long if I'd tried to list every
group or individual who might theoretically have been offended by something
Nima has said lately, so I tried to limit my speculations to just a few of the
obvious ones. ;-)
--Sekhmet
Sekhmet
> What do you mean, "Here in the US" ? I thought you lived in New
>Zealand? Could be that nz at the end of your e-address.
That's a spam blocker. I chose .nz because I have friends there, my favorite TV
show was filmed there (my current favorite movie was too, but that was long
after I started using .nz as a spam blocker so it doesn't count), and I'm a
sucker for Kiwi scenery. A real New Zealand address would end in ".co.nz", not
".com.nz", because they don't use ".com" there.
If you pay close attention, you'll see that a lot of AOL'ers have added odd or
nonsensical things to the end of our email addresses-- it's one of the very few
newsgroup features we get to play with!
>Americans don't
>really sue each and every person who calls someone a nut do they?
Not each and every one, no-- but it happens, as do lawsuits on other assorted
issues which I (and usually the court) tend to consider frivolous.
>I bet people are even smarter in New Zealand.
The ones I know are. ;-)
--Sekhmet
Sekhmet
> Humans back then were just as smart (uhm, or whatever word should be
>used) as humans today. As I understand it there is adequate description
>in
>surviving records (these old papyrus scrolls) to enable people today to
>realize how it was done, notwithstanding prejudices by some Westerners
>today. After all, how did the Baha'i Temple in India get built? If you
>didn't have that on film, I bet you'd have aliens credited with that one,
>too.
Not I, Michael-- despite ending up as a computer technician, my field of study
was Archaeology (with a Geology minor), so I know all about the racist origins
of the "ancient astronaut" theory, as well as those equally racist theories
requiring Europeans (or Atlanteans) to have helped other cultures create their
great works. I read Von Daniken and his ilk only as entertainment and to keep
my blood pressure up, since such books are so full of unwarranted assumptions
and factual errors that only the completely ignorant could take them seriously!
For example, the 100,000-year-old crystal skull is actually 14th century Aztec,
it is not unique, and the Aztecs had plenty of real skulls to use as models for
their sculptures, so the idea that the crystal skull was the prototype and our
skulls the knockoffs is totally preposterous.
And that "helipad" on the Plains of Nazca is only three feet across (it's the
knee of a spider effigy), so any aliens landing there must have been VERY VERY
SMALL.
There's plenty more, but I hope that's enough to show you that my "skyhook"
comment was a joke! (besides, I'm a goddess; what would I need aliens for? <g>)
--Sekhmet
Sekhmet
>
>But you can if that belief is expressed and is libellous!
Not if it's clear that it's only an opinion.
But even if you're correct, I feel that older offenses should take priority, so
it would only be fair for Nima to let everybody else sue him first, since his
was the first offense.
;-)
--Sekhmet
Sekhmet
>No, he specifically excluded Robin who has been taking Prednisone for years,
>but
>he did seem to be saying that since I took Prednisone for a few days, under
>competent physician's direction, I was a nut, a rather bizarre inference
>to make
>given that Prenisone is an anti-inflammatory medication.
Oh yeah, that's right. I remember now!
>If I took tylenol,
>would that mean I was clinically depressed, in Nima's world? [snip]
I guess so. ;-)
Maybe I'd better not let on that I drink a can of Dr. Pepper once in a while,
huh? Who knows what he'd make of that...
--Sekhmet
Dermod Ryder
> >I feel no need to have the e-mail address of any Counsellor, never
> >mind that of Counsellor Godzilla or whoever. He who was quoted in
the
> >letter is renowned as your mentor - the one who led you to the
light
> >of darkness in the AF.
>
> And that is really the reason Nima is out to get him, isn't it? This
fighting
> factions business is just a smoke screen.
Don't flatter yourself! You turned to the dark side but nobody I know
gives a damn about that. In this fight you're only one of a number of
targets.
> More plausible than your guy's story. But then I don't really think
there are
> so many moles in the Baha'i administrative centers as you would have
us
> believe. In fact your own statement that you originally received
this letter
> leads me to think there is another more plausible explanation. That
letter
> would likely have been available to the LSA that persuaded
YOU-KNOW-WHO to get
> off the internet at your wife's request I believe. Doesn't she serve
on this
> LSA? Might she have gotten a copy of this letter?
I ought to sue you for this piece of crapology - I broke two ribs
laughing at it.
Firstly I NEVER stated that I had originally received this letter. I
merely pointed out that it might be an incorrect assumption that Nima
had been the first to receive it in as much as he has given no detail
concerning the circumstances of its receipt by him.
Secondly I wouldn't know if this letter had been made available to the
LSA concerned to which my wife, not I, made the official complaint
about that particular person's behaviour. My opinion, FWIW, is that
it was NOT made available.
