NSA court action against Orthodox Bahá'ís

4 views
Skip to first unread message

con...@truebahai.com

unread,
Jan 5, 2007, 3:57:30 PM1/5/07
to
The National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahá'ís of the United States
has filed a Motion for Rule to Show Cause against Joel B. Marangella,
Franklin D. Schlatter, and the governing body for the Orthodox
Bahá'ís in the United States, the Provisional National Bahá'í
Council of the U.S., in the U.S. District Court in Chicago, Illinois.

I believe the public should be aware of these proceedings.

True copies of the NSA's Motion and the OBF's Response are available
online at this address:
http://www.truebahai.com/court/

Jeffrey

bjwa...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jan 9, 2007, 10:42:20 PM1/9/07
to
Thank you for sharing this, Jeffrey. Barbara

Abraxas

unread,
Jan 9, 2007, 11:25:51 PM1/9/07
to
On what grounds?

W

On Jan 6, 6:57 am, "cont...@truebahai.com" <cont...@truebahai.com>
wrote:

Abraxas

unread,
Jan 9, 2007, 11:33:55 PM1/9/07
to
Unless they have paid off the US Attorney General and the judge in
question, this is a case the National Satanic Assembly of the US will
undoubtedly lose. I hope you people have good lawyers, but the motion
has holes the size of Everest in it. Signs, insignias, symbols, holy
relics, names of religions and such cannot be patented or held to
copyright law under any US law. These fascists already lost a case
against Ahmad Sohrab and the New History Society when they walked down
that road, and they will lose again this time.

Note, however, that this latest tactic by the National Satanic Assembly
of the US is a tactic meant to hurt and silence the Remeyite Orthodox
Baha'i community as well as derivatives, and under the 1st amendment
(provided these fascists don't pull strings from the Bush Justice
Department) it is unconstitutional. If I were you people I would be
going to the press with this one and making quite a bit of noise about
it.

W

> > Jeffrey- Hide quoted text -- Show quoted text -

Ian: performancepoet@comcast.net

unread,
Jan 10, 2007, 8:03:25 PM1/10/07
to
I noted that in the Sans Guardian Organizations motion much was made
about interfereing with their buisness enterprise, at least they have
admited what it is they are engaged in and believe in.

Ron House

unread,
Jan 10, 2007, 11:01:05 PM1/10/07
to
Ian: perform...@comcast.net wrote:
> I noted that in the Sans Guardian Organizations motion much was made
> about interfereing with their buisness enterprise, at least they have
> admited what it is they are engaged in and believe in.

They either don't know the constitution of the United States
(impossible) or they don't care that they are trying to violate it.

So much for obedience to law.

--
Ron House ho...@usq.edu.au
http://www.sci.usq.edu.au/staff/house
Ethics website: http://www.sci.usq.edu.au/staff/house/goodness

Steve Marshall

unread,
Jan 11, 2007, 7:36:19 AM1/11/07
to
Ron wrote:
>They either don't know the constitution of the United States
>(impossible) or they don't care that they are trying to violate it.
>
>So much for obedience to law.

Hi Ron

The "Sans Guardian Organisation being referred to is the Bahai Faith,
aka Haifans. Are you saying that the Haifan Baha'i administration is
violating the US constitution and being disobedient to the law. If so,
then in what way?

ka kite
Steve

con...@truebahai.com

unread,
Jan 11, 2007, 7:27:00 PM1/11/07
to
We cannot comment on pending litigation.

You can see for yourself here: http://www.truebahai.com/court/

Jeffrey

Viv

unread,
Jan 12, 2007, 4:48:29 AM1/12/07
to

Abraxas wrote:

>
> Note, however, that this latest tactic by the National Satanic Assembly
> of the US is a tactic meant to hurt and silence the Remeyite Orthodox
> Baha'i community

But you have previously made clear your view that the whole
Marangellite-Remeyite thing is a Haifa black op, with Joel in the pay
of the UHJ.

If that is the case why would the NSA want to "hurt and silence" them?

PaulHammond

unread,
Jan 12, 2007, 5:16:48 AM1/12/07
to

What? YOu are still labouring under the delusion that anything
Nimikins says has to MAKE SENSE? be CONSISTENT?

Have even its own internal LOGIC?

You're so funny!

Mossad doesn't pay him for logic.

Paul

Viv

unread,
Jan 12, 2007, 8:50:21 AM1/12/07
to

Ron House wrote:
>
> They either don't know the constitution of the United States
> (impossible) or they don't care that they are trying to violate it.
>
> So much for obedience to law.
>

Come now, Ron, even by the standards of those who like to pick at
Baha'i institutions at every opportunity that's a pretty childish poke.
One can understand the Marangellite-Remeyites getting snippy, and Norma
will have to put his foot in, but you're normally more sensible. Going
to law in the US is a violation of the constitution? Going to law is a
violation of the law? Don't be silly. It's a trademark infringement /
passing-off case.

Viv.

Abraxas

unread,
Jan 13, 2007, 12:01:00 AM1/13/07
to

On Jan 12, 7:48 pm, "Viv" <viv_jacob...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Abraxas wrote:
>
> > Note, however, that this latest tactic by the National Satanic Assembly
> > of the US is a tactic meant to hurt and silence the Remeyite Orthodox

> > Baha'i communityBut you have previously made clear your view that the whole


> Marangellite-Remeyite thing is a Haifa black op, with Joel in the pay
> of the UHJ.

