@@Translation of Fars Newsagency Press Releaseon Baha'i missionary expulsions@@
Abraxas
http://www.farsnews.com/NewsVm.asp?nn=8310200045%20%20&word=???
http://www.farsnews.com/NewsVm.asp?nn=8310200045%20%20&word=???
Translation as follows:" Item No 8310200045
Political Desk 11th Jan 2005
TWO FOREIGN CITIZENS ACTIVE IN THE MISLED BAHA'I CULT EXPELLED
Fars News Agency: Two foreign citizens operating as cell leaders for
the misled Baha'i cult have been arrested and subsequently expelled
from the country. In an interview with Fars News Agency, a government
official spoke about the identification and capture of two foreign
citizens: "These individuals were involved in the establishment of
cells for the purpose of extending the activities of the misled Baha'i
cult amongst the youth. They were arrested by the security forces and
expelled from the country". He added: "One individual was a citizen of
a European country and the other was from a Latin American country.
They had regularly travelled into and out of Iran for the past five
years posing as tourists and businessmen. They used the cover of
business activities aimed at converting the youth to their cult. This
official named the city of London as the organising base in relation
tothe activities of these individuals and said: "These two established
networksin a number of universities in order to actively teach the
Baha'i cult."
END OF THE NEWS ITEM
star...@yahoo.com
They can always claim to being atheists who are just members of
University Baha'i Clubs - some people buy that line.
Starr*
pe...@capebyron.com
Apparantly it's a crime in Iran to practise a religion other than
Islam.
Finnegan's Wake
<pe...@capebyron.com> wrote in message
news:1106234657....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> Yep, muslims do that all the time in Australia. What's the crime mate?
> Apparantly it's a crime in Iran to practise a religion other than
> Islam.
>
Apparently it is! Now, have you any other shrewd observations to make?
Karen Bacquet
Well, I do: Whoever authorized two Baha'i teachers from London to
coordinate conversion efforts in Iran is out of their freakin' minds. I
don't know if folks here remember, but the Office of Persian and Arab
Affairs is in London; that fact was in one of the documents Journalist
leaked and could probably be confirmed elsewhere. The Iranian press
reported that the two Baha'i "missionaries" were London-based, so it's
almost certainly talking about that office. It works directly under the
UHJ, who is the body that appoints the liaisons to Middle Eastern countries.
Now, I am loath to just believe any rumor that comes down the pipe, but
*somebody* had to have approved this cockeyed, life-risking scheme, and
that somebody had to be in Haifa. (The press release itself appeared in
translation on H-Bahai, from an Iranian poster I'm not familiar with.)
The sudden resignations of Semple and Martin is, to say the least,
suggestive. Baha'is like to say these guys have no independent power,
but I can't imagine that if an individual UHJ member calls up any office
in the Baha'i world and says "Do this" that anyone is going to say "Wait
a minute, I want to make sure the entire House approved it first." In
fact, I would imagine that direct oral instructions from individual
members aren't that uncommon. I know that NSA secretaries do that.
Unless somebody else's head rolls, and soon, I'm going to find it hard
to believe that it wasn't Semple and Martin behind it all, without the
approval of their fellow-members. I know that Semple is an old man, and
way past due for retirement, and it may be true that Doug Martin has
health problems. But the off-year retirement of two UHJ members is
unusual, and coming on the heels of this other story, it seems just a
little too much for coincidence.
There are alternative scenarios: It could be that the entire UHJ
approved an effort to convert Iranians, which would indicate a callous
disregard for the safety of the friends in that country on their part.
Or that somebody from the ITC cooked up this scheme and gave the order
without permission, in which case we should be hearing of a retiring
Counsellor or two very shortly. Or, if one wants to really stretch it,
some hotshot at the Office of Persian and Arab Affairs made the decision
-- which, again, would result in someone being forced to resign. But
none of those are as likely as it being Semple and Martin who gave the
order, independently of the House as a whole.
Love, Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
Cal E. Rollins
Again, has anybody identified the two missionaries? And what is the
rumor Paul has heard about their being connected to these retirees?
Sounds too juicey for me to not know about. I pride myself in keeping
up on all the good stuff going around, so I'm profoundly hurt. --Cal
Mr. All Bad
Karen Bacquet wrote:
>
>
> Finnegan's Wake wrote:
>
>> <pe...@capebyron.com> wrote in message
>> news:1106234657....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>>
>>> Yep, muslims do that all the time in Australia. What's the crime mate?
>>> Apparantly it's a crime in Iran to practise a religion other than
>>> Islam.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Apparently it is! Now, have you any other shrewd observations to make?
>
>
> Well, I do: Whoever authorized two Baha'i teachers from London to
> coordinate conversion efforts in Iran is out of their freakin' minds.
To what can it be likened? Freezer salesmen among the Innuit? Perhaps
like chop sticks sales folk in the bamboo fields? Iran, as a nation,
would have the largest concentration of Baha'is, for a country of
statistically significatn size (that is excluding the small states one
might find in Micronesia and other sparsely populated regions), such
that it would _not_ be a place that one would pioneer _to_. Iran is the
place to pioneer _from_.
> I
> don't know if folks here remember, but the Office of Persian and Arab
> Affairs is in London; that fact was in one of the documents Journalist
> leaked and could probably be confirmed elsewhere. The Iranian press
> reported that the two Baha'i "missionaries" were London-based, so it's
> almost certainly talking about that office. It works directly under the
> UHJ, who is the body that appoints the liaisons to Middle Eastern
> countries.
>
I'm sorry, Karen, but this really is beside the point. Imagine Rome in
70 AD, where Christianity had just been heard about, sending Christian
missionaries to Palestine, where the largest concentrations of
Christians already were. It just makes no sense, whatsoever.
>
> Now, I am loath to just believe any rumor that comes down the pipe, but
> *somebody* had to have approved this cockeyed, life-risking scheme, and
> that somebody had to be in Haifa. (The press release itself appeared in
If occidentals were teaching the BF in Iran, then, they were, BUT, the
notion there was a plan to sell ice to the Innuit, or coals to
Newcastle, seems completely far-fetched, an assumption of organized
stupidity were simple folly is apparent. There was no need to send
Baha'is to Iran to teach the BF.
- Mr. All Bad
Karen Bacquet
>
> >
>
>> Now, I am loath to just believe any rumor that comes down the pipe,
>> but *somebody* had to have approved this cockeyed, life-risking
>> scheme, and that somebody had to be in Haifa. (The press release
>> itself appeared in
>
>
> If occidentals were teaching the BF in Iran, then, they were, BUT, the
> notion there was a plan to sell ice to the Innuit, or coals to
> Newcastle, seems completely far-fetched, an assumption of organized
> stupidity were simple folly is apparent. There was no need to send
> Baha'is to Iran to teach the BF.
So, you are saying that these two people went to Iran, over a period of
five years, admitting under questioning that they were based in London,
without permission from the Baha'i institutions? Good God, Pat, I was
told as a raw newbie in the middle of nowhere that we weren't supposed
to teach Iranians, or anyone else from the Middle East, the Faith --
even people living in this country. Baha'is aren't even supposed to
travel to Iran without permission from the Institutions. (They used to
run ads in the *Amerivan Baha'i* that we were supposed to notify the NSA
when we traveled anywhere abroad.) "Do not endanger the friends in
Iran" has been part of our catechism longer than I've been a Baha'i.
It's even trotted out as an excuse for the need to control information.
There are Baha'i scholars who have specialized in Persian, but have
never set foot in the country, as would be usual in a graduate program,
because *Baha'is can't go to Iran*. If any Baha'is were traveling to
Iran on a regular basis, and teaching the Faith, without permission,
they would have been in big trouble with the administration long ago. I
simply don't believe they could have kept such a thing secret from the
administration that long.
No way were these people there without someone in upper echelons knowing
and approving it.
The Baha'i community has declined significantly in numbers since 1979;
it's one reason why the UHJ keeps writing letters telling Baha'is not to
leave. They also seem to believe in some sort of prophetic "destiny"
that the Baha'is will have in Iran's future, so they don't want Baha'is
leaving -- they want them to stay to fulfil it. What it looks like to
me is that somebody got the bright idea to offset emigration through
conversion.
Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
Susan Maneck
>coordinate conversion efforts in Iran is out of their freakin' minds.
Karen,
Are you really taking this report at face value? My guess is that there were
simply two Baha'is who happened to be in Iran in conjunction with their
employment. When their religious identity was discovered, they were likely
kicked out on accusations of proselytizing whether they were doing so or not.
>The Iranian press
>reported that the two Baha'i "missionaries" were London-based, so it's
>almost certainly talking about that office.
Not necessarily. Remember, the Iranian government is keen to tie Baha'is into
British imperialism. Hence, they would likely be tied to London whether there
are any real connections or not.
>
>Now, I am loath to just believe any rumor that comes down the pipe, but
>*somebody* had to have approved this cockeyed, life-risking scheme,
I'm betting that the institutions likely did not even know about these two
going to Iran, if in fact they are really Baha'is.
>The sudden resignations of Semple and Martin is, to say the least,
>suggestive.
It's suggestive of nothing. Doug Martin's resignation was a bit of a surprise
but I had heard Ian Semple planned to retire over a year ago. I had thought he
was planning to finish his present term out, but I suppose he found he was just
slowing down too much.
What real connection has anyone made between the resignation of these two House
members and this report about an incident in Iran which we don't even know the
truth of?
>But the off-year retirement of two UHJ members is
>unusual, and coming on the heels of this other story, it seems just a
>little too much for coincidence.
You are vastly exaggerating the significance of this story. If it hadn't
corresponded with this event, Nima would be trying to tie it with something
other delusion of his. Why are you buying into it? The truth of the matter is
that men in their seventies or eighties could either die or have to retire
rather suddenly. If one of them had died Nima would be saying they had been
poisoned!
>There are alternative scenarios: It could be that the entire UHJ
>approved an effort to convert Iranians,
Are you really sure there was *any* effort to convert Iranians, or was this
just a presumption on the part of the government? My guess is the latter.
>
>Or that somebody from the ITC cooked up this scheme and gave the order
>without permission, in which case we should be hearing of a retiring
>Counsellor or two very shortly.
So if a Counsellor retires you will consider it proof? Come on, Karen, Nima may
engage in this kind of paranoid delusions, but surely you are a clearer thinker
than that! First off why don't you start by getting the names of these two
foreigners and then ascertain whether they are really Baha'is in good standing?
If they are Baha'is then look at the evidence as to whether or not they were
actually proselytizing or just happened to be in the country on other business
when it was discovered they were Baha'is. If indeed you can produce their
names, and collect clear evidence that they were actively teaching the Faith,
then maybe you can look for clues as to whether they had any official support.
>But
>none of those are as likely as it being Semple and Martin who gave the
>order, independently of the House as a whole.
And it is more likely there was no order and no proselytizing. For all we know
the two people expelled from the country were not even Baha'is.
Find out what really happened before you speculate on various scenarios as to
why. At least get these people's name. Then we can learn if they are Baha'is or
not.
warmest, Susan
warmest, Susan
http://bahaistudies.net/susanmaneck/
Baha'i Studies is available through the following:
http://www.escribe.com/religion/bahaist/
To subscribe: use subscribe bahai-st in the message body to ly...@list.jccc.net
Abraxas
>Apparantly it's a crime in Iran to practise a religion other than
>Islam.
Nope. If it was, there wouldn't be Christians and Jewish
representatives in the majlis. That line you are advancing above is
going to come and kick you in the ass.
W
Abraxas
>coordinate conversion efforts in Iran is out of their freakin' minds.
The (2004 consolidated) @@Persian and Arab Committee@@ of the ITC which
is headquartered in London (see Journalists leaked memo posted on TRB).
Given that usually each uhj member holds the regional portfolio and is
responsible for that region as a whole, it is not out of the realm of
speculation that the buck stopped with Ian Semple, hence the
resignation. However, Ruhi Institutes are the babies of Farzam Arbab.
What is the deal here with Doug Martin and Ian Semple both resigning?
As Randy put it, Kremnologists had it better than we did. But there is
more info on its way shortly. My contacts tell me the WC is in serious
damage control mode at the moment.
W
Karen Bacquet
Susan Maneck wrote:
>>Whoever authorized two Baha'i teachers from London to
>>coordinate conversion efforts in Iran is out of their freakin' minds.
>
>
> Karen,
>
> Are you really taking this report at face value? My guess is that there were
> simply two Baha'is who happened to be in Iran in conjunction with their
> employment. When their religious identity was discovered, they were likely
> kicked out on accusations of proselytizing whether they were doing so or not.
Susan,
Firstly, Baha'is are not supposed to be going to Iran. They have even
been discouraging Iranians who have family there from visiting.
Secondly, the report is too detailed. If these guys were just hanging
around, doing business, that would be some major inventing to connect
them with trying to convert college students, through a coordinated
effort, over a period of five years. Why connect businessmen with
universities, if they weren't there? The government could throw them
out of the country, just for being Baha'is, without any elaboration on it.
I'm hearing now from multiple sources that several Iranian Baha'is
have been arrested in connection with this, and released on bond.
>
>
>>The Iranian press
>>reported that the two Baha'i "missionaries" were London-based, so it's
>>almost certainly talking about that office.
>
>
> Not necessarily. Remember, the Iranian government is keen to tie Baha'is into
> British imperialism. Hence, they would likely be tied to London whether there
> are any real connections or not.
Then why not just say these guys are British? I mean, if you're going
to invent something, why stop with just saying they were working from
London. Or do they have something against Latin Americans, too?
>
>
>>Now, I am loath to just believe any rumor that comes down the pipe, but
>>*somebody* had to have approved this cockeyed, life-risking scheme,
>
>
> I'm betting that the institutions likely did not even know about these two
> going to Iran, if in fact they are really Baha'is.
I wouldn't think that folks are anxious to say they are Baha'is while in
Iran, if they are not. After all, if these people were there on
business, it must be very inconvenient and costly to get kicked out. If
they have business there, now they won't be able to go back. I can't
imagine what motivation they would have to falsely claim to be Baha'is,
in such circumstances.
>
>
>>The sudden resignations of Semple and Martin is, to say the least,
>>suggestive.