Thirdly, my wife is NOT a member of the LSA that dealt with Mr
Fleming. We do not live within its defined geographic area.
Finally - my wife is still awaiting a substantive response to her
complaint. In other words she has received no correspondence from
that LSA, barring an acknowledgement of its receipt.
This knocks this theory right on the head which leaves you with: -
(a) the Greeks attacked your computer - in which case all of your
files are out there and selected ones may start appearing on TRB or
elsewhere.
(b) one or more of those you forwarded the message to, sent it on to
Nima or even to me who in turn sent it to Nima but they have
categorically denied that and I would be inclined to believe them
(c) somebody at Wilmette leaked it.
The last of these options is the one you have been clearly told is the
right one - the actual way that the letter went to Nima whether
through other intermediaries or not. Personally I would rather it was
(a) - the thought of more of your files appearing on the Net is rather
appealing - don'tcha think!
> >Have you forgotten that Alison Marshall was summarily dismissed on
the
> >basis of her e-mail correspondence to a private list with a
> >no-forwarding policy.
>
> Nonsense. Neither Talisman I or Talisman II had a no-forwarding
policy. And
> none of her posts here would have been forwarded. What she had
posted in those
> places was quite enough to hang her.
Which she duly was, of course! Did you enjoy that spectacle?
> Certainly no one ever forwarded me
> anything from your top-secret lists. And I never forwarded anything
from Irfan.
So you're admitting you have no posts of mine in which I was allegedly
egging somebody on to have himself declared a CB.
> >For at least ten years before I came online, the
> >story went around the local community here that I was a CB and
> >therefore to be shunned.
>
> Gee, that couldn't have anything to do with your behavior could it?
Yeah - it did! Among other things I demanded a retraction and apology
for the AO's error in publicly claiming my daughter was a member of
the BF - never got the first part but I persisted until I got the
second. I also did not attend Bahai gatherings designed to impress
outsiders and put all of my complaints through the institutions. That
latter part was a grave error on my part for which I am truly
contrite.
Dermod Ryder
You're obviously unfamiliar with the concept of "constructive
dismissal" which is legalese for a situation in which an employer,
unwilling to actually terminate the contract of an employee,
establishes a pressured situation in which the employee has no option
other than to resign. It was made apparent to many that they were
unwelcome and that the only alternative to their being declared
Covenant Breakers was for them to submit their resignations. Take it
from there, idiot, and work out the rest of the argument for yourself
.... if you can.
If, OTOH, you can't, post another inane response and I'll take you
through the rest of it in very easy steps that even you can
understand.
Dermod Ryder
> >or could be an NITV fan or associate disturbed by your assertions
> >regarding the political slant of the station,
>
> Dear Sekhmet,
>
> More likely it could be pro-monarchist upset with his attempt to
associate the
> Baha'i Faith his group.
Jeez! The pro-monarchists do have some common decency after all!
Dermod Ryder
And they used blue steam to construct the DST! Worry not! Your
secret is safe with me!
Dermod.
Dermod Ryder
> > The Majnun post is a big red herring!
>
> It is a classic example of someone trying to talk sense to Nima.
I'm
> quite surprised you would categorize it as a "red herring"!
It's a big red herring when it is always trotted out to justify
allegations of the campaign then apparently existent, when, in fact it
proves there was no organised opposition.
> There is no organization. There is no discipline. There is no
order.
> There is a common target, though. If there were an organization,
Nima
> would not have named that source in May, and you didn't just get
organized
> over the summer. If yo believe you are organized right now, go
ahead and
> believe it. Two months from now, when Nima is purging enemies
within the
> movement, and next year when he is cleaning it out again, you might
see a
> rare pattern in your organization - chaos trumps - and that, my
friend,
> means it is _not_ an organization.
You're not listening! Nima and I do not belong to the organisation.
We are not BIGS - we are not qualified! We are freelance mercenaries
in this for the joy of the fight and nothing else! We know only a
certain amount about the organisation - only what it thinks we need to
know, to do the voodoo that we do so well! I certainly have an
informed opinion about what it is up to but I'm not sharing that - cos
you BIGS who are in denial and opposed to it don't need to know
anything about it.
> > Everything that is out there is a figment of people's
imagination -
> > and George Fleming didn't exist! Yeah! Sure!
> >
>
> I'm not going to touch that one directly, suffice it say, there was
no
> Invisible Directive, the unnamed one certainly did not provide it to
Juan
> Cole, there is no whisper campaign to dissuade American Baha'is from
> reciting certain prayers in public, and NITV does not have a TV show
> hosted by a former ABM.