It is. Since you cosa nostra cunts can't lay a hand on anyone else
other than your own lackies, you go after the racket Remeyites you
control in order to try to scare the real enemies you do have who are
ready to tear you assholes limb from bloody limb. The only problem with
this tactic is that *we* have your number now, holding you by yours
short curlies and pulling really hard.

> If that is the case why would the NSA want to "hurt and silence" them?

See above, clown.

W

Ian: performancepoet@comcast.net

unread,
Jan 13, 2007, 12:53:48 AM1/13/07
to
They are not viuolating the constitution by going to law, however,
what they are asking in many respects as a judgement would violate it.
One cannot trademark a the name used for a belief, i.e. trade mark
"Christian" then make very sect in Christiandom, stop using the word
to describe themselves, further not be able to use the name of their
founder Christ, nor any religious symbol such as the cross or
crucifix. It would seem to violate a very basic rule of seperation.


On Fri, 12 Jan 2007 01:36:19 +1300, Steve Marshall <asm...@es.co.nz>
wrote:

Ian: performancepoet@comcast.net

unread,
Jan 13, 2007, 12:59:03 AM1/13/07
to

Going to law is not against the constitution, but what they are
demanding of the law is. The seperation clause the establishment
clause etc. How does one trademark a name used by every adherent of
any sect of it, Bahai has been around since 1860's and was not trade
marked for about 70 years, further would be like trade marking
Christian and Christ, and then telling every sect you cant use those
words, if approved it would establish a religion over another.
Definately a constitutional issue. I dare say when the press and TV
get hold of this one the NSA is going to look very evil in the eyes of
most Americans.


On 12 Jan 2007 05:50:21 -0800, "Viv" <viv_ja...@hotmail.co.uk>
wrote:

Steve Marshall

unread,
Jan 14, 2007, 5:23:50 AM1/14/07
to
>One cannot trademark a the name used for a belief, i.e. trade mark
>"Christian" then make very sect in Christiandom, stop using the word
>to describe themselves, further not be able to use the name of their
>founder Christ, nor any religious symbol such as the cross or
>crucifix.

But the Haifan sect isn't trying to trademark generic stuff like
"Baha'i" and five and nine-pointed stars. It's trying to stop other
Baha'i sects from passing themselves off as Haifans by using phrases
trademarked by the US NSA and the Baha'i World Centre in Haifa. I
admit that it's a stretch to expect no other Baha'i sects to use
phrases like "Baha'i Faith", "National Spiritual Assembly" and
"Universal House of Justice", particularly when such terms are in
Baha'i writings that all the sects share.

It'll be an interesting fight to watch, and I'm glad I'm not yet
having to defend the Baha'i-related domain names that Alison and I
own. :-)

ka kite
Steve

Steve Marshall

unread,
Jan 14, 2007, 5:26:54 AM1/14/07
to
>Going to law is not against the constitution, but what they are
>demanding of the law is. The seperation clause the establishment
>clause etc. How does one trademark a name used by every adherent of
>any sect of it, Bahai has been around

The US NSA hasn't trademarked "Baha'i" and it's not making a case that
it has exclusive right to the word. Unless i missed it when I read the
court documents. Please quote where the US NSA is making this claim.

ka kite
Steve

con...@truebahai.com

unread,
Jan 14, 2007, 1:40:24 PM1/14/07
to
from the NSA's motion for rule to show cause:

"This motion is made on the grounds that, despite the Judgment, the
Remeyites are engaged in Web publishing efforts utilizing the NSA's
trademarks and other indicia of the Baha'i Faith without the NSA's
authorization and the NSA is suffering irreparable harm as a result.
The Remeyites web sites bear designations such as, National Baha'i
council of the United States, Provisional National Baha'i Council of
the United States, the Mother Baha'i Council... at domain names such as
truebahai.com, orthoddoxbahai.com, bahai-guardian.com... among others."

obf...@rt66.com

unread,
Jan 14, 2007, 10:23:41 PM1/14/07
to
Steve wrote:

"The US NSA hasn't trademarked "Baha'i" and it's not making a case
that
it has exclusive right to the word. Unless i missed it when I read the
court documents. Please quote where the US NSA is making this claim."

Dear Steve,

A document in my possession from the United States Patent Office
clearly
shows that the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United
States,
Wilmette, Ill. did register for a term of 20 years from March 11, 1952
the term
BAHA'I.

A statement signed by Horace Hollley is on the document, wherein it is
indicated
that the term is "for Publications - namely books, periodicals,
pamphlets, house organs
and news reports."

The NSA believes it has the exclusive right to the word BAHA'I. That's
the reason they
claim that others who use the term without their authorization are in
violation of the 1966
injunction.

Sincerely,

Frank Schlatter

Abraxas

unread,
Jan 14, 2007, 11:04:40 PM1/14/07
to
This is where we part company. I don't think your message to Talisman
is within the Haifan tradition.

If you had a direct link to God independent of Baha'u'llah, then you
would be able to produce verses to prove it. But you have never
produced anything that would lead me to think you have such direct
access to God through your heart.


Alison

Abraxas

unread,
Jan 14, 2007, 11:07:14 PM1/14/07
to

Viv

unread,
Jan 15, 2007, 3:44:50 AM1/15/07
to

Abraxas wrote:

Sorry, Norma, you've sworn and rambled and rumbled, but you haven't
actually answered the basic question. No change there then.

Abraxas

unread,
Jan 15, 2007, 9:23:27 PM1/15/07
to
Mozdur ranted:

> actually answered the basic question. No change there then

As a matter of fact I have. Took you long enough to come back with this
tripe...