>
>
> It's suggestive of nothing. Doug Martin's resignation was a bit of a surprise
> but I had heard Ian Semple planned to retire over a year ago. I had thought he
> was planning to finish his present term out, but I suppose he found he was just
> slowing down too much.
>
> What real connection has anyone made between the resignation of these two House
> members and this report about an incident in Iran which we don't even know the
> truth of?
If there were two Baha'i missionaries in Iran, working on a
five-year-long teaching project, then upper echelons approved it. One of
my friends suggested that it was possible that Semple and Martin
resigned in protest. I can't say for certain -- but *somebody* up there
approved this.
Now, I know that the Iranian press isn't particularly friendly towards
Baha'is, and I know they don't have a free press, but I don't believe
they are inventing a story in toto. Or are you saying that stories that
come out of the Iranian press should be just regarded as false until
proven otherwise? Is the Fars News Agency the Iranian equivalent to the
National Enquirer? Is that what you're saying? If they were going to
just invent something out of thin air, why not something really
scandalous and immoral? After all, if you're going to lie, might as
well lie big. Now the talk of "cells" and "networks" may be
exaggerated, but those guys were teaching the Faith there, and they got
caught.
>
>
>>But the off-year retirement of two UHJ members is
>>unusual, and coming on the heels of this other story, it seems just a
>>little too much for coincidence.
>
>
> You are vastly exaggerating the significance of this story.
Susan, these bozos put *lives* in danger to do this. That's not an
exaggeration, and you have to know that. I'm surprised you're not more
angry over that.
If it hadn't
> corresponded with this event, Nima would be trying to tie it with something
> other delusion of his. Why are you buying into it?
I am not "buying" it, but I can add two and two. Somebody authorized
those people to be there. Who was it, and why?
The truth of the matter is
> that men in their seventies or eighties could either die or have to retire
> rather suddenly. If one of them had died Nima would be saying they had been
> poisoned!
>
>
>>There are alternative scenarios: It could be that the entire UHJ
>>approved an effort to convert Iranians,
>
>
> Are you really sure there was *any* effort to convert Iranians, or was this
> just a presumption on the part of the government? My guess is the latter.
The impression given by that article is that these people did some
talking while they were under arrest. Their ethnicity was known; the
location of their "base" was known; it was known that they had made
several trips to Iran over a five-year period. As I said, they could
have just tossed these guys out of the country for being Baha'is, accuse
them of being spies or something, and that would be it. Is the Iranian
press in the habit of inventing detailed stories about people it doesn't
like, or do the journalists there have to come without shouting distance
of the truth?
>
>
>>Or that somebody from the ITC cooked up this scheme and gave the order
>>without permission, in which case we should be hearing of a retiring
>>Counsellor or two very shortly.
>
>
> So if a Counsellor retires you will consider it proof? Come on, Karen, Nima may
> engage in this kind of paranoid delusions, but surely you are a clearer thinker
> than that! First off why don't you start by getting the names of these two
> foreigners and then ascertain whether they are really Baha'is in good standing?
Names would help, but that's something that might not ever be known --
or only known through the rumor mill. As for them really being Baha'is,
like I said, I can't imagine why anybody would say they were a Baha'i
when they are not, under those circumstances. Unless you think they
were Orthodox Baha'is or members of another splinter group?
> If they are Baha'is then look at the evidence as to whether or not they were
> actually proselytizing or just happened to be in the country on other business
> when it was discovered they were Baha'is. If indeed you can produce their
> names, and collect clear evidence that they were actively teaching the Faith,
> then maybe you can look for clues as to whether they had any official support.
So, you're saying that any Baha'i who happens to be visiting Iran, for
any reason, will be accused of proselytizing, even if they are there to
visit their great-aunt Martha? Do stories like this appear in the
Iranian press on a regular basis? Because I know Iranian Baha'is who
live overseas have been able to go visit relatives and such for quite
some time -- the UHJ wouldn't bother to discourage something that isn't
happening. Do they get picked up by the government and accused of
trying to convert people?
If this were not a press story, I would not have believed it. It seems
too incredibly stupid even for the Baha'i administration, to do a thing
like this. But it sounds to me that you are saying that nothing out of
the press in that country is to be believed unless there is independent
corroboration. Is the press situation there really that terrible that
news stories amount to total fiction?
Love, Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
Abraxas
>news stories amount to total fiction?
No
PaulHammond
star...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> They can always claim to being atheists who are just members of
> University Baha'i Clubs - some people buy that line.
>
> Starr*
Now, what could you possibly be referring to here?
Palu*
the moon shines on a pile of shite and is still white
PaulHammond
The Iranian authorities tend to dismiss the Baha'i faith
as an invented religion/ a political tool of the British
Empire / in league with the Russians, whatever.
Saying "it isn't a real religion" is a way to justify them
persecuting Baha'is.
Earlier religions (mentioned in the Quran) have Muhammad's
protection, so they have some rights, though I do have
some recall of Christian's being chucked out of the
country for proselytising a couple of years ago...
Cal E. Rollins
Don't you love that newsagency use of cells in relation to our
pioneering in Iran? We use that word here in our cancer clinics and for
ME terrorists operating in our cities and hamlets. At least they didn't
call us pods like they did in the "Body Snatchers" films. The words
remind me of the one we use in connection with Ruhi and new
consolidation activities, "clusters." I remember the film years ago
called "The Bee People" who formed clusters. Praise be to Allah
cloisters are forbidden in this Dispensation. --Cal
Cal E. Rollins
You may be right. If people have seen the video tape in which Firuz
does a brilliant presentation before the American Congress' Subcommittee
on Iranian Persecutions, he says very clearly what you are saying.
Religions are free to practice their beliefs in Iran. It's Baha'is who
can't, because we are believed to be an heretical sect of Islam
deserving, at the very least, persecution and preferably death (my
words). --Cal
Cal E. Rollins
Are you implying that Paul is part of the London cabal dipping into Iran
over a five year period? It seems unlikely; however, I would have
thought it unlikely that there would be foreign nationals doing Baha'i
cellular work in Iran when I was discouraged from going to Cuba on an
humanitarian mission to a cancer clinic with my spouse.
Paul, thanks to Star, you're becoming more interesting than I thought
you were. Mai, oh Mai, Paul's a real spy.... --Cal
Steve Marshall
>Praise be to Allah
>cloisters are forbidden in this Dispensation.
"Say: O concourse of monks! Seclude not yourselves in your centres
and clusters. Come ye out of them by My leave, and busy, then,
yourselves with what will profit you and others. Thus commandeth you
He Who is the Lord of the Day of Reckoning. Seclude yourselves in the
stronghold of My love. This, truly, is the seclusion that befitteth
you, could ye but know it. He that secludeth himself in his house is
indeed as one dead. It behooveth man to show forth that which will
benefit mankind. He that bringeth forth no fruit is fit for the fire.
Thus admonisheth you your Lord; He, verily, is the Mighty, the
Bountiful.
(Baha'u'llah: Epistle to the Son of the Wolf, Page: 49)
Karen Bacquet
source I trust. First, I'd like to call attention to this article from
*Iran Focus*::http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1203
Note that is says that the Baha'is arrested were trying to attract
Iranian youth *through* economic activities, as opposed to the other
translated reports that said that they were visiting Iran *under cover*
of doing business. The implications are rather different.
What I have been told is that UHJ members have been recruiting wealthy
Baha'is to funnel money into Iran, for the purpose of setting up Baha'i
youth in business so that they can make a living. We know the economic
situation is very bad, and young people, whether Baha'i or not, have
trouble getting themselves on in life. There is high unemployment, with
all the despair and social ills that go along with that -- drug and
alcohol abuse, promiscuity, spousal and child abuse, the works. In the
West we tend to want to see the Iranian community as being angelic, but
this isn't true. Baha'i youth are given an additional measure of
hopelessness by the UHJ's insistence that they stay in the country, and
I am being told that there is an extremely high rate of depression among
them.
The UHJ is clearly very worried about the Baha'i community in Iran
collapsing entirely. This economic program is one means of trying to
give an incentive for young Baha'is to remain in Iran. My informant,
who is an Iranian Baha'i, tells me that the Baha'is arrested were not
actually teaching the Faith, but were engaged in this economic program,
aimed at Baha'i youth. The confusion may be that some of these kids of
Baha'i background have become alienated, and these people were using an
economic lure to get them back into the community -- which may well have
been seen by the Iranian government as an attempt at conversion.
On the surface, it doesn't seem like a bad idea, but this money is being
funnelled through the office in London, and the committee that is acting
as a de facto NSA in Iran. Both of these agencies are rife with
nepotism and favor trading. The perspective of my informant is that
Baha'is in Iran are just as affected by the social malaise prevalent in
Iran as anybody else is. The UHJ would be doing these kids a better
favor by getting them the hell out of there.
I have actually been given the name of the contact person for the UHJ's
covert economic program in Iran. He serves on the de facto NSA. Are you
still going to insist on my naming names, Susan, or would you rather I
take the path of discretion?
Love, Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
Mr. All Bad
Karen Bacquet wrote:
>
>
> Susan Maneck wrote:
>
>>> Whoever authorized two Baha'i teachers from London to coordinate
>>> conversion efforts in Iran is out of their freakin' minds.
>>
>>
>>
>> Karen,
>> Are you really taking this report at face value? My guess is that
>> there were
>> simply two Baha'is who happened to be in Iran in conjunction with their
>> employment. When their religious identity was discovered, they were
>> likely
>> kicked out on accusations of proselytizing whether they were doing so
>> or not.
>
>
> Susan,
>
> Firstly, Baha'is are not supposed to be going to Iran.
Prior to 'firstly not going to Iran' Iran had been a place of pilgramage
fro Baha'is. I'd wanted to go to Shiraz, but I have to wait.
> They have even
> been discouraging Iranians who have family there from visiting.
I've heard this, and still Baha'is _do_ go to Iran to visit family.
> Secondly, the report is too detailed.
????
The report I saw had no names, etc.
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
TWO FOREIGN CITIZENS ACTIVE IN THE MISLED BAHA'I CULT EXPELLED
Fars News Agency: Two foreign citizens operating as cell leaders for
the misled Baha'i cult have been arrested and subsequently expelled from
the country. In an interview with Fars News Agency, a government
official spoke about the identification and capture of two foreign
citizens, "These individuals were involved in the establishment of cells
for the purpose of extending the activities of the misled Baha'i cult
amongst the youth. They were arrested by the security forces and
expelled from the country". He added, "One individual was a citizen of
a European country and the other was from a Latin American country.
They had regularly travelled into and out of Iran for the past five
years posing as tourists and businessmen. They used the cover of
business activities aimed at converting the youth to their cult. The
official named the city of London as the organizing base in relation to
the activities of these individuals and said, "These two individuals
established networks in a number of universities in order to actively
teach the Baha'i cult."
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The passage on identity reads:
"In an interview with Fars News Agency, a government official spoke
about the identification and capture of two foreign citizens, "These
individuals were involved in the establishment of cells for the purpose
of extending the activities of the misled Baha'i cult amongst the youth.
They were arrested by the security forces and expelled from the country"."
It adds that one is a European and one a Latin American. It says they
posed as tourists and businessmen, and that they targetted the youth.
It would seem to me that a better way to target the youth would be to
enter Iran as engineering or science professors. They would have better
exposure to young people than tourists would.
> If these guys were just hanging
> around, doing business, that would be some major inventing to connect
> them with trying to convert college students, through a coordinated
> effort, over a period of five years. Why connect businessmen with
> universities, if they weren't there? The government could throw them
> out of the country, just for being Baha'is, without any elaboration on it.
>
KAren, the Baha'is are boogeymen. Could you imagine the US arresting an
al Qaeda suspect, and just deporting him to Yemen, or Saudi? More
likely he'd been in Guantanamo Bay until he confessed to beating his
parents as a child. Could you imagine Israel arresting a spiritual
leader of Hizbollah, and them deporting him to Gaza, and not
assasinating him, or jailing him?
>
> I'm hearing now from multiple sources that several Iranian Baha'is have
> been arrested in connection with this, and released on bond.
>
Boogeymen, like the PLO.
>>
>>
>>> The Iranian press reported that the two Baha'i "missionaries" were
>>> London-based, so it's almost certainly talking about that office.
>>
>>
>>
>> Not necessarily. Remember, the Iranian government is keen to tie
>> Baha'is into
>> British imperialism. Hence, they would likely be tied to London
>> whether there
>> are any real connections or not.
>
>
> Then why not just say these guys are British? I mean, if you're going
> to invent something, why stop with just saying they were working from
> London. Or do they have something against Latin Americans, too?
>
Supposing one is European and one is Latin American, why not state their
nations of origin? The connection to London may be gratuitous. If the
IRI _had_ released details, we would not be speculating.
>>
>>> Now, I am loath to just believe any rumor that comes down the pipe,
>>> but *somebody* had to have approved this cockeyed, life-risking scheme,
>>
I still disagree. The story fundamentally makes no sense - would a
Protestant from Lebanon in the Middle East, go to Alabama in the US, as
a Baptist missionary? The 'logic' of an occidental pioneering to Iran
is about on that level.
>>
>>
>> I'm betting that the institutions likely did not even know about these
>> two
>> going to Iran, if in fact they are really Baha'is.
>
>
> I wouldn't think that folks are anxious to say they are Baha'is while in
> Iran, if they are not.
I agree. The logic of that is even better than not sending an
occidental pioneer to Iran.
> After all, if these people were there on
> business, it must be very inconvenient and costly to get kicked out.
Hmmmmm, you just don't know. Maybe 10 years ago I had a chance to see
Australia. I was with a startup, and doing business w/ a small concern
in Adelaide. I had about 6 days of business, but I had a nine day trip
because 1) the tickets oddly cost less if I stayed over a week, and 2)
I'd never been to Oz, so I would not complain about a weekend and an odd
day or so of sightseeing in Sydney. If I'd been in a rush to go home
from Iran, I would not announce my faith to the mullahs; I'd just hold
on, or pay the extra to come home.
> If
> they have business there, now they won't be able to go back. I can't
> imagine what motivation they would have to falsely claim to be Baha'is,
> in such circumstances.