NITV does not have a show hosted by an ABM. But it has a Bahai Show
hosted by the sister of a former ABM and that show is beamed into
IRAN; is obviously approved by somebody and the NSA either knows
nothing or has been ordered to keep its mouth shut. Furthermore at
least one Iranian BIGS disapproved of that channel being utilised for
Bahai programming. That much is absolutely certain. Now let's move
on from that to ask if the Bahais are paying for this programme to be
on air; who has approved it; why is it being beamed into Iran at the
cost of possible peril to a beleaguered community there; is NITV an
overtly pro-Monarchist channel; does the AO have a political agenda in
permitting the transmission of this programme? These are the
important
questions - not whether or not Hobo Mahmoudi is hosting it.
> That is what happens when you complain that your popcorn is cold.
<SNIP>
>You watch the show, not making sense out of it, and when you
go
> out in the car and ask your wife to explain the plot, she says, "but
> honey, it was a surreal movie, it didn't have a plot, you just watch
the
> character development in the scenes".
<SNIP>
You're short-sighted - myopia combined with tunnel vision as to the
past, present and what is to come? Many of us arrived when the film
was half over and we have to play catch-up to understand the plot.
But we have done that and have moved on. The AO hasn't - still stuck
in the past demanding and expecting obedience of those who care not
two whits about it and regard it and its claimed infallibility in much
the same way as they would look upon a rabid dog.
> > The old liberals were
> > thrown out but those who had been quiet and remained within,
> > recognising they were in danger, organised for self protection and
to
> > build a platform from which to repulse the fundie attack and
> > take-over.
>
> ?????
They only succeeded in clearing out some of the liberals - the rest
went underground, got organised and are now on the counter attack.
Generally speaking they despise Nima and me for getting out and
leaving them in the doo-doo but they use us as we use them.
> Oh my gosh! And look at how it is used!!!!! Nima starts a thread
> accusing the AO of spying, and hours later starts another thread
with the
> fruits of his, umm err, 'information-gathering'. Dermod, the info
just
> gets used to make Nima look like a snoopy hypocrite, someone who is
up
> Susan's ass while she is finding out how he went off half cocked.
You say
> that the AO put Homa up to the show, but how come your 'information
> shower' doesn't tell anyone in your organization about it? Instead,
we
> get some story about a former ABM having a TV show!
What Nima and I look like doesn't matter! That is not and never has
been the issue. And you keep on howling about the typo. That is
exactly what we rely on - that, he who cannot be mentioned (what a
bonus that was) and all the rest of the crapology. I won't speak for
Nima but I wouldn't be caught dead anywhere near the DST's ass, with
or without a poker, but I suspect his inclinations would not be that
different. And if you think he went off "half-cocked" how come the AO
bade her not reply to him but let the matter rest? What is it hiding
that it cannot issue a statement or allow its chief apologist so to
do?
> > Yur Man was reported to them in August when he started and again
when
> > he was on the anti-Catholic rant. They did nothing out of sheer
utter
> > stupidity and the same is true of the NITV affair.
>
> Ergo, can we agree that they do not actively monitor?
In that case I know they did! In oher respects I have been told they
do and we have had evidence to that effect published here. One does
not have to be an office holder within the AO to perform its bidding.
>
> > You're not really
> > reading this letter and you're certainly not analysing it in any
way.
>
> What letter am I not reading? The one Susan showed me almost two
weeks
> ago to explain why she was letting Nima off after she nailed him,
that
> letter? I already read it and Susan already let Nima off. But, now
that
> the letter is posted, I don't feel the least bit discouraged in
putting
> the facts out.
Give me a break! The DST couldn't nail her colours to the mast never
mind nail Nima so as to let him off! You flatter her. Look at the
record - she can't answer Michael and me, so we're kill-filed. Now
she has to try to put me down in light of the failure of her protege
to do the job so we get a whole pile of silly stories about how she
has had to take a new identity because all posts from Northern Ireland
are blocked because I'm in her kill-file. Tosh and rubbish! My
telecommunication connections are via the UK - if she's reading John
MacLeod she ought to be able to read anybody from Northern Ireland.
She acknowledged she can't reply to Nima and now the NSA has admitted
they and she have no answer to him. Nobody has nailed Nima and nobody
among the A Onions can - that's the message of that letter!
May all your troubles be grandchildren!
Dermod.
Susan Maneck
>
>The first Talisman not only did not have a no-forwarding policy, but a
>Counsellor and several other Administrative folks openly subscribed to the
>list
Dear Sekhmet,
And a former Counsellor was subscribed to Talisman II and did nothing to hide
his identity.
Rabia1844
>unwelcome and that the only alternative to their being declared
>Covenant Breakers was for them to submit their resignations.
The hope of the Institutions was that they would submit to the Covenant, not
their resignations.