W

Ron House

unread,
Jan 15, 2007, 11:17:58 PM1/15/07
to

Hi Steve,

I didn't say that they were being disobedient to the law. I was thinking
about the fact that the teaching about obedience to the law was meant to
be obeyed in a spiritual as well as a technical sense. The NSA knows
full well of the legal rights granted in the US Constitution to freely
practise one's religion. The true spirit of obeying the law, then, would
preclude their trying to find a clueless judge who will make a judgement
in clear contravention of the rights granted under the Constitution. It
looks like another clear case of "all letter and no spirit": we all know
everyone should be permitted to promote their own religion, as long as
they violate no other laws, but the NSA is trying to close down or
impair information outlets that might inform people that there are other
Baha'is than Haifan Baha'is. Thus, "So much for obedience to law": they
conform to the letter and deliberately break the intention and spirit.
When the law in question is, spiritually, a very good law, in clear
conformity with Baha'u'llah's teaching to independently investigate
truth (His number one teaching according to 'Abdu'l-Baha), trying to
find end runs around it is spiritually reprehensible.

And to the UHJ: We all know you'll be sent a copy of this article, just
as we all know you know of, or initiated, the present action by the US
NSA. I mentioned this fiasco to my wife Gitie the other day, and we both
wish to point out to you how seriously your present behaviour falls
short of, and indeed betrays, Baha'u'llah's teachings about free and
open search for truth. Baha'u'llah's weapon was His pen, whereas yours
is depriving the pens of others of ink. Think about this discrepancy
carefully, and reverse this unjust course of action.

--
Ron House
rhouseATsmartchatDOTnetDOTau

Ron House

unread,
Jan 15, 2007, 11:22:40 PM1/15/07
to

See the original judgement p9, listing both "Baha'i" and the Greatest
Name symbol as trademarks. Since the bare word "Baha'i" is the only
common factor in many of the phrases they list and object to in their
motion, then yes, it would seem they both have trademarked "Baha'i" and
are also trying to stop the usage of the bare word "Baha'i".

--
Ron House

Steve Marshall

unread,
Jan 16, 2007, 6:00:09 AM1/16/07
to
obf...@rt66.com wrote:

>The NSA believes it has the exclusive right to the word BAHA'I. That's
>the reason they
>claim that others who use the term without their authorization are in
>violation of the 1966
>injunction.

Hi Frank,

Yes, it looks like you're right and I was wrong. The Haifans went
after the owners of bahaiwomen.com and won:

"A referee in an international dispute over a domain name has ruled
that visitors to BahaiWomen.com should find information on the Baha'i
religion and not pornography."
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0NEW/is_2002_Jan_18/ai_82018726

However, that decision doesn't impinge on freedom of religion, which
may be the crucial difference.

"In the court's opinion, the complaint fails to state a good cause of
action. The plaintiffs have no right to a monopoly of the name of a
religion."
http://bahai-library.org/documents/sohrab.html

It'll be an interesting case to watch.

Steve Marshall

unread,
Jan 16, 2007, 6:08:00 AM1/16/07
to
Ron House <ho...@usq.edu.au> wrote:

>I didn't say that they were being disobedient to the law. I was thinking
>about the fact that the teaching about obedience to the law was meant to
>be obeyed in a spiritual as well as a technical sense. The NSA knows
>full well of the legal rights granted in the US Constitution to freely
>practise one's religion. The true spirit of obeying the law, then, would
>preclude their trying to find a clueless judge who will make a judgement
>in clear contravention of the rights granted under the Constitution. It
>looks like another clear case of "all letter and no spirit": we all know
>everyone should be permitted to promote their own religion, as long as
>they violate no other laws, but the NSA is trying to close down or
>impair information outlets that might inform people that there are other
>Baha'is than Haifan Baha'is. Thus, "So much for obedience to law": they
>conform to the letter and deliberately break the intention and spirit.
>When the law in question is, spiritually, a very good law, in clear
>conformity with Baha'u'llah's teaching to independently investigate
>truth (His number one teaching according to 'Abdu'l-Baha), trying to
>find end runs around it is spiritually reprehensible.

Hi Ron,

Thanks for the explanation.

Now, I notice that your surname is House. Did you realise that you're
using a copyrighted word as a surname? People could be confused by
this.

ka kite
Steve

Steve Marshall

unread,
Jan 16, 2007, 6:09:41 AM1/16/07
to
Ron House <ho...@usq.edu.au> wrote:

>See the original judgement p9, listing both "Baha'i" and the Greatest
>Name symbol as trademarks. Since the bare word "Baha'i" is the only
>common factor in many of the phrases they list and object to in their
>motion, then yes, it would seem they both have trademarked "Baha'i" and
>are also trying to stop the usage of the bare word "Baha'i".

Thanks Ron. I'm up to speed now. I should remember not to
underestimate the nuttiness of organised religion.

ka kite
Steve

Ron House

unread,
Jan 16, 2007, 9:44:03 PM1/16/07
to
Steve Marshall wrote:

> Hi Ron,
>
> Thanks for the explanation.
>
> Now, I notice that your surname is House. Did you realise that you're
> using a copyrighted word as a surname? People could be confused by
> this.