>
More likely than an informed occidental falsely claiming to be Baha'is
would be Iran expelling occidentals who were first accused of being
Baha'is, and then admitted to it in questioning. It would seem to me
that if two occidentals went to feast in Iran, they could have been
followed, and then interrogated and expelled.
>>
>>
>>> The sudden resignations of Semple and Martin is, to say the least,
>>> suggestive.
>>
When every two dots are connected, every conspiracy theory gains validity.
>>
>>
>> It's suggestive of nothing. Doug Martin's resignation was a bit of a
>> surprise
>> but I had heard Ian Semple planned to retire over a year ago. I had
>> thought he
>> was planning to finish his present term out, but I suppose he found he
>> was just
>> slowing down too much.
>> What real connection has anyone made between the resignation of these
>> two House
>> members and this report about an incident in Iran which we don't even
>> know the
>> truth of?
>
>
> If there were two Baha'i missionaries in Iran, working on a
> five-year-long teaching project, then upper echelons approved it.
What is likely is that two occidentals were arrested and expelled, and
they likely were Baha'is. That they were pioneers is unlikely. that
there was a five year plan, is quite unlikely.
> One of
> my friends suggested that it was possible that Semple and Martin
> resigned in protest. I can't say for certain -- but *somebody* up there
> approved this.
>
There was no need for anyone in Haifa to approve anything. If I'd had
business in Iran ten years ago, I'd have gone. If someone here had told
me how to go to feast during my visit, you know I would have gone to feast.
>
> Now, I know that the Iranian press isn't particularly friendly towards
> Baha'is,
Where did you read this?
> and I know they don't have a free press,
I'm sure it is cheaper than the one in the US.
> but I don't believe
> they are inventing a story in toto.
That would be unlikely. I consider it likely that two occidental
Baha'is were expelled. I consider the rest to be unlikely
embellishments to stir up local passions against the cancer of bahaiism.
> Or are you saying that stories that
> come out of the Iranian press should be just regarded as false until
> proven otherwise?
I would not imagine they are made from nothing. Do you remember the
story almost two years ago about the Iraqi Army executing US servicemen
they captured? It was just a bunch of junk.
> Is the Fars News Agency the Iranian equivalent to the
> National Enquirer? Is that what you're saying? If they were going to
> just invent something out of thin air, why not something really
> scandalous and immoral? After all, if you're going to lie, might as
> well lie big. Now the talk of "cells" and "networks" may be
> exaggerated, but those guys were teaching the Faith there, and they got
> caught.
>
How do you know they were teaching the faith there?
>>
>>
>>> But the off-year retirement of two UHJ members is unusual, and coming
>>> on the heels of this other story, it seems just a little too much for
>>> coincidence.
>>
>>
>>
>> You are vastly exaggerating the significance of this story.
>
>
> Susan, these bozos put *lives* in danger to do this. That's not an
> exaggeration, and you have to know that. I'm surprised you're not more
> angry over that.
>
How can you know what they did that tipped off the IRI to their presence?
>
> If it hadn't
>
>> corresponded with this event, Nima would be trying to tie it with
>> something
>> other delusion of his. Why are you buying into it?
>
>
> I am not "buying" it, but I can add two and two. Somebody authorized
> those people to be there.
How do you even know that the two occidentals were teaching the faith in
Iran? This is just the most ludicrous idea I've read on the internet
this week.
Mr. All Bad
Mr. All Bad
Karen Bacquet wrote:
Seems a bit late for discretion, if there were anything to your story.
The IRI wants to repress the BF. The Baha'is are trying to help the
Baha'i community in Iran. You've told the world how it works. If the
IRI wants to shut it down, to continue to pursue their policies, they've
got all the information you gave them.
My best guess is that you were not given the real story, though you may
believe that just as much as you believed yesterday whatever Nima told you.
- Mr. All Bad
Steve Marshall
>My best guess is that you were not given the real story, though you may
>believe that just as much as you believed yesterday whatever Nima told you.
I think you're namesakely mistaken, Mr. Bad. There's no evidence that
Karen believed a word of what Nima/Wahid said. Even the bits Wahid
said that subsequently turned out to be valid - the UHJ retirements,
for example.
Karen is now talking about a trusted source. It's up to you to show
that Karen described Wahid in the same way. Happy hunting.
By the way, a trusted source tells me that Karen most definitely does
not trust what Wahid has been saying. :-)
ka kite
Steve
Karen Bacquet
>>
>
> Seems a bit late for discretion, if there were anything to your story.
> The IRI wants to repress the BF. The Baha'is are trying to help the
> Baha'i community in Iran. You've told the world how it works. If the
> IRI wants to shut it down, to continue to pursue their policies, they've
> got all the information you gave them.
They've already "shut it down", Pat. The government deported two
foreign Baha'is from Iran, and have arrested others. My guess is that
these guys, in their efforts to help Baha'i youth, reached out to some
who really aren't much affiliated with the Faith anymore, even if their
parents are Baha'i -- hence the charge of trying to convert youth
through economic incentives. It's a dangerous project, but not as
utterly foolhardy as the first impression I have of Baha'i travel
teachers going to Iran -- about which I, or anyone who would care about
endangered Baha'i lives in Iran, would be justifiably upset about. Such
a thing would be scandalous enough to explain sudden resignations in
upper echelons. I have just been trying to make sense of the situation.
Something like this economic program makes more sense, and makes sense
of what was reported in the press. And as far as them "helping" -- if I
had lots of money, and knew of a young person in a Iran who had no hope
of building any kind of a life, I'd get them the heck out of there. The
administration wants to create incentives for these kids to stay. The
language used by my informant concerning the situation in Iran was much
stronger than my own -- language I dare not use or I'd be accused of
prejudice against Iran and Iranians. Suffice it to say, things are very
bleak there, and the UHJ's insistence that Baha'is remain there borders
on cruelty.
>
> My best guess is that you were not given the real story, though you may
> believe that just as much as you believed yesterday whatever Nima told you.
Nima told me nothing; we have not been in contact. The article from the
Fars News Agency was translated and put on H-Bahai by someone else,
unless Nima is going by another name than Wahid Azal these days. And, I
put another, English-language report, in a link in my last post.
Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
Finnegan's Wake
"Karen Bacquet" <bac...@tco.net> wrote in message
news:10v34lr...@corp.supernews.com...
A plausible story though whether it is factual or just a cover, I'm unable
to say. We have a number of facts which may or may not be related. There
have been two resignations from the House; two arrests/deportations from
Iran of Bahais and reports they were proselytising in some way; a possible
London connection and a resignation from the UK NSA in the latter months of
last year. Are some or all of these connected?
Your story would actually give credence to a position that the House
resignations are motivated by retirements - I wonder though why two at the
one time and how or why both have so deteriorated that they did not go
before the 2003 elections. Of course if your story is true and the effort
was mounted as a solo operation then, obviously, heads have to roll. Of
course that could be the cover to confuse the Iranian authorities that the
programme is now stopped and the Bahai community in Iran is being left to
its fate - obliteration, much as the Roman Catholic community in England
disappeared in the reign of Elizabeth I. There would be scarcely any
Catholics in England now but for Irish immigration from the mid 19th century
onwards.
I'm not rushing to judgement on this - I'm morbidly curious about Washhead's
version of events when he gets round to posting it for the plain truth is
that there is a major deficiency in hard information and not enough versions
from which one might construct a useful hypothesis as to what exactly is or
has been going on.
If your version is a cover story than it does at least confirm that the
Iranian Bahai community is in serious trouble and may even be on or near the
point of extinction. I tend therefore to agree with you that the
humanitarian thing to do is to get the people out and into a society where
their human rights will be recognised. Ironically, of course, that would be
one of the Western democracies that the AO so despises and disparages. I
don't much care if the AO collapses - my concerns are more with the
individual people, not the Fascist bastards who are more interested in
preserving the veneer of the existence of a "vibrant" BIGS community ...
which doesn't exist anywhere in the civilised or non-civilised world.
Abraxas
>as an invented religion/ a political tool of the British
Because it is.
>...in league with the Russians, whatever.
Because it was that as well particularly given the fact that the first
place your "profit" took refuge after the attempt on the life of
Nasiruddin Shah was the Russian embassy in Tehran.
>Saying "it isn't a real religion" is a way to justify them
>persecuting Baha'is.
There has been no persecution of Baha'is in Iran since the mid '80s.
That is a myth and the expulsions coming in the wake of the bogus wolf
cries of genocide finaly proved it.
W
Susan Maneck
>> Note that is says that the Baha'is arrested were trying to attract
>> Iranian youth *through* economic activities,
Gee, could it just be that these were a couple of businessmen who may or may
not have been Baha'i? It sure sounds like an effort to cast a sinister light on
their business transactions to me!
Karen Bacquet
Finnegan's Wake wrote:
> "Karen Bacquet" <bac...@tco.net> wrote in message
> news:10v34lr...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> A plausible story though whether it is factual or just a cover, I'm unable
> to say.
Dear Dermod,
I don't think it's a cover; this was not told to me by someone who had
reason to cover for the administration -- rather the opposite. And this
was not invented just for this situation; it has been going on some time.
We have a number of facts which may or may not be related. There
> have been two resignations from the House; two arrests/deportations from
> Iran of Bahais and reports they were proselytising in some way; a possible
> London connection and a resignation from the UK NSA in the latter months of
> last year. Are some or all of these connected?
>
> Your story would actually give credence to a position that the House
> resignations are motivated by retirements - I wonder though why two at the
> one time and how or why both have so deteriorated that they did not go
> before the 2003 elections.
Well, I wonder, too -- but odds are that we'll just have to keep on
wondering.
Of course if your story is true and the effort
> was mounted as a solo operation then, obviously, heads have to roll.
No. If these guys really were prosyletizing, then heads would have to
roll. However, in light of this new information, they might not have
been. Remember, this new article says that the Baha'i "missionaries"
were offering financial incentives to convert; this fits with the story
of giving financial help to young Baha'is -- some of whom might be
alienated enough from the community to be virtually "converts". If they
were at university, they might have even been passing as Muslims. At
least to me it makes more sense to me that Baha'is from the London
Office would be dealing with young people that have Baha'i parents, than
the idea that they were simply hanging out on college campuses trying to
convert Muslims. The first is at least comprehensible; the latter would
be the order of a madman.
>
> If your version is a cover story than it does at least confirm that the
> Iranian Bahai community is in serious trouble and may even be on or near the
> point of extinction.
That is the impression that I'm being given -- although with the caveat
that this is one person's view of the situation. You have to remember
that this informant wanted this story out there; he's angry at the
policy of pressuring Baha'is not to leave, and feels that it leaves
young Baha'is in a hopeless situation, not only materially, but
spiritually and morally as well. But, yes, the picture I'm being given
is that the Iranian Baha'i community is seriously deteriorating in every
way you'd want to name. You know, it's a kind of myth that persecution
makes a religious community stronger -- "Blood of the martyrs is seed of
the Church" and all that. But historically, one can demonstrate that
this simply isn't true.
I tend therefore to agree with you that the
> humanitarian thing to do is to get the people out and into a society where
> their human rights will be recognised. Ironically, of course, that would be
> one of the Western democracies that the AO so despises and disparages. I
> don't much care if the AO collapses - my concerns are more with the
> individual people,
Yes, that's the thing. I would praise this economic program as a great
humanitarian thing to do, except that the real agenda here is to keep
Baha'is in Iran. If one is concerned about individuals, a plane ticket
would be much cheaper and more effective than a bankroll for a business.
The UHJ is more concerned about keeping a "Baha'i community" in Iran
than it is about the welfare of the people involved.
Love, Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
Steve Marshall
>>> Note that is says that the Baha'is arrested were trying to attract
>>> Iranian youth *through* economic activities,
>
>Gee, could it just be that these were a couple of businessmen who may or may
>not have been Baha'i? It sure sounds like an effort to cast a sinister light on
>their business transactions to me!
Uh, No. Karen is simply pointing out what was written in the article.
Karen Bacquet
Steve Marshall wrote:
Oh, yeah, of course they weren't Baha'is -- the stingy bastards just
told the Iranian police that so they could get a free ticket home!
Susan is basically insisting that we start with information we may never
get i.e. the names of the parties, and confirmation of their Baha'i
status. If they were Baha'is operating in Iran, it would be much to the
AO's interest to leave everybody guessing. A person I know checked it
out with their NSA, and they'd heard of the story, but the World Center
would not confirm that these people are Baha'is. There is already
speculation that the story is just "Islamic propaganda". So, I guess
we're supposed to believe that Iranian security folks were just sitting
around on a slow day, and decided there hadn't been enough negative
press on the Baha'is lately, so they invented a story of nonexistent
deportees. Or they deported some businessmen who weren't really
Baha'is. Or they deported Baha'i businessmen, but once they booted
them, decided to invent a story about them out of thin air. (e.g. they
were really based in Sao Paolo, but Iranian security decided to report
them as being from London, because they hate the British.) As I said,
I'm coming to believe that the nature of their activities was
misunderstood, and part of this other project -- but would Iranian
authorities say they were trying to convert youth in universities, if
they hadn't been anywhere near a campus? Or talking to young people
somewhere?
Now this report is obviously not neutral; it is couched in the nasty
language that the Iranian government uses about Baha'is. This is a
regime that hates Baha'is and has deliberately set out to destroy the
community there. But unless somebody explains to me that it is common
practice in Iran to report arrests that do not actually occur, then they
arrested two people who admitted to being Baha'is.
What I would like to know is what these people were doing that drew
government attention to themselves, and got them arrested in the first
place.
star...@yahoo.com
As expendable as a fly....in relations to the cabal on high!
pe...@capebyron.com
time, we let them because in a modern democracy one places a value on
freedom of religion. In a free country you can freely discuss religion
and politics, discussing either in Iran would likely get in you jail.
What is likely is that some Iranian Baha'is pretended to be Muslim to
get into University and then were given money through these two
gentlemen, perhaps relayed from relatives abroad.
The relatives would have choosen Westerners because, if caught,
Westerners would likely be deported, whilest using returning Iranian
exiles would probably mean that they would be thrown in jail without a
key. It's not an uncommon request, Baha'is in Iran have their mail
search routinely, any money enclosed would mostlikely end up in the
pockets of Iranian officials. Baha'i jewelry or books would also end
up destroyed or melted down. The only safe way to pass such things to
Baha'is in Iran is through a personal contact.