Rabia1844
>believe X ?"
Most certainly not. I wouldn't have had the grounds I have for a lawsuit
against Nima if he had said "I think she is on anti-depressants" rather than
"it is a well known fact that Susan has been taking high grade prescription
anti-depressants for
several years now."
That's the kind of statement which constitutes libel.
Rabia1844
>intelligence, informed debate, the fruits of academia, beauty, the
>arts, historical accuracy and normal human standards would have motive
>enough to want to see BS eradicated from the face of the earth.
Yes, and because you guys imagine yourselves to be the embodiments of all those
things, you wouldn't hesitate to do it. Thank you for your admission.
Dermod Ryder
"Rabidof1844" <rabi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021012202347...@mb-fo.aol.com...
Interesting! You think that a regard for truth accuracy, etc. is some
sort of "admission". Of guilt? Is this what your New World Order is
about? That these things are to be disdained? That those who
subscribe to them would therefore indulge in nefarious practice to
eliminate those who do not? What a strange sad person you are!
Come now, Blessed Mediatrix! That description applies to the decent
vast majority of mankind as well. So do include them in the list of
your usual suspects and go fulminate against them as well!
Dermod Ryder
"Rabidof1844" <rabi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021012200935...@mb-fo.aol.com...
Yeah sure! And Sylvester ain't gonna eat Tweetie Pie if he gets the
chance!
Dermod Ryder
"dweadful steam twap " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021012195628...@mb-fo.aol.com...
> >
> >
> >The first Talisman not only did not have a no-forwarding policy,
but a
> >Counsellor and several other Administrative folks openly subscribed
to the
> >list
>
> Dear Sekhmet,
>
> And a former Counsellor was subscribed to Talisman II and did
nothing to hide
> his identity.
My God! How magnificent of him!
But the gist still is that these gomers haunt the place and woe betide
anybody who says a word out of place! So much for freedom of
expression!
Boy, were they pissed at such rank disobedience as they found - indeed
some were "shocked!" And the truly strange thing is that when they
went to discipline the brats who dared express their opinions, those
self same brats told them to "eff off" and "wise up", that the
Writings allowed of such freedom of expression. Weeeell! I ask you!
Such impertinence! And to a Counsellor who allowed it to be known
that his magnificent presence was in the immediate vicinity! Pity is
that the beggars couldn't be taken out, at once, and strung up to the
nearest lamppost! But, alack and alas, because secular society has
silly rules against these sorts of proper things, they just could not
be done!
But, my word, were those brats taught a salutary lesson when the three
greatest culprits were slung out on their ears and the rest of the
cads and bounders got the message and slung their own hooks! If only
they had had the good manners to shut up then, wouldn't life have been
grand ....... ! Geez! One wouldn't be getting odd messages from some
strange demented woman, when one is on the way out to the airport on
one's way for a quick vacation in China! (Sigh) Lord, 'tis a strange
wicked world!
Dermod Ryder
> Not I, Michael-- despite ending up as a computer technician, my
field of study
> was Archaeology (with a Geology minor), so I know all about the
racist origins
> of the "ancient astronaut" theory, as well as those equally racist
theories
> requiring Europeans (or Atlanteans) to have helped other cultures
create their
> great works. I read Von Daniken and his ilk only as entertainment
and to keep
> my blood pressure up, since such books are so full of unwarranted
assumptions
> and factual errors that only the completely ignorant could take them
seriously!
Wasn't Von Daniken exposed or actually confessed to the fact that he
made up the evidence as he went along to suit his "theories"? I read
the first of his books - "Chariots of the Gods" (?) many moons age and
thought at the time that it was "interesting" but needed a lot more
work before it would be convincing. Later revelations that his
"artefacts" were not as old as he claimed wiped his theory out
completely - if aliens did visit in the past etc., because of Von
Daniken, the burden of proof has now surpassed the "balance of
probability" test.
> For example, the 100,000-year-old crystal skull is actually 14th
century Aztec,
> it is not unique, and the Aztecs had plenty of real skulls to use as
models for
> their sculptures, so the idea that the crystal skull was the
prototype and our
> skulls the knockoffs is totally preposterous.
You can very easily "sex" a prehistoric skull - if the mouth is open,
it's a woman - at least according to the late great Spike Milligan.
> And that "helipad" on the Plains of Nazca is only three feet across
(it's the
> knee of a spider effigy), so any aliens landing there must have been
VERY VERY
> SMALL.
"Caterpillars" perhaps?
> There's plenty more, but I hope that's enough to show you that my
"skyhook"
> comment was a joke!
It was??????
>(besides, I'm a goddess; what would I need aliens for? <g>)
Your amusement perhaps??????
Dermod.