Now there's a thought... I do believe I started before they did... ;-)

Baha'i Censorship - See Website

unread,
Jan 17, 2007, 7:15:11 AM1/17/07
to
Excerpts from Mirza Ahmad Sohrab's Broken Silence: The Story of Today's
Struggle
for Religious Freedom. New York: Universal Publishing, 1942.
Reprinted. H-Bahai: Lansing, Michigan, 2004.
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/SohrabEx.htm
http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/diglib/books/P-T/S/sohrab/Broken.htm
Please note that in its use of the tactic of what Sohrab called "slanderous
vilification," the headnotes on H-net on Broken Silence and The Will and
Testament of Abdu'l-Baha violate the NEH, MSU, and H-Net's own democratic
principles regarding scholarly and academic debate and discussion. The
associated links, for these two works, and attempts to discredit Sohrab with
bogus legal opinions, further demonstrate fanatical Baha'i abuse and
undermining of the democratic principles that support H-Net, yet another
indication of the extent to which power-hungry Baha'is are willing to go to
maintain their stranglehold and bias people against opinions they oppose. In
these books, Sohrab presents a view of Bahai life in America during the
early 20th Century very different from what the deceptive headnotes suggest.

Sohrab's entire book may be downloaded in one click. 21 megabytes.
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/Sohrab.zip

Other works by Sohrab:

Excerpts at bottom: Mirza Ahmad Sohrab. The Will and Testament of Abdul
Baha, An Analysis.
New York: Universal Publishing, 1944. Reprinted. H-Bahai: Lansing, Michigan,
2004.
http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/diglib/books/P-T/S/sohrab/wtab.htm
Entire book may be downloaded in one click:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/SohrabAWT.zip 3 megs.

Mirza Ahmad Sohrab. I Heard Him Say. Words of Abdul Baha as Recorded by his
Secretary.
New York: The New History Foundation, 1937. Digitally republished, East
Lansing, Mi.: H-Bahai, 2004
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/SohrabIHS.zip 5 megs.

Mirza Ahmad Sohrab. Abdul Baha's Grandson: Story of a Twentieth Century
Excommunication New York: Universal Publishing for The New History
Foundation,
1943. Reprinted. H-Bahai: Lansing, Michigan, 2004.
http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/diglib/books/P-T/S/sohrab/ABG.htm

Mirza Ahmad Sohrab. My Bahai Pilgrimage. Autobiography from Childhood to
Middle Age.
New York: New History Foundation, 1959. Reprinted. H-Bahai: Lansing,
Michigan, 2004.
http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/diglib/books/P-T/S/sohrab/MBP.htm
Entire book may be downloaded in one click:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/SohrabMBP.zip 8 megs.

Sohrab, Mirza Ahmad. The Story of the Divine Plan. Taking Place during, and
immediately following World War I. New York: The New History Foundation,
1947. Digitally republished, East Lansing, Mi.: H-Bahai, 2004.
http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/diglib/books/P-T/S/sohrab/SDP.htm

Mirza Ahmad Sohrab. Broken Silence. The Story of Today's Struggle for
Religious Freedom.
New York: Universal Publishing, 1942.
Sohrab's entire book may be downloaded in one click. 29 megabytes.
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/Sohrab.zip

Pages 83, 85, 131, and 206 are missing from the scanned H-Net version of
Broken Silence:

"The love of religious liberty is a stronger sentiment than an attachment to
civil or political freedom. That freedom which the conscience demands and
which men feel bound by their hopes of salvation to contend for, can hardly
fail to be attained. Conscience in the cause of religion, and the worship of
Deity, prepares the mind to act and suffer beyond almost all other
causes.... History instructs us that this love of religious liberty, a
compound sentiment in the breast of men, made up of the dearest sense of
right and the highest conviction of duty, is able to look the sternest
despotism in the face" (12). --Daniel Webster

Praise be to God! You are living upon the great continent of the West
enjoying perfect liberty, security and peace of this just government . . .
for in this human world there is no greater blessing than liberty. You do
not know. I who for forty years have been a prisoner, do know. I do know the
value and blessing of liberty. For you have been and are now living in
freedom and you have no fear of anybody. Is there a greater blessing than
this? Freedom! Liberty! Security! These are the great bestowals of God.
Therefore praise ye God! --Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace,
Vol. I, page 49. Address before the Metropolitan African Methodist Church,
Washington, D.C. April 23, 1912.

"Here, I wish to affirm my conviction that the Will of Abdul Baha is valid
and that his appointment of Shoghi Effendi as the Guardian of the Bahai
Cause is unchallengeable. Nevertheless, I take exception to certain policies
and methods initiated by Shoghi Effendi and the Bahai Administration
established under his leadership" (26).

"The teachings of Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha are liberal to the nth degree,
and broad beyond the outposts of human thought. It was the intention of the
Founders to establish an unorganized movement, so all-inclusive and free as
to be immune to the natural proclivities of men to restrict and limit. The
fact that restriction and limitation have already set in and are fast
gaining ground, at this date, only twenty years after the removal from our
midst of Abdul Baha, is a matter of profound concern to all those who,
labels apart, believe in promoting Universal Religion" (26-27).

"The Bahai Cause, as founded by Baha'u'llah nearly a century ago and as
interpreted by his son Abdul Baha, was and still is a UNIVERSAL RELIGION.
Its principles were intended to safeguard the conscience of man from
interference by any hierarchical organization; to spiritualize society and
to socialize religion; to unify the fundamental ideals of the World Faiths;
to bestow upon every child of God the precious gift of liberty and to
harmonize the conflicting interests of nations, races and peoples of the
earth with the power of spirit. However, the present day Bahai
Administration under the title of the National Spiritual Assembly of the
Bahais of the United States and Canada has, through its dogmas and creeds,
frustrated the aims of the Founders of the Bahai Faith."