I'm surprised that someone who is as used to freedom as you are would
support these inquisators.
Abraxas
>support these inquisators.
Blow it out your backside, racist skippy cultist! I support any effort
that is designed to safeguard the national interests of my motherland
against your MOSSAD backed cult of saboteurs, agent provocateurs and
Israeli fifth columnists obviously operating in my motherland against
its national interests. You people got nailed with your dicks in your
hands, you have no argument or explanation as to why you were there,
and no human rights organization is even buying this silly line above,
not to mention you have just been shot in the foot with your wolf cries
of "genocide." I detest the IRI, but good on them for nailing you
bastards and internationally exposing your sleaze and arrogance!
W
Abraxas
regime that hates Baha'is and has deliberately set out to destroy the
community there."
Oh, yes, set out to deliberately destroy the baha'is so much so that
they allowed an ad hoc NSA to operate inside Iran since the late '90s;
have been giving out documentation out to baha'is easier than candy in
order to go wherever they wish; have allowed baha'is to register their
marriages; have opened up all educational facilities and universities
to them; have granted more rights and freedoms than virtually all
political groups and other minorities; even allowing Western baha'is to
travel in and out of Iran unmolested since 2000, until your
self-righteous arrogance with this "genocide" BS angered them to no end
and they put the boot in, etc.
Do you people even consider and weigh every angle when you write crap
like the above?
W
Abraxas
>time, we let them because in a modern democracy
LOL :))
Woomera detention camp! A government which still has not apologized for
the Lost Generation or publically acknowledged the genocide of the
white man against its indigenous peoples.
You have some gall, skippy!
W
Mr. All Bad
Karen Bacquet wrote:
>
>
(snip)
>
> What I would like to know is what these people were doing that drew
> government attention to themselves, and got them arrested in the first
> place.
>
Perhaps you could contact representatives of the Islamic Republic of
Iran, and ask them. They would know better than me, or anyone else
here, what these two did that drew the attention of the security agency,
such that they were eventually arrested.
Were they followed out of a known Baha'i activity?
Had Baha'is in Iran tipped then off that occidental Baha'is were
visiting?
Etc.
If they tell you, please post that here, so the Baha'is in Iran can read
what happened, or at least the official government explanation.
- Mr. All Bad
sma...@jam.rr.com
> What I have been told is that UHJ members have been recruiting
wealthy
> Baha'is to funnel money into Iran, for the purpose of setting up
Baha'i
> youth in business so that they can make a living.
Dear Karen,
If that story is true, then these two businessmen would not have been
proselytizing to non-Baha'is would they?
Are you
> still going to insist on my naming names, Susan, or would you rather
I
> take the path of discretion?
Nope. What we are looking for is the name of the two foreigners who
were kicked out, not some Iranian. If they have already been expelled
they can't be hurt and no discretion is necessary.
warmest, Susan
sma...@jam.rr.com
> Your story would actually give credence to a position that the House
> resignations are motivated by retirements - I wonder though why two
at the
> one time
Dermod,
I think two at time may be the maximum the House allows in order to
insure continuity.
and how or why both have so deteriorated that they did not go
> before the 2003 elections.
A lot can happen in two years when you are as that old.
Susan
sma...@jam.rr.com
to
> roll. However, in light of this new information, they might not have
> been. Remember, this new article says that the Baha'i "missionaries"
> were offering financial incentives to convert;
Dear Karen,
I would agree that your friend's report is much more credible, even if
somewhat slanted, than what Farsnews reported. There is no way that
Western believers would have been sent to Iran to actively proselytize.
But unemployment among Baha'is in Iran continues to be a big problem,
and it is quite conceivable that the institutions attempted to do
something about this. I'm checking my own sources on this.
You know, it's a kind of myth that persecution
> makes a religious community stronger -- "Blood of the martyrs is seed
of
> the Church" and all that. But historically, one can demonstrate that
> this simply isn't true.
Depends on the level of persecution. If it is intermittent and not too
widespread it helps strengthen group identity, as it was in
Christianity. But genoicide kills the seed.
>
I would praise this economic program as a great
> humanitarian thing to do, except that the real agenda here is to keep
> Baha'is in Iran.
Karen, they can't all leave Iran even if we wanted them too. Something
has to be done for those who remain.
warmest, Susan
Karen Bacquet
sma...@jam.rr.com wrote:
>>What I have been told is that UHJ members have been recruiting
>
> wealthy
>
>>Baha'is to funnel money into Iran, for the purpose of setting up
>
> Baha'i
>
>>youth in business so that they can make a living.
>
>
> Dear Karen,
>
> If that story is true, then these two businessmen would not have been
> proselytizing to non-Baha'is would they?
Yes, exactly. In fact, this information came as something as a relief
to me, because I was appalled to think that some idiot gave the green
light to a teaching project in Iran. However, it is not hard to picture
how the Iranian government would see reaching out to some of these youth
as "proselytizing". Last I heard, you couldn't get into universities in
Iran if you admit to being Baha'i, so some of these kids may have been
passing as Muslims. Also, some young people with Baha'i parents may not
be necessarily Baha'is themselves. Are formal enrollment procedures and
records kept in Iran? Anyway, I think the likelihood is that reaching
out to Baha'i youth was misconstrued into trying to convert Iranian
youth in general. All it would take would be for a non-Baha'i friend to
hear about it, or for the outreach program to contact some kid who is
alienated and/or angry with the administration (that happens in Iran,
just like it happens here, you know) for word of the project to get back
to the authorities. It's a risky thing to be doing, but not as utterly
insane as the idea of a general teaching project. It makes more sense
of the situation.
And, in light of this new information, I think it's unlikely that the
UHJ resignations are related -- this wouldn't be as scandalous and
controversial as the story that first appeared. After all, the "no
teaching Iranians" rule is the UHJ's own policy, which would have been
violated if that's what they were doing.
>
> Are you
>
>>still going to insist on my naming names, Susan, or would you rather
>
> I
>
>>take the path of discretion?
>
>
> Nope. What we are looking for is the name of the two foreigners who
> were kicked out, not some Iranian. If they have already been expelled
> they can't be hurt and no discretion is necessary.
I wouldn't have named the guy in Iran, even if you wanted me to.:-) I
may not be wild about Baha'i administrators, but I don't have the right
to get them killed. I wouldn't even do that to people I really, really
dislike -- and I don't even know this guy. (Although the info I'm
getting is that the folks on the Baha'i governing committee in Iran
aren't the most ethical bunch in the world.) The only usefulness having
the name is to me is that I'll keep an eye out for any information about
him.
I haven't heard the names of the people expelled. I did, however,
check into *Iran Focus*, which appears to be a pretty solid journalistic
outfit, which openly talks of social problems and people being
mistreated. I would not expect that they'd be taken in by a fake story,
and no doubt they are used to dealing with official statements from the
government. However, I've got the site bookmarked, and will check back
to see if there are any updates. The site looks like the kind of place
that if the story turns out to be bogus, there will be a correction posted.
Love, Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
>
> warmest, Susan
>
sma...@jam.rr.com
> Yes, exactly. In fact, this information came as something as a
relief
> to me, because I was appalled to think that some idiot gave the green
> light to a teaching project in Iran.
Dear Karen,
That's why I felt quite sure the press' account had to be distorted.
However, it is not hard to picture
> how the Iranian government would see reaching out to some of these
youth
> as "proselytizing".
They would paint it that way in any case. Keep in mind that they are
deliberately putting such economic pressures on Baha'is in order to
persuade them to convert.
Last I heard, you couldn't get into universities in
> Iran if you admit to being Baha'i, so some of these kids may have
been
> passing as Muslims.
That's changed somewhat. The goverment changed it's policy a couple of
years ago such that you no longer have to put your religion down to
apply for college (except if you want to be a teacher.) But you do have
to take an exam in religion, either Judaism, Christianity,
Zoroastrianism or Islam. Baha'is signed up to take the Islam exam which
they usually could pass with no problem. Unfortunately when the
government issued their papers they themselves put these students'
religion down as Islam. So now the Baha'is are protesting that this
essentially still excludes Baha'is from the universities. I wouldn't be
surprised though, if some of those Baha'i students admitted under these
circumstances went ahead and attended the university. They didn't claim
to be Muslims, after all.
What Baha'i students should do, in my opinion, is take the Zoroasrian
instead of the Islam exam. I'll bet you anything the government would
not want to list that many people as Zoroastrian!
Also, some young people with Baha'i parents may not
> be necessarily Baha'is themselves. Are formal enrollment procedures
and
> records kept in Iran?
Probably not anymore.
Anyway, I think the likelihood is that reaching
> out to Baha'i youth was misconstrued into trying to convert Iranian
> youth in general.
As I said, it would have been misrepresented whether or not it was
misconstrued. The Iranian government wants to make Baha'is as
uncomfortable as possible and such a project would have defeated that
end. Shayhis, btw, like Jews and Baha'is are not allowed to hold
government jobs either. But they've gotten rich since the revolution
from their investments in pistachio orchards.
It's a risky thing to be doing, but not as utterly
> insane as the idea of a general teaching project. It makes more
sense
> of the situation.
Yep. Which is why I find your story credible.
>
> And, in light of this new information, I think it's unlikely that the
> UHJ resignations are related
Exactly.
> I wouldn't have named the guy in Iran, even if you wanted me to.:-)
I didn't think you would.
(Although the info I'm
> getting is that the folks on the Baha'i governing committee in Iran
> aren't the most ethical bunch in the world.)
That may say more about your source.
> I haven't heard the names of the people expelled. I did, however,
> check into *Iran Focus*, which appears to be a pretty solid
journalistic
> outfit, which openly talks of social problems and people being
> mistreated. I would not expect that they'd be taken in by a fake
story,
> and no doubt they are used to dealing with official statements from
the
> government.
I don't know that they were. They just quoted the government. If you
read their story carefully there is nothing obviously false in it. They
simply noted that two foreigners were expelled for 'practicing' their
religion and quoted what the government said.
warmest, Susan
Abraxas
W
sma...@jam.rr.com
> Firstly, Baha'is are not supposed to be going to Iran.
Yep, but sometimes they do. I know of a well-known Baha'i academic who
went there to attend an academic conference some years ago. I'm sure if
the IRI realized he was Baha'i they would have kicked him out as a
foreign missionary too.
The government could throw them
> out of the country, just for being Baha'is, without any elaboration
on it.
Karen, the persecution of Baha'is is justified on the basis that we are
some kind of conspiracy to destroy Iran and Islam. Therefore, whatever
they were doing must be given a conspiratorial slant. But frankly, I'm
not yet persuaded these two were even Baha'i.
> I'm hearing now from multiple sources that several Iranian Baha'is
> have been arrested in connection with this, and released on bond.
Perhaps. Still doesn't proof our foreigners were Baha'is. And even if
they were it doesn't prove they were engaged in proselytizing. But
maybe they were all caught together in a Ruhi Study Circle, no doubt
the IRI's version of a 'cell.'
>
> Then why not just say these guys are British?
Hey, I don't deny that somebody from Latin America and someone from
Europe were kicked out of the country? But do we really know whether
any of the rest is true? If one of them was from Latin America and they
are trying to prove some kind of conspiracy, wouldn't they have to tie
them to London somehow?
I mean, if you're going
> to invent something, why stop with just saying they were working from
> London. Or do they have something against Latin Americans, too?
Maybe because one of them was so obviously not British. ;-}
> I wouldn't think that folks are anxious to say they are Baha'is while
in
> Iran, if they are not.
I didn't read a press release from them saying they are Baha'is. It is
the government which is charging this.
I can't
> imagine what motivation they would have to falsely claim to be
Baha'is,
> in such circumstances.
Where is your evidence they claimed to be Baha'is?
>
> If there were two Baha'i missionaries in Iran, working on a
> five-year-long teaching project, then upper echelons approved it.
Great where is your evidence that this indeed happened? Or are you just
going to take the IRI's word for it?
One of
> my friends suggested that it was possible that Semple and Martin
> resigned in protest.
Protest of what? If your friends think Doug Martin would resign from
the House of Justice 'in protest' they really don't know what they are
talking about! And as I said, Ian Semple was already set to retire. I
can tell you who else is too, but not on a public forum like this. My
guess is that if Doug Martin became too ill to continue, this person
must have had to put his own retirement off.
I can't say for certain -- but *somebody* up there
> approved this.
Why don't you find out for certain it even happened yet.
>
> Now, I know that the Iranian press isn't particularly friendly
towards
> Baha'is, and I know they don't have a free press, but I don't
believe
> they are inventing a story in toto. Or are you saying that stories
that
> come out of the Iranian press should be just regarded as false until
> proven otherwise?
I'm saying if it has anything to do with Baha'is or Jews it shouldn't
be taken as true until you get some other kind of confirmation. For
instance, if they had given these two people's name we could ascertain
if in fact they were Baha'is. We still wouldn't know what they were
doing there, however.
Is the Fars News Agency the Iranian equivalent to the
> National Enquirer? Is that what you're saying?
Maybe more like the Soviet Pravada.
If they were going to
> just invent something out of thin air, why not something really
> scandalous and immoral?
Not thin air. I think we can assume there were two foreigners they
wanted to get rid of for whatever reason.
Now the talk of "cells" and "networks" may be
> exaggerated, but those guys were teaching the Faith there, and they
got
> caught.
I doubt that very much. Not if by teaching you mean they were
proselytizing to non-Baha'is. If indeed they were Baha'is it is
possible they were engaged in some Baha'i activity like Study Circles.
But that seems doubtful to me as well. They are doing Ruhi in Iran but
I doubt if they really need outside tutors. It is also possible they
were having some business dealings with Baha'is, but if that were the
case I doubt if the institutions knew about it or approved it.
> Susan, these bozos put *lives* in danger to do this.
Again, you *don't* know that. You don't know who they are and you don't
know what they did.
That's not an
> exaggeration, and you have to know that. I'm surprised you're not
more
> angry over that.
Why would I be angry at the AO about charges the Iranian government is
making that I so far have no reason to think are true?
>
> I am not "buying" it, but I can add two and two. Somebody authorized
> those people to be there.
Again, you do not know that.
"Who was it, and why?"