Dermod Ryder
> >> You can't sue someone for what they believe.
> >
> >But you can if that belief is expressed and is libellous!
>
> Not if it's clear that it's only an opinion.
Not according to UK law.
> But even if you're correct, I feel that older offenses should take
priority, so
> it would only be fair for Nima to let everybody else sue him first,
since his
> was the first offense.
Writs shall fly????
Dermod.
>
> ;-)
>
> --Sekhmet
Sekhmet
>Wasn't Von Daniken exposed or actually confessed to the fact that he
>made up the evidence as he went along to suit his "theories"?
I don't know if he ever confessed, but he was certainly exposed!
>I read
>the first of his books - "Chariots of the Gods" (?) many moons age and
>thought at the time that it was "interesting" but needed a lot more
>work before it would be convincing. Later revelations that his
>"artefacts" were not as old as he claimed wiped his theory out
>completely - if aliens did visit in the past etc., because of Von
>Daniken, the burden of proof has now surpassed the "balance of
>probability" test.
Yes. By far.
Another interesting guy to read is Velikovsky, who managed to be preposterous
in at least three different fields-- archaeology, geology, and astronomy (with
a few questionable forays into chemistry and physics as well). He's been
exposed too, but his ideas are still argued about in some circles.
I especially like the part of "Worlds in Collision" where he confuses
hydrocarbons with carbohydrates and postulates that the "manna from heaven" in
Exodus consisted of congealed petroleum products thrown off by Venus in a close
encounter with the Earth (ooh! Yummy tasty tar! <g>).
[snip]
>You can very easily "sex" a prehistoric skull - if the mouth is open,
>it's a woman - at least according to the late great Spike Milligan.
Spike has a lot to answer for! ;-)
>> And that "helipad" on the Plains of Nazca is only three feet across
>(it's the
>> knee of a spider effigy), so any aliens landing there must have been
>VERY VERY
>> SMALL.
>
>"Caterpillars" perhaps?
Or fairies!
>> There's plenty more, but I hope that's enough to show you that my
>"skyhook"
>> comment was a joke!
>
>It was??????
Er... um.... (hush, Dermod! I'm trying to throw Michael off the scent!)
>>(besides, I'm a goddess; what would I need aliens for? <g>)
>
>Your amusement perhaps??????
Maybe I could teach them line dancing.
--Sekhmet
Sekhmet
>> >
>> >But you can if that belief is expressed and is libellous!
>>
>> Not if it's clear that it's only an opinion.
>
>Not according to UK law.
Hmmm. Maybe this had better go to the World Court, since some of the
prospective litigants are in the US, not the UK, and the laws seem to differ on
this point (oh wait-- the US doesn't _like_ the World Court!)
>> But even if you're correct, I feel that older offenses should take
>priority, so
>> it would only be fair for Nima to let everybody else sue him first,
>since his
>> was the first offense.
>
>Writs shall fly????
Probably before pigs do, but possibly not anytime soon. ;-)
--Sekhmet
Paul Hammond
>
> > >
> <SNIP>
> > >Come now, Dermod, haven't you ever played a "wallie" yourself,
> > >though not
> > > nearly as whacked out as the ninestars character?
> >
> > Of course I've played the "wallie" and that's the difference - I've
> > played it; they aren't playing. those gomers believe that tosh!
>
> So it would seem. What was interesting to me, was that ninestar showed
> up, started posting the stuff, Nima copied, and by the time the Baha'is at
> Beliefnet really understood what ninestar was saying, and telling them how
> seriously wrong they were, I might add, Nima seemed to have left the
> scene. It looks peculiar to me, very peculiar, and not in a 'playing'
> kind of way.
>
> Peace, prosperity, and pick something else, too,
> - Pat
Just on this bit, I've just recently gone back to posting on beliefnet,
so I've seen the recent stuff where it happened.
ninestar is still there, posting away - and I'm not sure what *your*
theory is about him, Pat.
One of the regular conservatives there, dusty, has hinted darkly about
his doubts of ninestar's bona fides - the best guess I can make out
from his mutterings is that he suspects Steve Marshall of inventing
him, but this is clearly bunkum.
Of course, he's nothing compared to our George Fleming - just reflecting
a common, if distasteful, USAnion opinion, and asking in a hurt manner
why it is that Baha'is shouldn't discuss current affairs.
But, I'm interested in how people are reacting to him.
Paul
Rabia1844
>sort of "admission". Of guilt?
No, anyone who states that their own personal conceptions of 'truth, accuracy,
etc.' are justifications for a criminal act as you did has made an admission.
Michael McKenny
You quoted and shared with us:
Sekhmet (sekhm...@aol.com.nz) writes:
> Michael wrote:
>> What do you mean, "Here in the US" ? I thought you lived in New
>>Zealand? Could be that nz at the end of your e-address.