"The authenticity of this document is beyond the shadow of doubt" (47).

An Old Accusation
"Practically, from the departure of the Master from this life until today,
it has been charged against me by the Bahai Organization and by the members
of the Community that I deny the Will of Abdul Baha and refuse to accept
Shoghi Effendi as Guardian. Therefore, I take this opportunity to make a
plain and unequivocal statement: Never in thought, word or writing have I
questioned the authenticity of the Will, nor denied the validity of the
appointment of Shoghi Effendi. Let us now hope that, once and for all time,
this fact has been make clear and manifest" (49).

"After the ascension of Abdul Baha in 1921, certain reactionary and dogmatic
forces began to make their appearance in the Cause. Almost unnoticeable at
first, they, little by little, gained ground until at present, this
movement, which was the most universal and liberal of all movements, past
and present, has been reduced to a sect, while its spirit is all but
extinguished. The principles of Baha'u'llah are forgotten and in their stead
we see nothing but a mass of rules and regulations that duplicate, to say
the least, the ecclesiastical paraphernalia of previous organized religions"
(51).

"If, in the course of my writing, I have occasionally disagreed with the
policies of Shoghi Effendi, it is not because I, in the least, contest the
genuineness of the Will of Abdul Baha or question the appointment of Shoghi
Effendi to the Guardianship, but because, as a Bahai, I maintain my freedom
of conscience and hold to the injunction of Baha'u'llah: *Independent
investigation of Truth.* Citizens of the United States feel themselves at
liberty to freely discuss, to agree or disagree with the policies of the
President. This does not imply that they question his right to occupy the
White House, nor that they are planning to overthrow the government. On the
contrary, it is an expression of their love for this country and of their
desire to contribute toward its safety and betterment" (52-53).

"I will show from the writings of Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha that the Cause
that they envisaged and for which they suffered is quite different and
totally at variance with the one that is being taught today. One is divine
revelation, the other is human authority; one is universal and
all-inclusive, the other is restricted and separative; one is dignity and
freedom of conscience, the other is subserviency and blind loyalty; one is
wings outstretched, the other is feet enchained" (53).

"I do not claim to be a leader. I do not seek followers. I have no wish that
my name should be even remembered. I am simply a voice in the wilderness.
Lastly, farthest of all from my thoughts is the idea of being destructive,
for my aim is to re-discover the original spiritual teachings of Baha'u'llah
and Abdul Baha, which were and are for the establishment of a divine
civilization" (54).

"The Local Assembly of this city wished to supervise our activities. I, on
the other hand, owing to long experience with the Assemblies, was convinced
that such supervision implied a complete domination and would lead to the
total destruction of the work itself. We looked upon The New History Society
as an independent effort to teach the principles of the Cause, and we needed
freedom in so doing. Afterwards, when the initial interest had been created,
we were ready to guide our new found friends to the Center, to arrange
classes under the direction of its own Bahai teachers and to strive in every
way toward the co-operation of the two groups" (75).

"It was repeatedly required of me that I should appear before the Local
Assembly of New York and the National Spiritual Assembly, but I looked on
these bodies as Religious Tribunals . . . and believed that I would be
trapped into making admissions, regarding my opinion of the organization,
which would be used against me. Consequently, while I was at all times
willing to discuss any and all matters with individual members of the
Assemblies, I consistently refused to appear before their official groups
(77).

"Now, Mrs. Chanler knew that *co-operation* meant supervision of our
programs and of everything that was said on our platform. It implied endless
discussions and certain interruptions of the work. We felt that we could not
risk... (82). [83 missing]

Recruiting Station
"By this time, large numbers of the members of the Bahai organization had
actually jointed The New History Society. This membership with us in no wise
affected their loyalty to the Center, for all of us looked on the new
movement as a sort of recruiting station, and we often termed it as such"
(93).

Voting season
"The New History Society, from time to time, opening its flood-gages and
allowing a stream of immature Bahais to filter into the precincts of the
Assembly. So far so good; but how about the voting season? Would it not be
likely that these fresh, untrammeled minds would pick out some *new*
officers to represent them, and that within a few years a large part of the
administrative personnel would be changed? This supposition brings up a
serious point, applying to both National and Local Assemblies, the former
having been functioning since time out of mind with practically no change of
officers" (95).

"I have to thank Ruhi Effendi for so concisely summing up my characteristics
in the above statement. I could not have done it better myself. An almost
religious belief in freedom for all men, and a dislike for the red tape that
applies to organizations (especially supposedly spiritual ones) are strongly
developed in my consciousness. On this basis, I have always functioned and
always will" (114).

"For ourselves, we shall continue along the path that we have chosen so
deliberately; we shall teach freedom of conscience, respect for the
convictions of others and cooperation between men and women of all systems
of thought tending toward a true comradeship of human beings, born and
unborn. Then, shall we teach religious liberty? To ask the question is to
answer it. The aspiration toward religious liberty has always existed in the
consciousness of mankind. It lives in Hindu hearts, in Jewish hearts, in
Christian hearts, in Islamic hearts and, after its long leap from the heart
of *The Most Great Prisoner in Acca*, it lives in the hearts of people
everywhere. This is a cardinal principle of the New World Order" (120).