When you find out who they were maybe you can find out if they were
authorized to do anything at all.
> The impression given by that article is that these people did some
> talking while they were under arrest.
Yes, they they have ways of making you say anything, I'm sure.
"Their ethnicity was known;"
That much is probably true.
the
> location of their "base" was known;
No, a location for supposed operations was named. But we don't know if
that is true or not.
it was known that they had made
> several trips to Iran over a five-year period.
As one would expect of foreign bussinessmen.
Is the Iranian
> press in the habit of inventing detailed stories about people it
doesn't
> like,
It doesn't sound that detailed to me at all. What they are accused of
is extremely vaque and subject to interpretation.
or do the journalists there have to come without shouting distance
> of the truth?
When it comes to Baha'is and Jews, probably not. Why don't you check
out some of their other news releases and see how credible they sound?
I read one where they stated American astronauts had found the evidence
the moon had been split by Muhammad just as the Qur'an says and that
this discovery had sparked interest in Islam among Americans and
Europeans.
> Names would help, but that's something that might not ever be known
--
> or only known through the rumor mill.
If this really happened it wouldn't be hard to get a hold of their
names.
As for them really being Baha'is,
> like I said, I can't imagine why anybody would say they were a Baha'i
> when they are not, under those circumstances.
You mean under torture?
> So, you're saying that any Baha'i who happens to be visiting Iran,
for
> any reason, will be accused of proselytizing, even if they are there
to
> visit their great-aunt Martha?
If they are foreigners Aunt Martha doesn't live there. But yes, I would
say that any Baha'i who happens to be visiting Iran would run that
risk, if they weren't very, very careful.
Do stories like this appear in the
> Iranian press on a regular basis? Because I know Iranian Baha'is who
> live overseas have been able to go visit relatives and such for quite
> some time -- the UHJ wouldn't bother to discourage something that
isn't
> happening. Do they get picked up by the government and accused of
> trying to convert people?
I suspect it would be more dangerous for foreigners than Iranians.
>
> If this were not a press story, I would not have believed it.
I hope you don't believe what they said about splitting the moon too.
It seems
> too incredibly stupid even for the Baha'i administration, to do a
thing
> like this.
If they did, I would agree. But I don't believe it.
But it sounds to me that you are saying that nothing out of
> the press in that country is to be believed unless there is
independent
> corroboration.
Basically, yeah. But a press release like this might well be sufficient
reason to look for corroboration. That's what I'm doing and that's what
you should be doing *before* the speculation.
Is the press situation there really that terrible that
> news stories amount to total fiction?
Well, what do you make of the story about splitting the moon?
warmest, Susan
Karen Bacquet
>
> (Although the info I'm
>
>>getting is that the folks on the Baha'i governing committee in Iran
>>aren't the most ethical bunch in the world.)
>
>
> That may say more about your source.
Like what? That there are disillusioned Iranians just like there are
disillusioned Westerners? Except that Baha'is in Iran are more
vulnerable and a screw-up (or screwing over) on the part of the
powers-that-be is likely to have more serious consequences.
Oh, but I forgot -- the critic is always wrong, and less believable than
a committee that isn't even a real NSA, but has more power to affect
people's lives. Who appoints that committee anyway? It can't be
elected, certainly.
Karen Bacquet
>
> They would paint it that way in any case. Keep in mind that they are
> deliberately putting such economic pressures on Baha'is in order to
> persuade them to convert.
>
> Last I heard, you couldn't get into universities in
>
>>Iran if you admit to being Baha'i, so some of these kids may have
>
> been
>
>>passing as Muslims.
>
>
> That's changed somewhat. The goverment changed it's policy a couple of
> years ago such that you no longer have to put your religion down to
> apply for college (except if you want to be a teacher.)
Really? So this report from *Iran Focus* dated a little over a month
ago is inaccurate?
"For example, a Baha'i teenager cannot enter Iran's universities; either
he would have to lie and say that he is not a Baha'i, or else be
deprived of the right to higher education. The Baha'i community of Iran
had organized computer-based correspondence classes for youth, the
authorities have repeatedly disrupted these [classes] and confiscated
teaching materials"
They are quoting a guy from the International Federation of Human Rights
Leagues.
http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=965
Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
Finnegan's Wake
<sma...@jam.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1106469545.3...@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> I would agree that your friend's report is much more credible, even if
> somewhat slanted, than what Farsnews reported. There is no way that
> Western believers would have been sent to Iran to actively proselytize.
> But unemployment among Baha'is in Iran continues to be a big problem,
> and it is quite conceivable that the institutions attempted to do
> something about this. I'm checking my own sources on this.
I would think that the Farsnews report is based on the results of the
interrogation of the two persons concerned but would not go into the full
detail of what was revealed during those interrogations.
> You know, it's a kind of myth that persecution
> > makes a religious community stronger -- "Blood of the martyrs is seed
> of
> > the Church" and all that. But historically, one can demonstrate that
>
> > this simply isn't true.
>
> Depends on the level of persecution. If it is intermittent and not too
> widespread it helps strengthen group identity, as it was in
> Christianity. But genoicide kills the seed.
Not in Ireland, but then, as a people, we have backbone!
> I would praise this economic program as a great
> > humanitarian thing to do, except that the real agenda here is to keep
>
> > Baha'is in Iran.
>
> Karen, they can't all leave Iran even if we wanted them too. Something
> has to be done for those who remain.
Why not? Huge areas of Ireland were cleared after and during the Famine by
the landlords paying for the fares to England, America and other areas.
Finnegan's Wake
<sma...@jam.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1106468658....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Your story would actually give credence to a position that the House
> > resignations are motivated by retirements - I wonder though why two
> at the
> > one time
>
> Dermod,
>
> I think two at time may be the maximum the House allows in order to
> insure continuity.
Looks like the rest of them will be going as well?
> and how or why both have so deteriorated that they did not go
> > before the 2003 elections.
> A lot can happen in two years when you are as that old.
That's the reason that civilised societies make retirement mandatory at a
certain age. It perhaps also illustrates the power lust that is endemic in
the AO that having acquired it, they are loathe to relinquish it.
Finnegan's Wake
<sma...@jam.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1106472951....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> However, it is not hard to picture
> > how the Iranian government would see reaching out to some of these
> youth
> > as "proselytizing".
>
> They would paint it that way in any case. Keep in mind that they are
> deliberately putting such economic pressures on Baha'is in order to
> persuade them to convert.
They must be converting then in large numbers otherwise the Grumpies
wouldn't be concerned. Of course, if the Bahais had the moral fibre that
the Irish Catholics had, they would preserve their faith even unto
starvation and death.
sma...@jam.rr.com
> They must be converting then in large numbers otherwise the Grumpies
> wouldn't be concerned.
Yeah, I know. In your book the House of Justice couldn't possibly be
concerned with these young people's well-being. That's the difference
between you and Karen. Karen was reliefed that the House hadn't done
anything as idiotic as sending Western Baha'is to proselytize in Iran.
You, on the other hand, would have relished the idea.
sma...@jam.rr.com
> Like what? That there are disillusioned Iranians just like there are
> disillusioned Westerners?
Or maybe that he's cynical enough to imagine corruption whether there
is any or not.
> Oh, but I forgot -- the critic is always wrong, and less believable
than
> a committee that isn't even a real NSA, but has more power to affect
> people's lives.
Nope. If the critic in question can present real evidence they might
actually be right. All we have here is a vaque allegation.
sma...@jam.rr.com
> Really? So this report from *Iran Focus* dated a little over a month
> ago is inaccurate?
Dear Karen,
It's a little dated. My understanding is that the situation right now
is up in the air. A Baha'i wouldn't have to lie, but they would be
given paperwork that does the lying for them. I don't think the
institutions want Baha'is entering the universities under those
circumstances either, but I'm not sure if they regard it as apostacy if
one goes ahead and enrolls anyhow.
warmest, Susan
Mr. All Bad
Karen Bacquet wrote:
>
>
>
>>
>> They would paint it that way in any case. Keep in mind that they are
>> deliberately putting such economic pressures on Baha'is in order to
>> persuade them to convert.
>>
>> Last I heard, you couldn't get into universities in
>>
>>> Iran if you admit to being Baha'i, so some of these kids may have
>>
>>
>> been
>>
>>> passing as Muslims.
>>
>>
>>
>> That's changed somewhat. The goverment changed it's policy a couple of
>> years ago such that you no longer have to put your religion down to
>> apply for college (except if you want to be a teacher.)
>
>
> Really? So this report from *Iran Focus* dated a little over a month
> ago is inaccurate?
>
> "For example, a Baha'i teenager cannot enter Iran's universities; either
> he would have to lie and say that he is not a Baha'i, or else be
> deprived of the right to higher education. The Baha'i community of Iran
> had organized computer-based correspondence classes for youth, the
> authorities have repeatedly disrupted these [classes] and confiscated
> teaching materials"
>
> They are quoting a guy from the International Federation of Human Rights
> Leagues.
>
> http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=965
>
> Karen
> http://bacquet.blogspot.com
>
Karen, the implementing details were described below. After you read
them, I'll connect the dots for you.
>
> But you do have
>
>> to take an exam in religion, either Judaism, Christianity,
>> Zoroastrianism or Islam. Baha'is signed up to take the Islam exam which
>> they usually could pass with no problem. Unfortunately when the
>> government issued their papers they themselves put these students'
>> religion down as Islam. So now the Baha'is are protesting that this
>> essentially still excludes Baha'is from the universities. I wouldn't be
>> surprised though, if some of those Baha'i students admitted under these
>> circumstances went ahead and attended the university. They didn't claim
>> to be Muslims, after all.
So, the requirement is a religion test. The Baha'i sees "Islam" as the
easy test for them; they take and pass the "Islam" test, and their
matriculation paperwork now says "Muslim". At that point, the Baha'i
can correct their religious identification, in which case they've broken
the "don't ask, don't tell" protection, in announcing their Baha'iness,
such that they are expelled, OR, they play taqqiya, and when they
subsequently identify themselves as Baha'i they are accused of
apostasizing.
Does this help?
Susan, as that how you understood it to work?
The effect is that Baha'is are excluded from advanced education, as was
described in "Iran Focus".
- Mr. All Bad
Mr. All Bad
Finnegan's Wake wrote:
Okay, w/ 200,000 Baha'is leaving Iran, they could go to .....
... Belfast and Antrim. The Irish have the backbone to assimilate these
blow-ins; the Irish even invented the term for it, "Blow-ins".
Stand by to update the NI Baha'i census, from 123 to 200, 123.
- Mr. All Bad
Karen Bacquet
Lay off the Reaper; he didn't say any such thing. From the House's own
statements, their top concern appears to be, not conversions or
apostasy, but the exodus of Baha'is from Iran. In fact, I've never seen
any admission from official sources that there *are* apostasies --
there most certainly are some, but I have no idea how significant that
number is. But what is indisputable is that thousands of Baha'is have
left Iran; no doubt thousands more would like to. While I'm sure that
there is concern about the well-being of Iranian Baha'is, the first
priority of the administration is to keep them in Iran, which outweighs
that concern. Put it this way: They'd like to see the Iranian Baha'i
community free and thriving, but if it comes to the choice between
having these folks free and thriving in other countries, or left
miserable in Iran, they'd rather have the latter.
Mr. All Bad
Karen Bacquet wrote:
>
>
(snip)
>
> Lay off the Reaper; he didn't say any such thing. From the House's own
> statements, their top concern appears to be, not conversions or
> apostasy, but the exodus of Baha'is from Iran. In fact, I've never seen
> any admission from official sources that there *are* apostasies -- there
> most certainly are some, but I have no idea how significant that number
> is. But what is indisputable is that thousands of Baha'is have left
> Iran; no doubt thousands more would like to. While I'm sure that there
> is concern about the well-being of Iranian Baha'is, the first priority
> of the administration is to keep them in Iran, which outweighs that
> concern. Put it this way: They'd like to see the Iranian Baha'i
> community free and thriving, but if it comes to the choice between
> having these folks free and thriving in other countries, or left
> miserable in Iran, they'd rather have the latter.
As I understand it, Shoghi Effendi forbid Iranian Baha'is to emigrate to
the US. The longest of any Iranian Baha'is living in the US, date back
to the late 1950s, when Shoghi Effendi passed away.
Baha'is have come from Iran to the US, since the revolution of 1979; I
knew of a family when I lived in Germantown MD, where the husband and
wife had emigrated after the revolution and were on the LSA. There were
others, as well. There may have been a few individuals who had
administrative complications, as well. As I understand it, the
complications arose in the 1980s when those leaving Iran were asked
their religion, and Baha'is were not allowed to leave, such that they
could either apostasize at the airport, and fly out, and suffere
complications with the AO afterward, or they could walk out across the
Pakistani border, which was very dangerous. As I understand it, this is
no longer the case at all; Baha'is are allowed to fly out at the
airport, w/o lying about their religion.
I know of person in my community whose mother flies back and forth,
staying on each side of the ocean, for months, and she is an active
Baha'i. I really don't have the impression that the UHJ has stopped, or
had stopped Baha'is from leaving Iran. I think a mass exodus causes
extra problems for people, such as the cross-border migrations caused
problems with the partitioning of India.
I would imagine that your Iranian Baha'i informant, also emigrated from
Iran since the revolution; the UHJ did not stop him.
- Mr. All Bad
Cal E. Rollins
Cute about clusters/cloisters.
But you have brought up a rather bomb of a statement if the translation
is correct, a bomb that has been intermitently exploding since prior to
1957.
If Baha'u'llah really did say, as you allege, that people (married of
course) who have no children aren't worth the wood it takes to burn them
with, what does that say about the childless Guardian? I wonder how the
apologists among us explain that poorly translated passage, if, indeed,
it can be proven that Baha'u'llah really did say that. Some scholars
have said "fruit" here doesn't mean children, it means good works. Make
sense? Sure does to me. --Cal
Karen Bacquet
I have been told the same thing, and that this is why the UHJ is writing
letters that discourage emigration.
>
> I know of person in my community whose mother flies back and forth,
> staying on each side of the ocean, for months, and she is an active
> Baha'i. I really don't have the impression that the UHJ has stopped, or
> had stopped Baha'is from leaving Iran. I think a mass exodus causes
> extra problems for people, such as the cross-border migrations caused
> problems with the partitioning of India.