>
> That's a spam blocker. I chose .nz because I have friends there, my favorite TV
> show was filmed there (my current favorite movie was too, but that was long
> after I started using .nz as a spam blocker so it doesn't count), and I'm a
> sucker for Kiwi scenery. A real New Zealand address would end in ".co.nz", not
> ".com.nz", because they don't use ".com" there.
> If you pay close attention, you'll see that a lot of AOL'ers have added odd or
> nonsensical things to the end of our email addresses-- it's one of the very few
> newsgroup features we get to play with!
I see. That explains why you've been posting at interesting hours for
one actually living in NZ. i agree about the scenery and movies.
>>Americans don't
>>really sue each and every person who calls someone a nut do they?
>
> Not each and every one, no-- but it happens, as do lawsuits on other assorted
> issues which I (and usually the court) tend to consider frivolous.
I thought in order to win a suit one had to prove financial loss, and I
can't see how anyone could prove being called a nut resulted in financial
loss, especially being called a nut in a newsgroup post. It would be very
interesting to see if such a case was every won by the one called a nut.
As I may have mentioned before, some of the pagan lists I belong to have a
rule that threatening to sue can be grounds for getting kicked off the list.
>>I bet people are even smarter in New Zealand.
>
> The ones I know are. ;-)
Three cheers to them.
Thrice Three Blessings, Michael.
Michael McKenny
You shared with us:
Sekhmet (sekhm...@aol.com.nz) writes:
> Michael wrote:
>> Humans back then were just as smart (uhm, or whatever word should be
>>used) as humans today. As I understand it there is adequate description
>>in
>>surviving records (these old papyrus scrolls) to enable people today to
>>realize how it was done, notwithstanding prejudices by some Westerners
>>today. After all, how did the Baha'i Temple in India get built? If you
>>didn't have that on film, I bet you'd have aliens credited with that one,
>>too.
>
> Not I, Michael-- despite ending up as a computer technician, my field of study
> was Archaeology (with a Geology minor), so I know all about the racist origins
> of the "ancient astronaut" theory, as well as those equally racist theories
> requiring Europeans (or Atlanteans) to have helped other cultures create their
> great works. I read Von Daniken and his ilk only as entertainment and to keep
> my blood pressure up, since such books are so full of unwarranted assumptions
> and factual errors that only the completely ignorant could take them seriously!
Yet one more reason to like you. If you've looked at the solarguard web
site, what's your opinion of the archaeology it contains. It has Michel
Boucher's history of Canadian Archaeology, with extensive bibliography,
and other archaological stuff scattered amongst the various geographic
sections.
I recall around 1974 watching a debate between Von Daniken and an
archaeology professor. Alas, the professor wasn't used to, it seems,
speaking briefly and didn't do very well, because the bell interrupted
before the point was made.
> For example, the 100,000-year-old crystal skull is actually 14th century Aztec,
> it is not unique, and the Aztecs had plenty of real skulls to use as models for
> their sculptures, so the idea that the crystal skull was the prototype and our
> skulls the knockoffs is totally preposterous.
> And that "helipad" on the Plains of Nazca is only three feet across (it's the
> knee of a spider effigy), so any aliens landing there must have been VERY VERY
> SMALL.
>
> There's plenty more, but I hope that's enough to show you that my "skyhook"
> comment was a joke! (besides, I'm a goddess; what would I need aliens for? <g>)
I understood you were joking. I meant an impersonal you above, like we or
one, i.e. "We would have those around us just as assertive that aliens must
have built the Baha'i Temple in India as those around us are that aliens
must have built the pyramids". Atlanteans, Lemurians and Hyperborians are
the same thing. I understand your point about deities not needing aliens.
I'll try not to say too loudly that some people consider references to
deities an indication of alien presence on Earth.
Live Long and Prosper :)
Michael
Freethought110
yours you've managed to alienate over the years by chucking off your BS.
Names like Robert Johnston and George Flemming come prominently to mind.
--
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)
"Rabia1844" <rabi...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021012122752...@mb-md.aol.com...
>The only people who
>would have an interest in planning and co-ordinating such an assault
>would appear to be the BIGS.
And who would be interested in planning and coordinating such an assault on
Baha'i Studies?
Dermod Ryder
Hi sekhmet,
> >Wasn't Von Daniken exposed or actually confessed to the fact that
he
> >made up the evidence as he went along to suit his "theories"?
>
> I don't know if he ever confessed, but he was certainly exposed!
And doubtless got six months for it too! Dirty beast!