"Let me state that during the last eleven years this body of men and women
have set themselves to oppose the work of The New History Society, to
attribute to its founders and members all sorts of unworthy motives; to
publish in *Bahai News* articles of a most crude character and to
countenance stories and rumors that have no foundation in fact and no
relation to reality. In taking this attitude and in systematically following
a course of enmity and persecution, the members of the National Spiritual
Assembly of the Bahais of the United States and Canada have been free and
untrammeled; one may assert that they have used (or in my opinion have
abused) their constitutional right of free press, free speech and free
assembly (124-125).

"In 1939, The New History Society exhibited its works and literature in
[the] Science and Education Building at the New York World's Fair, and
during these months an idea came to the mind of Mrs. Frederick Allien, one
of the first Bahais in this country, who had been called *Berthalin* by
Abdul Baha and who has used this name ever since. The idea was that it would
be a valuable service to the Cause if, after the closing of the Fair, our
exhibit could be transported to the city. After some consultation, it was
decided to take this step as a purely temporary activity, and on November
7th, 1939, *Bahai Bookshop* was opened at 828 Lexington Avenue, a lease
having been signed for the duration of six months. I admit that we were
fully conscious that, in all probability, the National Spiritual Assembly of
the Bahais of the United States and Canada would resent this further
heralding of the Bahai name and teachings. However, we were prepared, as in
the past, to meet opposition in silence (126).

"Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha lived in prison, suffered and gave their
teachings *free* for the religious unification of mankind in order that, in
1928, these spiritual heavenly teachings be monopolized, and sold under
trade-mark to an unsuspecting public as so much *goods*, similar to *Blue
Sunoco, G. Washington coffee, Twenty Mule Team Boraxo* or *the new, blended
with Havana, Whilte Owl Cigar* (it's milder)!" (132).

"The Bahai organization is not a religion, nor a spiritual renaissance, nor
the spirit of the age, but is a full-fledged corporation which, while it
engages itself in marketing the principles of Baha'u'llah for the
establishment of Universal Peace, through its various branches in the United
States, Canada and in other parts of the world, has protected these goods by
taking out a trade-mark on the very name which more than twenty thousand
Persian men and women claimed at the price of their lives" (133).

"I will point out one peculiar aspect of *Bahai News*. Every copy, in recent
times [1940s], carries on its front page the inscription: *For Bahais Only.*
Why for Bahais only, if the Bahai Cause is intended for the whole world? Why
for Bahais only, if there is nothing to hide? Why for Bahais only, if this
periodical is a credit to those who prepare it? Abdul Baha on many occasions
said that in the Bahai Cause there is no secret doctrine, and that there
should be no secret society nor secret meetings. He never thought of
specifying the point that there should be no secret publication: *For men
only, For members of the Klan only, For Bahais Only* (136).

"The insidious adversaries are those who hold office in the National
Spiritual Assembly of the Bahais of the United States and Canada. They are
the ones who, through their legalistic verbiage, have stopped the
circulation of the blood of life through the arteries of mankind; they are
the ones who have banished love from their midst and enthroned the Veiled
Hatred which is more dreadful than the unveiled one; they are the ones who
have spread the pall of subtle fear and suspicion over the Bahai Community,
exiling confidence and self-respect; they are the ones who, through
political manipulations before and during annual Bahai Conventions, are
re-elected to the same offices year after year--thus, keeping a stranglehold
on the activities of the Cause and directing those activities according to
their own good-pleasure" (137).

"The writer of the article in *Bahai News reaches the height of his
slanderous vilification when he likens Mr. and Mrs. Chanler and their Bahai
friends *to those enemies that preceded them: Subhi-Ezel, Mohamet Ali,
Kheirella and their like" (138).

"The Bahai Movement is not an organization. You cannot organize the Bahai
Movement. The Bahai Movement is the spirit of the age. It is the essence of
all the highest ideals of this century. The Bahai Cause is an inclusive
movement. The teachings of all religions and societies are found here.
Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Mohammadans, Zoroastrians, Theosophists,
Freemasons, Spiritualists, etc., find their highest aims in this Cause,
Socialists and philosophers find their theories fully develped in this
movement" --Abdul-Baha (141).

"Registered Aug. 7, 1928 Trade-Mark 254,271 United States Patent Office
National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States and Canada
of New York, N. Y. Application filed March 10, 1928. Serial No. 262,923.
BAHA'I STATEMENT To the Commissioner of Patents: National Spiritual Assembly
of the Baha'is of the United States and Canada, a common-law corporation,
organized and operated under the declaration of trust and doing business
at...
As we read and re-read the statement, we are lost in a sea of amazement. We
rub our eyes, we fidget, we feel restless; we wonder whether all this is not
a nightmare--impossible, incredible. We stagger, and search in our
consciousness for an explanation; then, completely baffled, we look up into
the face of Mr. Horace Holley. Maybe he will tell us what this means! He
smiles, triumphantly pointing to the signature, and we read: National
Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States and Canada by Horace
Holley, Secretary.... There is a stake on the *source* of the Bahai Cause
and its owner-proprietor is the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahais of
the United States and Canada. The *password* given to mankind by
Baha'u'llah, to be used for the regeneration of nations, is in the
possession of the Bahai administrators" (145-146).

"No one on the face of the earth can fathom the *mystery* latent in the name
*Bahai* except these interpreters of the law, these esteemed members of the
all-powerful Bahai hierarchy. The *jewel with many facets* is boxed and
locked, and the key is in the velvet pocket of Mr. Horace Holley.... The
*set of principles necessary for the peace of the world, for economic
stability, for the true progress of sciences and arts are registered and
trade-marked, and woe unto those who dare to speak or write on these
subjects!" (147).