>
> I would imagine that your Iranian Baha'i informant, also emigrated from
> Iran since the revolution; the UHJ did not stop him.
The UHJ does not have any physical power to stop people from leaving; it
is, however, using the power of its authority to discourage Iranian
Baha'is from emigrating. It's supposed to be infallible, and folks are
supposed to obey it -- that's a heavy-duty persuasion factor.
Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
>
> - Mr. All Bad
>
truth...@yahoo.co.uk
kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 23/1/05 05:07 pm:
> Okay, w/ 200,000 Baha'is leaving Iran, they could go to .....
> ... Belfast and Antrim. The Irish have the backbone to assimilate
these blow-ins; the Irish even invented the term for it, "Blow-ins".
>
> Stand by to update the NI Baha'i census, from 123 to 200, 123.
>
> - Mr. All Bad
Are you trying to give Pastor Legge a heart attack Pat? Your jest
could become true. Iranian Baha'is love to come to the wealthiest
countries they can find who will take them. Once they find out
paddyland has become richer than the US they will all be heading this
way.
I can just see the newspaper heading "200 Iranian Baha'is are welcomed
to live in Antrim Town after they were not wanted in East Belfast by an
Evangelical pastor and his followers"
Trueseeker
Belfast Telegraph Home > News
Ireland wealthier than the US and fourth in global 'richest' league
By Ben Quinn
17 January 2005
Ireland is now wealthier than the US and is on course to become the
world's third richest economy, according to a leading economist.
Economic wealth per head of population surpassed that of the US for the
first time late last year.
"We are richer than both Boston and Berlin," said Bank of Ireland
chief's economist, Dan McLaughlin. "We surpassed Berlin in the
millennium year and, now in early 2005, we are richer than Boston."
The analysis is based on an increase in Irish economic wealth to
€36,100 per head of population ($41,500), at an exchange rate of
$1.15, which has surpassed the US figure of $40,100. The current
exchange rate for the euro is $1.31.
Read more here:
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=601596
Cal E. Rollins
Well who cares about what Susan insists? I insist about names. I heard
much the same thing some time ago when a friend told me he expected
stuff to shortly hit the fan.
At that time I wondered if there were portfolios among the House of
Justice members (as has been alleged by folk other than just Nima). My
active imagination made me wonder if Martin, backing the troubled
Baha'is in that group in Canada, may have been in charge of the troubled
youth in Iran who reflected the same malaises as the rest of the youth
living in materialistic societies such as in the Americas. I was hoping
he was. If he was, I applaud him that somebody is facing realities and
doing something tangible for a change. However, the possibility of it
having backfired, if true, is rather problematic. Maybe. It'll
probably blow over. --Cal
Cal E. Rollins
Why do you say that heads have to roll after a problem arises? We know
that the actions of the Universal House of Justice are not accountable
to anybody save Baha'u'llah. And as far I can determine He ain't
talkin' to nobody except the House of Justice. We also know that if a
member has done something injurious to the Commonweal, heads do roll,
but the guillotining is not mandated to be a private one masked by
retirement as often occurs in the U.S. Government. The Baha'i Faith is
different. Except in that case of the National Treasurer. --Cal
Karen Bacquet
Cal E. Rollins wrote:
> Karen,
>
> Well who cares about what Susan insists? I insist about names.
Who cares what anybody insists? I haven't got any, and as far as I can
tell, nobody does. Presumably, the UHJ knows, and its not telling. No
doubt, the info will either be released or trickle down the grapevine
somehow. If you want to disbelieve me until I provide names, then
that's really no skin off my behind at all.
>
> At that time I wondered if there were portfolios among the House of
> Justice members (as has been alleged by folk other than just Nima).
Juan used to speak of the UHJ members having portfolios all the time. I
just recently had someone ask me which UHJ member has the portfolio
dealing with Baha'is in the Middle East, and whether it was Semple or
Martin. Had to tell him I don't know, but he certainly took it as a
given that this is the way work is divided up in Haifa.
Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
sma...@jam.rr.com
> Well who cares about what Susan insists? I insist about names.
Well, we wouldn't expect you to be concerned with people's lives, Cal.
> At that time I wondered if there were portfolios among the House of
> Justice members (as has been alleged by folk other than just Nima).
Mostly Juan.
Cal E. Rollins
Yeah, right. That's the same technique she and her mentor Peter use to
squelch my yakking about the slaves in the Households. I should produce
the names of these slaves, otherwise they don't exist, so shut up
already, Cal! After all, didn't the Research Department say they have
no record of slaves, just servants?
Geez. With them kind of historians, Baha'i history is going to be a
wondrous thing to behold in future. --Cal
Cal E. Rollins
What do you think would happen if somebody were to give the names of the
two people expelled on TRB? Would the informant be persecuted in any
way? Can you guarantee them immunity? --Cal
Karen Bacquet
sma...@jam.rr.com wrote:
>>Well who cares about what Susan insists? I insist about names.
>
>
>
> Well, we wouldn't expect you to be concerned with people's lives, Cal.
Oh, he meant the Iranian contact for the economic program? Well, that
he can whistle for.
Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
Cal E. Rollins
You're certainly someone to be concerned about people's lives the way
you blab about them on this list as well as others. As you no doubt
know by now, this was one of the concerns of that leaked memo about you
and your big mouth. Now you're acting like nothing ever came out of
your mouth but attar of rose. Give us all a break and get lock jaw!
--Cal
Mr. All Bad
Karen Bacquet wrote:
OH_MY_GOODNESS!
THESE MURDEROUS LYING BASTARD THUGS HAVE BEEN TRYING DIFFERENT WAYS TO
EXTIRPATE THE bf FROM IRAN, AND THE uhj HAS STOOD AGAINST THEM, DESPITE
THEIR 1992 PLAN TO
"destroy their cultural roots outside the country"
THE IRI IS TALKING ABOUT THE UHJ. THE UHJ HAS A CHANCE TO CHICKEN OUT
AND THEIR RESPONSE IS TO not BE INTIMIDATED BY THESE MEGALOMAINIACAL
MURDERERS. LET ME REMIND YOU, CHAMBERLAIN DID NOTHING FOR PEACE OR
JUSTICE WHEN HE APPEASED HITLER IN MUNICH.
Are you completely knucking futs, here, Karen Bacquet? This is about
Mahdiesque in my judgemental-meter. If you've got to be judgemental,
due to some tragic fundie flaw on your part, at least have the decency
to judge the evil in the order it occurs, 'mkay?
I applaud the UHJ for encouraging the Baha'is to stay! I appluad the
UHJ for doing their little part to stand up to these mullahs.
I do not see the UHJ absolutely forbidding all Baha'is to leave, and I
think it would be tragic for them to encourage the Baha'is to leave, as
that would not only lead to the problem associated with mass migration,
but it knuckles under to the fascists, and, in turn, they will scapegoat
the Jews, the Zorastrians, the atheists, the agnostics, or the Sunnis next.
I applaud the Baha'is in Iran, most of all, for standing up to these
murdering mullahs and their bloody-handed hacks.
- Mr. All Bad
Mr. All Bad
truth...@yahoo.co.uk wrote:
> in article 35i3a0F...@individual.net, Mr. All Bad at
> kohliCUT...@ameritel.net wrote on 23/1/05 05:07 pm:
>
>
>>Okay, w/ 200,000 Baha'is leaving Iran, they could go to .....
>>... Belfast and Antrim. The Irish have the backbone to assimilate
>
> these blow-ins; the Irish even invented the term for it, "Blow-ins".
>
>>Stand by to update the NI Baha'i census, from 123 to 200, 123.
>>
>>- Mr. All Bad
>
>
> Are you trying to give Pastor Legge a heart attack Pat? Your jest
> could become true. Iranian Baha'is love to come to the wealthiest
> countries they can find who will take them. Once they find out
> paddyland has become richer than the US they will all be heading this
> way.
>
> I can just see the newspaper heading "200 Iranian Baha'is are welcomed
> to live in Antrim Town after they were not wanted in East Belfast by an
> Evangelical pastor and his followers"
>
I'm happy to read that the carports are filled in Paddyland, but that
would be 20,000 Iranian Baha'is for Antrim Town, since Dublin would only
take 60,000, and Belfast, just the 40,000. There are hundreds of
thousands of Baha'is in Iran, and it seems someone would like them to
all leave.
- Mr. All Bad
sma...@jam.rr.com
> statements, their top concern appears to be, not conversions or
> apostasy, but the exodus of Baha'is from Iran.
Dear Karen,
They never said this was their *top* concern. Nor have they absolutely
forbidden Baha'is to leave the country. They have simply discouraged
it. If they did otherwise who do you think would be leaving and who
would have to stay?
In fact, I've never seen
> any admission from official sources that there *are* apostasies --
Oh, I've seen some. Don't you remember when the LSA of Teheran was
arrested and executed? The person at whose house the meeting was held
apostasized. But this is one piece of information you *could* probably
get reliablly from Farsnews. They love to advertise it when a Baha'i
apostasizes.
But what is indisputable is that thousands of Baha'is have
> left Iran; no doubt thousands more would like to.
And it is also indisbutable that unless they denied their faith in
order to get out, they are still regarded as Baha'is in good standing.
While I'm sure that
> there is concern about the well-being of Iranian Baha'is, the first
> priority of the administration is to keep them in Iran, which
outweighs
> that concern.
Did you ever think that discouraging the elite from leaving might be
the best way to insure the well-being of the bulk of Baha'is who are
unable to leave?
warmest, Susan
Karen Bacquet
>>
>>
>> The UHJ does not have any physical power to stop people from leaving;
>> it is, however, using the power of its authority to discourage Iranian
>> Baha'is from emigrating. It's supposed to be infallible, and folks
>> are supposed to obey it -- that's a heavy-duty persuasion factor.
>>
>
> OH_MY_GOODNESS!
>
> THESE MURDEROUS LYING BASTARD THUGS HAVE BEEN TRYING DIFFERENT WAYS TO
> EXTIRPATE THE bf FROM IRAN, AND THE uhj HAS STOOD AGAINST THEM, DESPITE
> THEIR 1992 PLAN TO
> "destroy their cultural roots outside the country"
> THE IRI IS TALKING ABOUT THE UHJ. THE UHJ HAS A CHANCE TO CHICKEN OUT
> AND THEIR RESPONSE IS TO not BE INTIMIDATED BY THESE MEGALOMAINIACAL
> MURDERERS. LET ME REMIND YOU, CHAMBERLAIN DID NOTHING FOR PEACE OR
> JUSTICE WHEN HE APPEASED HITLER IN MUNICH.
>
> Are you completely knucking futs, here, Karen Bacquet? This is about
> Mahdiesque in my judgemental-meter. If you've got to be judgemental,
> due to some tragic fundie flaw on your part, at least have the decency
> to judge the evil in the order it occurs, 'mkay?]\
Of course, the regime in Iran is evil -- who says it's not? The entire
tragedy in the first place is entirely due to the fact that Baha'is are
denied their human rights. But if "standing up" to that regime means
that an entire generation of Iranian Baha'is falls into unemployment,
drugs, crime, prostitution, promiscuity, lack of education, spousal and
child abuse and a whole range of other psychological and social
pathologies because they are required to remain in an unhealthy
environment-- WE HAVE LOST THEM ANYWAY! This is what is happening, and I
don't see where it does the Faith, or anybody else one bit of good. If
leaving Iran means these kids have the hope of building some kind of a
life, then they should get out of there. Or do you think having
thousands of our youth crippled by these moral ills, is just fine as
long as they bear the name "Baha'i" and are in Iran?
Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
sma...@jam.rr.com
>
> As I understand it, Shoghi Effendi forbid Iranian Baha'is to emigrate
to
> the US. The longest of any Iranian Baha'is living in the US, date
back
> to the late 1950s, when Shoghi Effendi passed away.
Dear Pat,
That's not true of all. There were a number of Iranian young men that
the Guardian allowed to immigrate to go to school here well before he
died. That is when Firuz Kazemzadeh, Amin Banani and some others came
over. They all came together and collectively were known as the
"Persian Boys."
>
> Baha'is have come from Iran to the US, since the revolution of 1979;
There were plenty before the revolution, but the bulk of them came
afterwards.
As I understand it, this is
> no longer the case at all; Baha'is are allowed to fly out at the
> airport, w/o lying about their religion.
I think that is true.
>
> I know of person in my community whose mother flies back and forth,
> staying on each side of the ocean, for months, and she is an active
> Baha'i. I really don't have the impression that the UHJ has stopped,
or
> had stopped Baha'is from leaving Iran.
They are discouraging Baha'is from going back and forth and from
leaving Iran. Going back and forth is discouraged because it threatens
the Baha'is' refugee status. But there is no prohibition, nor are there
sanctions against Baha'is if they choose to ignore this. If they really
wanted to stop emigration entirely they would not help these Baha'is
get refugee status when they did leave.
I think a mass exodus causes
> extra problems for people, such as the cross-border migrations caused
> problems with the partitioning of India.
I think it is more of a problem because only the elites will leave
depriving the community of the resources with which to help everybody
else.
warmest, Susan
sma...@jam.rr.com
> The UHJ does not have any physical power to stop people from leaving;
it
> is, however, using the power of its authority to discourage Iranian
> Baha'is from emigrating.
Dear Karen,
As you well know the House of Justice can impose plenty of sanctions if
they want to forbid emmigration. They aren't doing that.
It's supposed to be infallible, and folks are
> supposed to obey it -- that's a heavy-duty persuasion factor.
If one disobeys the Universal House of Justice directly they can be
declared a Covenant breaker. But in fact, there are no sanctions
applied in these cases whatsoever. Therefore, it is not an order.
warmest, Susan
Finnegan's Wake
"Mr. All Bad" <kohliCUT...@ameritel.net> wrote in message
news:35i3a0F...@individual.net...
>
> Okay, w/ 200,000 Baha'is leaving Iran, they could go to .....
> ... Belfast and Antrim. The Irish have the backbone to assimilate these
> blow-ins; the Irish even invented the term for it, "Blow-ins".