> Another interesting guy to read is Velikovsky, who managed to be
preposterous
> in at least three different fields-- archaeology, geology, and
astronomy (with
> a few questionable forays into chemistry and physics as well). He's
been
> exposed too, but his ideas are still argued about in some circles.
> I especially like the part of "Worlds in Collision" where he
confuses
> hydrocarbons with carbohydrates and postulates that the "manna from
heaven" in
> Exodus consisted of congealed petroleum products thrown off by Venus
in a close
> encounter with the Earth (ooh! Yummy tasty tar! <g>).
I also read "Worlds in Collision" many moons ago - in fact somebody
swiped my copy of the book. Velikovsky was condemned from Day One for
his hypothesis by people who had often not even read the book. I
confess to being no expert in the field but he struck me as presenting
a well argued case which upset the conventional wisdom and the
establishment very much and that was why he was rejected.
In one respect he does seem to have had a lasting effect -
"catastrophism" which was the essence of what he wrote is now accepted
as a possible explanation for many prehistoric events including the
disappearance of the dinosaurs. We have one of those coffee-table
books (Xmas present) which contains an article on Velikovsky showing
that many of his predictions have been proven true e.g. Venus has a
massive atmosphere, is very hot and has an anomalous rotation and few
of them false - this being in a book that refutes Von Daniken and is
totally dismissive of the "Aliens built the Pyramids" theory. From
what I gathered he's still hated by an establishment being forced to
accept that some of what he postulated is true.
>
> [snip]
> >You can very easily "sex" a prehistoric skull - if the mouth is
open,
> >it's a woman - at least according to the late great Spike Milligan.
>
> Spike has a lot to answer for! ;-)
One of the greatest humourists of the 20th Century, all he has to
answer for is the fact that he made millions laugh.
>
> >> And that "helipad" on the Plains of Nazca is only three feet
across
> >(it's the
> >> knee of a spider effigy), so any aliens landing there must have
been
> >VERY VERY
> >> SMALL.
> >
> >"Caterpillars" perhaps?
>
> Or fairies!
Or more probably - leprechauns. In other words, and I can now reveal
this to a sceptical world, 'twas alien leprechauns who landed and they
founded the super race now known as the Irish. How else can you
explain that we have the best music, the best drink, the most erudite
expounders of language and other talents so great in numbers, they
defy enumeration. Besides that didn't one of our golfers sink that
magic putt that defeated the USA in the Ryder Cup! Of course there
are ... one or two "throwbacks" that we try to keep quiet about,
including one who was here recently.
> >> There's plenty more, but I hope that's enough to show you that my
> >"skyhook"
> >> comment was a joke!
> >
> >It was??????
>
> Er... um.... (hush, Dermod! I'm trying to throw Michael off the
scent!)
I don't think you can. He's Irish after all!
> >>(besides, I'm a goddess; what would I need aliens for? <g>)
> >
> >Your amusement perhaps??????
>
> Maybe I could teach them line dancing.
I think they went home to avoid that!
Dermod.
>
> --Sekhmet
Sekhmet
[snip]
> I thought in order to win a suit one had to prove financial loss, and I
>can't see how anyone could prove being called a nut resulted in financial
>loss, especially being called a nut in a newsgroup post.
In the US we have that pesky "defamation of character" thing, reputation
apparently being as valuable as financial loss (although the person suing
_does_ demand money as recompense for damage to their reputation, not merely a
public retraction and apology)
>It would be very
>interesting to see if such a case was every won by the one called a nut.
I'm not sure anybody has ever won one, but it doesn't stop people from trying!
>As I may have mentioned before, some of the pagan lists I belong to have a
>rule that threatening to sue can be grounds for getting kicked off the list.
I like that idea. Unfortunately it won't work in an unmoderated newsgroup...
--Sekhmet
Sekhmet
>site, what's your opinion of the archaeology it contains. It has Michel
>Boucher's history of Canadian Archaeology, with extensive bibliography,
>and other archaological stuff scattered amongst the various geographic
>sections.
Unfortunately I haven't had a chance to give Solarguard more than a quick look.
Obviously I will have to make time to check it out in more detail!
> I recall around 1974 watching a debate between Von Daniken and an
>archaeology professor. Alas, the professor wasn't used to, it seems,
>speaking briefly and didn't do very well, because the bell interrupted
>before the point was made.
Most professors do tend to have difficulties being concise! ;-)
[snip]
>> There's plenty more, but I hope that's enough to show you that my "skyhook"
>> comment was a joke! (besides, I'm a goddess; what would I need aliens
>for? <g>)
>
> I understood you were joking. I meant an impersonal you above, like we
>or
>one, i.e. "We would have those around us just as assertive that aliens must
>have built the Baha'i Temple in India as those around us are that aliens
>must have built the pyramids". Atlanteans, Lemurians and Hyperborians are
>the same thing.