"The remedy given by the Great Physician for the healing of the sick body of
the world has been made up into a patent medicine, and no one is allowed to
avail himself of its restorative powers except by permission of these
parochial pharmacologists. We, the members of the Bahai Organization, have a
priority right on *the ideals of fellowship and service irrespective of
race, creed, nationality and class,* and those who put these principles into
practice are our *insidious enemies* (147).

"In the light of the above rules, it is not difficult to picture the kind of
society that would be ours if the Bahai community becomes widespread under
the aegis of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahais of the United
States and Canada. Any dictator who might arise in this country, of
whatsoever political hue, red, brown, black or yellow, would take to his
heart and cherish these deaf, dumb and blind subjects, utterly servile and
subservient, who would never oppose him nor resist his most cruel laws or
indeed his slightest whim. The citizenry of these proud United States would
become a race of automata, a chain-gang; and our fair democracy would have
been converted into a nightmare, more gruesome and frightful than could be
imagined by any H. G. Wells in his most despondent mood" (156-157).

"My personal opinion is that if some effectual means be not presently
adopted to disperse this sacrosanct hierarchy, to nullify its power and
destroy its authority, it will ere long reduce the Bahai Cause to the status
of a sect, seeing that it has now waxed so exceedingly puffed up with pride
as to attack anyone who, before the face of his Maker, calls himself a
Bahai. If a method be not devised to check the inordinate ambitions of these
administrators of the Bahai Cause, they will, for the establishment of their
own un-American, un-democractic ideology, so limit the spiritual potency of
the words of Baha'u'llah that the effect of these words on the hearts of men
will be reduced to a whisper" (157).

"If this group is left to continue in its course of every day devising a new
lock, of forging a new chain, of fashioning a new whip for application of
the fair body of the Cause, then, I swear by the Almighty that Baha'u'llah
himself will arise in his Supreme Power and shatter these fetters to a
thousand pieces, thus freeing his Message and setting it again to flow, like
a tumultuous cyclone, through the wide avenues of life! (159).

"What Is the Bahai Cause? The Bahai Cause is a free spiritual Revelation.
Baha'u'llah, as its Founder, prayed that all men may partake of the
inestimable blessings of his Message. This Message, in its essence, belongs
to humanity, and no individual, no group of individuals, no church, no
state, no organization, no administration can lay an exclusive claim to it.
It cannot be trade-marked, and it cannot be patented.... *The words of God
are independent* of the sponsorship of a corporation" (159).

"The Complaint, served on April 25th; the Amended Complaint, presented on
June 7th; the Supplemental Bill of Particulars, added on October 30th, and
the final Memorandum, submitted to the Court on December 27, 1940 . . .
display a shifting of attitude very perplexing to the student of these
documents. The lawsuit started out on the basis of the trade-mark held on
the word *Bahai*, but this definite claim was dropped in the *Amended*
Complaint and in all subsequent Papers. The same process of elimination on
other claims is followed, more or less regularly, in the series of briefs,
showing that the plaintiffs were laboring under confusion of thought and
purpose. Baseless assertions and fantastic allegations were advanced as
facts; but no proofs were offered.... yet hundreds of New York's public,
knowing the situation but slightly, would have been willing to go on record,
stating that some of these charges were obviously not true. At any rate,
according to the Court *no facts* were ever produced and no *good cause of
action* was ever advanced" (171-172).

"As one studies these documents, one comes to the realization that the
plaintiffs are obsessed with a single thought and purpose, namely: that
Baha'u'llah came to earth to form an organization and that his teachings are
to be monopolized by them. This line of argument, like the ominous undertone
of a Greek tragedy, runs throughout all their demands. They believe that our
*unlawful* public teaching of the Bahai Cause is *trespassing* upon their
rights and privileges and works to their *damage and injury*; and they
consider that, if we are permitted to *continue* in these *unlawful acts*,
the National Spiritual Assembly of the Bahais of the United States and
Canada and the Spiritual Assembly of the Bahais of the City of New York
*will suffer irreparable injury*" (172).

"During the eleven years of the existence of The New History Society . . .
Mr. and Mrs. Chanler have poured in their money freely, joyously, as grist
to the mill of their endeavor. Small contributions to the work came in now
and then, from our members, some books were sold and the proceeds added to
the budget, but ninety-nine and three-quarters percent of the total expended
on the maintenance of the work came from the one source--Mr. and Mrs.
Chanler. Everybody knows this; and yet the plaintiffs *claim that we have
made profits, and diverted to ourselves contributions to the Bahai Cause*
which otherwise would have been received by them. All these allegations were
under oath. Here, one cannot help wonder at the mental processes which make
such claims and oaths possible.... So, the Court did not confer upon the
plaintiffs a spiritual and material monopoly on the Bahai Teachings"
(174-174).

"A most incomprehensible aspect of the design of the National Spiritual
Assembly was utter confidence in the justice of its plan and complete
assurance of victory. One reason for this apparent confidence was, I
suspect, the small weight which its members placed on the guarantee of
religious liberty in this country as set forth in the Bill of Rights,
together with a minimizing of the effect which this law of tolerance had had
on the consciousness of the American people" (175).