We can take a few of them around here ... so long as they behave themselves
properly and don't try to spread the elitest crap around too much. Of
course, mebbe this time you'll send us a few with backbone because the last
lot failed badly in that respect.
One of them started with the crap ... superior beings ... great fortitude
... persecutions ... martyrs etc. and set out to be a shining example of
that to edify and educate the natives. Apparently, somebody disagreed with
him, to the extent that he had to leave the country in some haste. It must
have been a pretty strong disagreement ... way in excess of petrol bombs,
bullet in the head etc. because those of us who remain here shrug those
things off as an everyday occurrence, or, could it possibly be a case of a
total bullshitter with no backbone.
I think we should be told.
> Stand by to update the NI Baha'i census, from 123 to 200, 123.
Send them by all means - Ireland now needs immigrants! Naturally I reckon a
fair percentage will be converted by the Irish ... Guinness is a powerful
teaching tool!
You might even think of coming to the auld sod, yourself!
truth...@yahoo.co.uk
sma...@jam.rr.com at sma...@jam.rr.com wrote on 23/1/05 07:36 pm:
>> If that many come I am emigrating to North Rona.
> Hmmm. Maybe it wouldn't be such a bad idea to bring them all out.
On second thoughts, in this one instant I am in full agreement with the
UHJ. Instead I would suggest the AO order all 252 Baha'is here to go
NSA headquarters in London for a crash course in Farsi in preparation
to be smuggled into IRAN through Pakistan. Think of the wonderful work
they can do for Baha'u'llah? I can just see patsy curvine getting her
hump up because her camel wont do as its told.
Trueseeker
sma...@jam.rr.com
I
> just recently had someone ask me which UHJ member has the portfolio
> dealing with Baha'is in the Middle East, and whether it was Semple or
> Martin.
Dear Karen,
If there is such a thing as 'portfolios' it is highly unlikely that the
Middle East would be given to those House members who don't even know
the language. I am pretty sure that there are House members who have
primary responsibility for the running of certain offices at the World
Centre, however. For instance, I think Doug Martin and Hooper Dunbar
oversee the Research Department. That is not quite the same as having
portfolios, though.
Had to tell him I don't know, but he certainly took it as a
> given that this is the way work is divided up in Haifa.
That may be no more than an indicator of the extent to which Juan's
rumor has spread. I know Juan has used this 'portfolio' theory to
ascribe authorship of certain letters written on behalf of the House to
specific members, and then act like it comes from that individual
instead of the House. That only demonstrates his ignorance of how the
process works.
warmest, Susan
Finnegan's Wake
"Karen Bacquet" <bac...@tco.net> wrote in message
news:10v7sv2...@corp.supernews.com...
> Oh, he meant the Iranian contact for the economic program? Well, that
> he can whistle for.
Would that be "Dixie" or "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" that he has to
whistle?
I could give you "The Kesh Jig" or the "Ballymun Regatta" at a pinch!
Finnegan's Wake
<sma...@jam.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1106505329....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Well who cares about what Susan insists? I insist about names.
>
>
> Well, we wouldn't expect you to be concerned with people's lives, Cal.
Or that you could see that he was!
> > At that time I wondered if there were portfolios among the House of
> > Justice members (as has been alleged by folk other than just Nima).
> Mostly Juan.
He's in the know and you're not. So, no surprises there!
>
Finnegan's Wake
"Cal E. Rollins" <crol...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:13141-41...@storefull-3276.bay.webtv.net...
> Susan,
>
> You're certainly someone to be concerned about people's lives the way
> you blab about them on this list as well as others. As you no doubt
> know by now, this was one of the concerns of that leaked memo about you
> and your big mouth. Now you're acting like nothing ever came out of
> your mouth but attar of rose.
And nothing stayed between the ears!
> Give us all a break and get lock jaw!
Two broken arms would be better - she couldn't assault a keyboard!
> --Cal
>
Finnegan's Wake
> Karen, Susan,
>
> What do you think would happen if somebody were to give the names of the
> two people expelled on TRB?
Who was expelled from TRB? Did I miss something important? No, not Susie -
something important!
> Would the informant be persecuted in any
> way?
You better believe it!
> Can you guarantee them immunity?
Not even with rampant lockjaw!
Karen Bacquet
>
>
> Did you ever think that discouraging the elite from leaving might be
> the best way to insure the well-being of the bulk of Baha'is who are
> unable to leave?
What kind of well-being are the "elites" providing?
Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
>
> warmest, Susan
>
Karen Bacquet
sm
>
>
> That may be no more than an indicator of the extent to which Juan's
> rumor has spread. I know Juan has used this 'portfolio' theory to
> ascribe authorship of certain letters written on behalf of the House to
> specific members, and then act like it comes from that individual
> instead of the House. That only demonstrates his ignorance of how the
> process works.
Oh, give it a rest, willya! Juan has scarcely said "Boo!" in Baha'i
cyberspace for the last year and you're still ragging on him.
Mr. All Bad
Karen Bacquet wrote:
>
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>> The UHJ does not have any physical power to stop people from leaving;
>>> it is, however, using the power of its authority to discourage
>>> Iranian Baha'is from emigrating. It's supposed to be infallible, and
>>> folks are supposed to obey it -- that's a heavy-duty persuasion factor.
>>>
>>
>> OH_MY_GOODNESS!
>>
>> THESE MURDEROUS LYING BASTARD THUGS HAVE BEEN TRYING DIFFERENT WAYS TO
>> EXTIRPATE THE bf FROM IRAN, AND THE uhj HAS STOOD AGAINST THEM,
>> DESPITE THEIR 1992 PLAN TO
>> "destroy their cultural roots outside the country"
>> THE IRI IS TALKING ABOUT THE UHJ. THE UHJ HAS A CHANCE TO CHICKEN OUT
>> AND THEIR RESPONSE IS TO not BE INTIMIDATED BY THESE MEGALOMAINIACAL
>> MURDERERS. LET ME REMIND YOU, CHAMBERLAIN DID NOTHING FOR PEACE OR
>> JUSTICE WHEN HE APPEASED HITLER IN MUNICH.
>>
>> Are you completely knucking futs, here, Karen Bacquet? This is about
>> Mahdiesque in my judgemental-meter. If you've got to be judgemental,
>> due to some tragic fundie flaw on your part, at least have the decency
>> to judge the evil in the order it occurs, 'mkay?]\
>
>
> Of course, the regime in Iran is evil --
Then they, not the UHJ, are to be blamed for the oppression of the Baha'is.
> who says it's not?
Oooooops, My mistake! I'd thought you had some doubts about the UHJ for
encouraging the Baha'is of Iran to remain the Baha'is of Iran. Had I
misunderstood your opinion on the matter? Please do tell me if I had!
> The entire
> tragedy in the first place is entirely due to the fact that Baha'is are
> denied their human rights. But if "standing up" to that regime means
> that an entire generation of Iranian Baha'is falls into unemployment,
> drugs, crime, prostitution, promiscuity, lack of education, spousal and
> child abuse and a whole range of other psychological and social
> pathologies because they are required to remain in an unhealthy
> environment-- WE HAVE LOST THEM ANYWAY!
They are not required to all stay. The fact that you've had your ear
filled w/ gibber from an Iranian Baha'i would have suggested to a
_reasonable_ person, that the UHJ has NOT REQUIRED THEM to stay, SO WHAT
ARE YOU GOING ON ABOUT?
> This is what is happening, and I
> don't see where it does the Faith, or anybody else one bit of good.
People make their choices, Karen. If you want to order the Baha'is of
Iran to all leave by Naw Ruz, go ahead. I think you are making a big
mistake, but you are in charge, so do it.
> If
> leaving Iran means these kids have the hope of building some kind of a
> life, then they should get out of there.
How can Baha'is anywhere have a life when we are puppets of the IRI?
How can Baha'is from Iran have a life when they've moved out to LA, the
Hezbollahis are extinguishing the last vestiges of Zoroastrianism, and
we cleared the path for the buthcers to do it?
> Or do you think having
> thousands of our youth crippled by these moral ills, is just fine as
> long as they bear the name "Baha'i" and are in Iran?
I applaud the Baha'is of Iran and I appluad the UHJ for not knuckling
under to the mullahs.
- Mr. All Bad
Mr. All Bad
Finnegan's Wake wrote:
> "Mr. All Bad" <kohliCUT...@ameritel.net> wrote in message
> news:35i3a0F...@individual.net...
>
>>Okay, w/ 200,000 Baha'is leaving Iran, they could go to .....
>>... Belfast and Antrim. The Irish have the backbone to assimilate these
>>blow-ins; the Irish even invented the term for it, "Blow-ins".
>
>
> We can take a few of them around here ... so long as they behave themselves
> properly and don't try to spread the elitest crap around too much. Of
> course, mebbe this time you'll send us a few with backbone because the last
> lot failed badly in that respect.
>
> One of them started with the crap ... superior beings ... great fortitude
> ... persecutions ... martyrs etc. and set out to be a shining example of
> that to edify and educate the natives. Apparently, somebody disagreed with
> him, to the extent that he had to leave the country in some haste. It must
> have been a pretty strong disagreement ... way in excess of petrol bombs,
> bullet in the head etc. because those of us who remain here shrug those
> things off as an everyday occurrence, or, could it possibly be a case of a
> total bullshitter with no backbone.
>
> I think we should be told.
>
Aye, yie, yie. Have they some bullshitters among 'em, even better'n our
own Georgie?
>
>>Stand by to update the NI Baha'i census, from 123 to 200, 123.
>
>
> Send them by all means - Ireland now needs immigrants! Naturally I reckon a
> fair percentage will be converted by the Irish ... Guinness is a powerful
> teaching tool!
>
> You might even think of coming to the auld sod, yourself!
>
That would be lovely, but I don't know when I can do it.
- Mr. All Bad
Mr. All Bad
Karen Bacquet wrote:
Consider the context. Someone else (vous?) mentioned Juan's cheap
rationalizations (the portfolio theory) and Susan explained it. She's
not ragging on him, she's trying to deflate your assertion that House
members had portfolios because Juan said so. Juan also said other
things that not only turned out to be junk, but conclusions based on the
junk which he insisted were true anyway.
I'm not ragging on Juan, either. My intent is to simply point out the
origin of "Juan" in this discussion - you brought him in, and to explain
that his opinion means nothing. If it must mean something, it is not
something good.
- Mr. All Bad
Steve Marshall
>Yeah, I know. In your book the House of Justice couldn't possibly be
>concerned with these young people's well-being. That's the difference
>between you and Karen. Karen was reliefed that the House hadn't done
>anything as idiotic as sending Western Baha'is to proselytize in Iran.
>You, on the other hand, would have relished the idea.
Does anyone have a theory about the difference between Susan and
Karen?
sma...@jam.rr.com
> Looks like the rest of them will be going as well?
Contrary to common opinion, no one stays on the House forever.
> That's the reason that civilised societies make retirement mandatory
at a
> certain age.
Are you saying the US isn't civilzed?
Don't answer that.
Mr. All Bad
Steve Marshall wrote:
In theory, they are the same; in practice, they are quite different.
This is my findings regarding practice, and theory, as well. In theory,
both theory and practice are the same, though, much like Tad and the
Sock Puppets.
- Mr. All Bad
sma...@jam.rr.com
> You're certainly someone to be concerned about people's lives the way
> you blab about them on this list as well as others.
I'm rather careful about what information I will or won't release
actually.
As you no doubt
> know by now, this was one of the concerns of that leaked memo about
you
> and your big mouth.
The memo said nothing about my releasing information that should be
kept confidential. At most, it indicated the Counsellors disagreed with
some things I said. I know they have a different opinion about Ruhi.
sma...@jam.rr.com
of
> > > Justice members (as has been alleged by folk other than just
Nima).
> > Mostly Juan.
>
> He's in the know and you're not. So, no surprises there!
Yeah, right. He's got all these wonderful sources like George telling
him that Baha'is can't say the prayer for America.
sma...@jam.rr.com
> cyberspace for the last year and you're still ragging on him.
Karen,
You are the one who brought up the portfolio rumor and Juan is the one
who started it. Thems just the facts.
Steve Marshall
> At that time I wondered if there were portfolios among the House of
> Justice members (as has been alleged by folk other than just Nima).
Here's what Peter Khan says:
"There are a few other needs I mention before I stop. These are needs
that are particular to some societies in the world with which I
include New Zealand. And I say these having a reasonable knowledge of
this country. New Zealand is one of the countries I follow very
closely in the holy land - we can't all follow the entire 182 National
Spiritual Assembly communities, but we follow some of them more than
others and then everything comes to the House of Justice table, and so
we're aware of the basic features of what happens everywhere."
http://bahaistudies.net/khan.html
And he also said:
"Related to that is the question: "I'm still waiting for the unseen
calamity by the end of the 20th century. Are we still getting it?"
I've got news for you folks, you've got it. This stuff going on in New
Zealand at the present time, if this is not a calamity, what is?"
The calamity is in New Zealand, Mr. Wake. Not in Ireland.
ka kite
Steve
sma...@jam.rr.com
Steve Marshall
>As you well know the House of Justice can impose plenty of sanctions if
>they want to forbid emmigration. They aren't doing that.
>
>>It's supposed to be infallible, and folks are
>> supposed to obey it -- that's a heavy-duty persuasion factor.
>
>If one disobeys the Universal House of Justice directly they can be
>declared a Covenant breaker. But in fact, there are no sanctions
>applied in these cases whatsoever.
None whatsoever?
"In reply to your letter of 13 June concerning the restoration of
administrative rights for those who left Iran with official exit
permits, the Universal House of Justice has requested us to convey the
following guidance on its behalf."
http://bahai-library.com/uhj/iran.emmigrants.html
Karen Bacquet
>>
>>
>> Of course, the regime in Iran is evil --
>
>
> Then they, not the UHJ, are to be blamed for the oppression of the Baha'is.
Of course, they are. Iran has got some very serious social problems,
just generally. *Iran Focus* reported that drug abuse has just exploded
since the revolution, for example -- now one out of 17 people there is a
drug addict. I recently heard a story on NPR about Iran's use of child
soldiers during the 1980s that made me sick to my stomach. Of course
this is an evil regime, and I wish those fighting for democracy there
well. The Baha'is, besides just being in a country that is in very bad
shape, are doubly-disadvantaged, by the open denial of their most basic
human rights. As I said before, any young person there is going to have
a tough row to how; Baha'i youth are working under an extra burden.