Okay. I feel much better now-- I thought you thought I was an idiot! ;-)
>I understand your point about deities not needing aliens.
>I'll try not to say too loudly that some people consider references to
>deities an indication of alien presence on Earth.
Yes, please don't; it was SO terribly sad what happened to Apollo (Star Trek:
"Who Mourns for Adonis?"). <g>
I worked for a guy once (fortunately briefly) who, to all appearances, was a
garden-variety Conservative Christian, holding all the proper Conservative
Christian views, _except_ he was utterly convinced (and tried to convince me)
that Jesus came from outer space. Scary!
--Sekhmet
Sekhmet
>I also read "Worlds in Collision" many moons ago - in fact somebody
>swiped my copy of the book.
I still have both "Worlds in Collision" and "Earth in Upheaval", and
occasionally reread both, because they're excellently written and chock-full of
fascinating little facts, even though Velikovsky's conclusions are more than a
little "iffy", IMHO.
>Velikovsky was condemned from Day One for
>his hypothesis by people who had often not even read the book. I
>confess to being no expert in the field but he struck me as presenting
>a well argued case which upset the conventional wisdom and the
>establishment very much and that was why he was rejected.
Yes, that's true, at least in part. I remember one of my professors being
horrified, just in principle, when I insisted on writing a paper on
Velikovsky's work for one of her classes, even though I wrote objectively
rather than as one of his devotees.
>In one respect he does seem to have had a lasting effect -
>"catastrophism" which was the essence of what he wrote is now accepted
>as a possible explanation for many prehistoric events including the
>disappearance of the dinosaurs.
The current terminology is "punctuated equilibrium". ;-)
>We have one of those coffee-table
>books (Xmas present) which contains an article on Velikovsky showing
>that many of his predictions have been proven true e.g. Venus has a
>massive atmosphere, is very hot and has an anomalous rotation and few
>of them false - this being in a book that refutes Von Daniken and is
>totally dismissive of the "Aliens built the Pyramids" theory. From
>what I gathered he's still hated by an establishment being forced to
>accept that some of what he postulated is true.
Some of what he postulated is true, but not for the reasons he claimed they
were. For example, Venus is indeed hot, but current thought is that it's due to
a runaway "greenhouse effect" (i.e. extreme Global Warming), not residual heat
from the planet ping-ponging around the solar system. Others of his ideas have
similar problems, and he _completely_ missed plate tectonics (a.k.a.
continental drift), which is a better (and proven) explanation for a lot of the
geological phenomena he used as evidence for his theories. But as I said he's
fun to read, and there's certainly plenty of food for thought in his books.
BTW, did you see that it has been proposed that there may be life on Venus
after all? I recently saw an article (I think it was on the BBC website, but
don't remember for sure) which said there's evidence of life high in the
Venusian clouds, where heat and pressure are far less intense than at the
surface. Fascinating if true!
[snip]
>> Spike has a lot to answer for! ;-)
>
>One of the greatest humourists of the 20th Century, all he has to
>answer for is the fact that he made millions laugh.
Yeah, I know. ;-)
>>
>> >> And that "helipad" on the Plains of Nazca is only three feet
>across
>> >(it's the
>> >> knee of a spider effigy), so any aliens landing there must have
>been
>> >VERY VERY
>> >> SMALL.
>> >
>> >"Caterpillars" perhaps?
>>
>> Or fairies!
>
>Or more probably - leprechauns.
Aaaargh! I was afraid you'd mention them...
>In other words, and I can now reveal
>this to a sceptical world, 'twas alien leprechauns who landed and they
>founded the super race now known as the Irish. How else can you
>explain that we have the best music, the best drink, the most erudite
>expounders of language and other talents so great in numbers, they
>defy enumeration.
Great suffering produces great art?
>Besides that didn't one of our golfers sink that
>magic putt that defeated the USA in the Ryder Cup! Of course there
>are ... one or two "throwbacks" that we try to keep quiet about,
>including one who was here recently.
::ahem::... yes; you guys need to keep a closer eye on your gene pool! ;-)
>> >> There's plenty more, but I hope that's enough to show you that my
>> >"skyhook"
>> >> comment was a joke!
>> >
>> >It was??????
>>
>> Er... um.... (hush, Dermod! I'm trying to throw Michael off the
>scent!)
>
>I don't think you can. He's Irish after all!
Yeah, but he's been transplanted to other soil. Wouldn't that dilute him some?
>> >>(besides, I'm a goddess; what would I need aliens for? <g>)
>> >
>> >Your amusement perhaps??????
>>
>> Maybe I could teach them line dancing.
>
>I think they went home to avoid that!
I wondered why the place got so quiet all of a sudden!
--Sekhmet