>
>> who says it's not?
>
>
> Oooooops, My mistake! I'd thought you had some doubts about the UHJ for
> encouraging the Baha'is of Iran to remain the Baha'is of Iran. Had I
> misunderstood your opinion on the matter? Please do tell me if I had!
I think the policy is mistaken. We have this image of the Baha'i
community of Iran as being a bunch of serene and steadfast
martyr-saints, but common sense would tell us that only a small fraction
of *any* population are saints. Most are just ordinary believers trying
to struggle through life the best they can. Encouraging people to stay
and be sacrifices to some future vision of Baha'is playing a role in the
"regeneration" of Iran is just asking people to throw their lives away.
>
> They are not required to all stay. The fact that you've had your ear
> filled w/ gibber from an Iranian Baha'i
He knows more Iranian youth than you do, and he says 99% of them are
depressed. Even if that is exaggeration, it's still very alarming.
would have suggested to a
> _reasonable_ person, that the UHJ has NOT REQUIRED THEM to stay, SO WHAT
> ARE YOU GOING ON ABOUT?
>
I think you underestimate just how much weight "encouragement" from the
UHJ would have -- and if we are talking about young people, their
family's opinion would have a lot of weight. So, even if they
themselves weren't inclined to listen to the UHJ, their family might.
It would be a rare 20-year-old that would strike out into a foreign
country leaving his whole family behind.
It comes down to a difference in perspective -- I don't relate to caring
about groups; I care about individuals. I spend a good deal of my
online time like the guy who spends each morning walking along the beach
pitching stranded starfish back into the ocean. When asked why it
matters when more will just wash up on shore the next day, he threw a
starfish back into the sea and said "It mattered to that one."
If a barrier can't be built to keep the starfish from being stranded on
the beach, then the only alternative is to toss them one-by-one into the
ocean.
I don't have a quarrel with anything the UHJ is trying to do to help the
Iranian Baha'is; I just think that doing so with the goal of keeping
them in Iran is a mistake -- this turns a humanitarian endeavor into an
agenda. It would be equally "help" from my perspective, to give those
who can't afford to leave the means to do so. If I were one of these
rich people that the UHJ is hitting up for its economic program, that's
what I would do.
Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
Karen Bacquet
> Susan:
>
>>If one disobeys the Universal House of Justice directly they can be
>>declared a Covenant breaker. But in fact, there are no sanctions
>>applied in these cases whatsoever.
>
>
> None whatsoever?
>
> "In reply to your letter of 13 June concerning the restoration of
> administrative rights for those who left Iran with official exit
> permits, the Universal House of Justice has requested us to convey the
> following guidance on its behalf."
> http://bahai-library.com/uhj/iran.emmigrants.html
>
Dear Steve,
I happened to be briefly describing the online goings-on for the past
couple of days to Hubby, and brought up this policy to him. He thought
it was incredibly stupid, then said "That's one problem I have with you
Baha'is, this martyrdom fixation." It's like tossing a Jew that escaped
Nazi Germany with fake baptismal papers out of his synagogue. God knows
how many Baha'is were lost to the Faith because of this.
Again, it's the idea that it's better for Iranian Baha'is to stay and be
martyrs than to escape and live decent lives. No civilized religion
would act this way.
Love, Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com
Finnegan's Wake
<sma...@jam.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1106498095....@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> > They must be converting then in large numbers otherwise the Grumpies
> > wouldn't be concerned.
>
> Yeah, I know. In your book the House of Justice couldn't possibly be
> concerned with these young people's well-being. That's the difference
> between you and Karen. Karen was reliefed that the House hadn't done
> anything as idiotic as sending Western Baha'is to proselytize in Iran.
> You, on the other hand, would have relished the idea.
I couldn't give a fiddler's fart about the Grumpies; in terms of
intelligence I rate them exactly the same as all religious zealous weirdos
at zero, zilch and doodly squat. They don't give a damn about any
individual in Iran or elsewhere - all that concerns them is their precious
"human resources" and presence in any country, that they can boast of their
irrelevance and imagine they are of importance.
And don't bullshit about differences twixt Karen and me for you know sweet
FA about them ... if any. If you think we can't see your feeble efforts to
drive a wedge you're even dumber than I gave you credit for! You can't drive
that wedge because Karen and I can disagree without getting wor knickers in
a knot (shock! horror! I don't demand or expect her to agree with me)and,
secondly, there's a bond of unity there that you can't break or even fathom.
Not forgetting, of course, that Karen doesn't quote, or worse still,
misquote private correspondence - let those, to whom this may apply, take
note that the Old Reaper can be most unforgiving about certain things and
that nothing short of sackcloth, ashes and profuse grovelling will ever
alter his mindset on that. Any who think otherwise are tatie bread!
>
Mr. All Bad
sma...@jam.rr.com wrote:
Oh. I had not been reading Cal.
Sorry Karen! It looked to me to be you.
- Mr. All Bad
Mr. All Bad
Karen Bacquet wrote:
>
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>> Of course, the regime in Iran is evil --
>>
>>
>>
>> Then they, not the UHJ, are to be blamed for the oppression of the
>> Baha'is.
>
>
> Of course, they are. Iran has got some very serious social problems,
> just generally. *Iran Focus* reported that drug abuse has just exploded
> since the revolution, for example -- now one out of 17 people there is a
> drug addict. I recently heard a story on NPR about Iran's use of child
> soldiers during the 1980s that made me sick to my stomach. Of course
> this is an evil regime, and I wish those fighting for democracy there
> well. The Baha'is, besides just being in a country that is in very bad
> shape, are doubly-disadvantaged, by the open denial of their most basic
> human rights. As I said before, any young person there is going to have
> a tough row to how; Baha'i youth are working under an extra burden.
>
>>
>>> who says it's not?
>>
>>
>>
>> Oooooops, My mistake! I'd thought you had some doubts about the UHJ
>> for encouraging the Baha'is of Iran to remain the Baha'is of Iran.
>> Had I misunderstood your opinion on the matter? Please do tell me if
>> I had!
>
>
> I think the policy is mistaken.
No one should question your right to be wrong.
> We have this image of the Baha'i
> community of Iran as being a bunch of serene and steadfast
> martyr-saints,
Eh, no. You have your image; I've got mine. The Baha'i down the street
has theirs, and the nighbors across the way imagine the Baha'i of Iran
to be the two humped camel. None is completely correct, and even the
one which is most clearly wrong has something good.
> but common sense would tell us that only a small fraction
> of *any* population are saints.
Again, speak for yourself. The population of heaven is _entirely_
saints. This is a tautology you would argue against, so common sense is
_not_ on your side.
> Most are just ordinary believers trying
> to struggle through life the best they can. Encouraging people to stay
> and
No. No "and". They are asked to remain the Baha'is of Iran. Some are
called to pioneer, and some are asked to stay. Black Americans were
discriminated against in the Southern US. Some stayed and some left.
Eventually the local policy was changed. It was not improved due to
everyone leaving. Rosa Parks was a local woman. Things were improved
because some stayed, and some, such as Dr. King, found a way to show a
moralizing Christian world, how profoundly barbaric they'd been, and
redeemed them all. We are a people of faith. We have nothing to gain
in abandoning our faith at the outset.
> be sacrifices to some future vision of Baha'is playing a role in the
> "regeneration" of Iran is just asking people to throw their lives away.
>
>>
>> They are not required to all stay. The fact that you've had your ear
>> filled w/ gibber from an Iranian Baha'i
>
>
> He knows more Iranian youth than you do, and he says 99% of them are
> depressed. Even if that is exaggeration, it's still very alarming.
>
Common sense suggests he should be discounted.
> would have suggested to a
>
>> _reasonable_ person, that the UHJ has NOT REQUIRED THEM to stay, SO
>> WHAT ARE YOU GOING ON ABOUT?
>>
> I think you underestimate just how much weight "encouragement" from the
> UHJ would have -- and if we are talking about young people, their
> family's opinion would have a lot of weight. So, even if they
> themselves weren't inclined to listen to the UHJ, their family might. It
> would be a rare 20-year-old that would strike out into a foreign country
> leaving his whole family behind.
>
Sure, and by the exact some token, encouraging the Baha'is to leave will
result in a mass exodus, and it will be due entirely to the UHJ.
>
> It comes down to a difference in perspective -- I don't relate to caring
> about groups; I care about individuals. I spend a good deal of my
> online time like the guy who spends each morning walking along the beach
> pitching stranded starfish back into the ocean. When asked why it
> matters when more will just wash up on shore the next day, he threw a
> starfish back into the sea and said "It mattered to that one."
>
I doubt you care. Suppose there were any truth to what your source
said, and to what you posted about economic activities. Suppose these
occidentals had been arrested and interrogated. One of two outcomes
would happen. Either they tell your sources version, or they tell what
the Hezbollahis want to hear:
"Hello, my name is Patricio. I am a bahooooveyeyey from Sao Paolo. I
go to campuses in Iran and solicit prostitutes. I pay them, but not for
sex. I pay them to listen to me talk about the misguided bahooooveyeyey
faith."
Supposing they tell the cover story, the Hezbollahis note their report,
and they deport the misguided bahooooveyeyeys, and bar them from
returning. Then they read your account. They decide they need to learn
more about what the bahooooveyeyeys were doing. They pick up Iranian
bahooooveyeyeys in the area, to get information from them. They find
ways to intercept and interrupt the economic aid from foregin sources.
They get to do this because you wanted to win an argument on the
internet, and tell me how you care about people. Tell me you care, and
I have to wonder if you ever needed help from someone, ever in your
life, if you've ever seen that help get snatched out of their hands and
go away, because some do-gooder had a better idea?
>
> If a barrier can't be built to keep the starfish from being stranded on
> the beach, then the only alternative is to toss them one-by-one into the
> ocean.
>
> I don't have a quarrel with anything the UHJ is trying to do to help the
> Iranian Baha'is; I just think that doing so with the goal of keeping
> them in Iran is a mistake -- this turns a humanitarian endeavor into an
You have no sense of scope for a wholesale humanitarian endeavor. Your
interest is solely that one starfish who personally kisses your
do-gooder hand. Life does need a personal touch. Literacy comes to
mind. There are also things that work on the wholesale level. You
would be helpful to many deserving people whose names you would never
know, if you were not someone who would risk tossing out their
opportunities for them, at the wholesale level, as you appear to be
quite willing to do, to simply impress others with how much you are
really in the know.
The starfish need a sea wall. You are like that tosser of star fishes
who destroys a sea wall that a mason is building to protect the
starfish, because you want to save the starfish one at a time, in a
cycle of personal dependence, in which your role is completely key.
I applaud the Baha'is of Iran, and I appluad the UHJ, and the Baha'is
who have arisen from abroad, to support the Baha'is of Iran. I do hope
that your Iranian Baha'i friend is like Patricio from Sao Paolo, just
telling his questioner what his questioner wants to hear.
- Mr. All Bad
Finnegan's Wake
>
>
> Lay off the Reaper; he didn't say any such thing.
Susie just wishes he had and, per usual, replies to what she misunderstands
rather than anything actually said. It's yet another aspect of her
technique - that and the inevitable delay when controversy arises .... for
she has to go and get briefed on the official line she's supposed to take.
> From the House's own
> statements, their top concern appears to be, not conversions or
> apostasy, but the exodus of Baha'is from Iran. In fact, I've never seen
> any admission from official sources that there *are* apostasies --
> there most certainly are some, but I have no idea how significant that
> number is.
There are a few links here on the Penal Laws enacted for Ireland from
Elizabeth I to George III to rid the island of Popery: -
http://www.irishclans.com/articles/penallaws.html
http://homepage.tinet.ie/~earrings/penal_laws.html
http://www.clarelibrary.ie/eolas/coclare/history/penal_laws_clare.htm
Obviously there were apostasies but not so many as to affect the balance
twixt Papists and Protestants in the island. The Penal Laws were a
significant factor in shaping Irish society and creating dependence on the
potato which brought catastrophe in the 1840s when Potato Blight wrecked the
crop.
The Grumpies weren't around in those days to send emissaries with finance to
assist the native community survive. As I've already said, because the
Irish have backbone, they endured, preserved their Faith and subsequently
prospered so that they could relinquish that same Faith.
It was a major mistake to send in the cavalry with economic aid - if the
Grumpies want Bahaism to survive in Iran they have to go all out to make
sure the community has a really hard time. Of course if they reckon the
rate of apostasy is high ... too high, in fact that it threatens the
survival, then, obviously they have to do something. But if the community
can take it, then my advice is to heap everything on it ... and then some,
you know, things like actually denouncing Bahais to the authorities
themselves, if nobody else is doing it, just to show that the Bahai
community excels and is better than all the rest ... just like they keep
telling us.
> But what is indisputable is that thousands of Baha'is have
> left Iran; no doubt thousands more would like to. While I'm sure that
> there is concern about the well-being of Iranian Baha'is, the first
> priority of the administration is to keep them in Iran, which outweighs
> that concern. Put it this way: They'd like to see the Iranian Baha'i
> community free and thriving, but if it comes to the choice between
> having these folks free and thriving in other countries, or left
> miserable in Iran, they'd rather have the latter.
Pathetic! It has escaped their attention that Christianity died in the land
of its birth only to flourish elsewhere. Old Peter and Linus weren't,
apparently, that concerned about that situation as to take artificial means
to preserve a Xtian community there to welcome Vespasion and his boys when
they trooped in for what was, apparently, one hell of a destructive party.
Karen Bacquet
>
>
> And don't bullshit about differences twixt Karen and me for you know sweet
> FA about them ... if any. If you think we can't see your feeble efforts to
> drive a wedge you're even dumber than I gave you credit for! You can't drive
> that wedge because Karen and I can disagree without getting wor knickers in
> a knot (shock! horror! I don't demand or expect her to agree with me)and,
> secondly, there's a bond of unity there that you can't break or even fathom.
Besides the basic fact of our friendship, dear Dermod, I simply know
that you would *never* relish folks coming to harm because of their
religious beliefs. You've seen religious violence up close and personal.
Love, Karen
http://bacquet.blogspot.com