"The decision handed down in the Supreme Court of New York by Justice Louis
A. Valente on April 1, 1941, is an epoch-making document for . . . its
contents have universal application. Eloquently and definitely, Judge
Valente has reaffirmed the validity of the Bill of Rights. In the case under
review, he denies . . . a monopoly on the word *Bahai*, thus constituting,
in the name of the latest revealed religion, a charter of freedom which
shall stand as long as this nation retains the character conferred upon it
by its founders. I think that will be *always*--in spite of the perils that
menace liberty in these sad times. Thus, from now on, any sincere seeker
after truth, who has realized his highest aspirations in the Bahai Cause,
can term himself a follower of Baha'u'llah and use his name without let or
hindrance. No one can molest him or try to undermine his service in the
movement" (182).

"The Most Important Point. Justice Valente ruled that *the plaintiffs have
no right to a monopoly of the name of a religion. The defendants, who
purport to be members of the same religion, have an equal right to use the
name of the religion in connection with their own meetings, lectures,
classes and other activities. This is the most important point in question;
for, henceforth the National Spiritual Assembly cannot claim, as it has up
to this time, that it is the sole representative of all the Bahais in the
land. There are now, and will be in increasing numbers, Bahais who would not
think it appropriate to be represented by the National Spiritual Assembly,
and whom the National Spiritual Assembly would not think it appropriate to
represent. The laws of this nation will be the practical guarantee of such
Bahais, who will turn their hearts to God in the service of Baha'u'llah and
Abdul Baha, without benefit of clergy (187-188).

Not a Religion
"In studying the Complaint, the Amended Complaint, the Bill of Particulars,
the Supplemental Bill of Particulars and the final Memorandum, one comes to
the conclusion that the plaintiffs are solely preoccupied with the
consolidation of their privileges as a *corporation*. They are deeply
concerned over the possible diversion from them of contributions and the
making, by others, of profits which might have accrued to their budget. They
enlarge on the subjects of unfair competition, pecuniary advantages and
injury to business, and let loose shafts of accusation on charges of
trespassing. It is clear the the Bahai Administration is not a religion, but
a great corporation, having *more than one hundred* subsidiary corporations
operating in various parts of the United States and Canada. Before the
Court, it announces that it is the trustee and custodian of a variety of
properties, including a temple under construction at Wilmette, Illinois,
upon which more than a million dollars has been expended, to date. Likewise,
there is a trust fund under its control as well as a publishing concern. All
these material advantages are possessed by the Bahai Administration, and no
competition shall be allowed in the Bahai name and teachings which are the
source of its wealth! No, the Bahai Administration is not a religion. The
Bahai Cause, from which it derives, was such; but that was long ago" (191).

"By no stretch of imagination can we invest the members of the National
Spiritual Assembly with the same innocence.... Then, why did they allow
themselves to perpetrate the unethical act of concealing from the
Commissioner of the United States Patent Office the fact that the word Bahai
was derived from the name *Baha*, and that *Baha* was a person, and more,
that he was the founder of a Universal Religion? The answer is of course
plain. In such a case, they would have been refused the trade-mark!" (211).

"Hence, the trade-mark on the symbol of the *MOST GREAT NAME*, the
application for which was signed by Mr. Horace Holley, Secretary,
constitutes the rock-bottom of infidelity in the annals of the Bahai
Administration. No further act, however black, can rival this one" (218).

"The National Assembly of the Bahais of the United States and Canada has two
faces--liberal and orthodox; democratic and totalitarian; and these faces
are mirrored on the pages of their twin publications, entitled *World Order*
and *Bahai News*. The former, which is intended for the public, reflects
broad modern ideas; the latter, published for *Bahais Only*, presents
articles and news designed to bolster up and maintain a despotic and
illogical system" (223). ["The American Baha'i" now serves the role of the
latter.]

"Here we see that, while the National Spiritual Assembly asserts that
religious controversy is not a quality of America, it allows itself the very
un-American action of dragging its fellow-believers into the law-courts over
nothing more nor less than a *religious controversy*. While it states that
in this country a varied population has been assured freedom of conscience
and the individual right to worship God according to any practice, it exerts
itself to deprive the members of The New History Society and all liberal
Bahais of this very *individual right to worship* God according to their
convictions and beliefs. While it speaks of the *climate of tolerance*, it
disseminates among its communities the poison of theological controversy
and, without mercy or let-up, persecutes the liberal elements within its own
ranks. But then, this piece of writing is for the public, while the actual
doctrines of the Bahai Administration may be studied by the elect within the
pages of the *Bahai News*" (224).

"It is true that the National Spiritual Assembly, once in a while before its
own membership, pretends to value the assets conferred by these United
States. In a letter dated February 15, 1941, and addressed to *Bahai
Friends*, it questions mournfully: 'In our favored country we are still in
possession of our freedom, our possessions, our liberty of thought--how long
will they last?' Indeed, not long if this institution has its way! The
present day Bahai organization is the model upon which an alleged world
order is to be fashioned; and what a world order it will be, judging from
the pattern! The individual is not allowed to use his conscience, but must
adhere to the rulings of his superiors without regard to modern social
issues or humanitarian inclinations; above all, without regard to the Bahai
teachings. Under these conditions, the better elements in the group are
forced to maintain a painful silence, leaving the conduct of affairs to
those of less sensitive fibre. It is largely for this reason that the Bahais
keep themselves aloof from current affairs. They function on a basis that is
untenable; consequently, they cannot look the world eye to eye. I have heard
more than one of their leaders speaking on public platforms in Geneva,
Switzerland, at times when that city was the hub of advanced thought, and
these outstanding Bahais could not bring themselves to the point of
pronouncing the name of Baha'u'llah. Why this? Simply because the Bahai
Administration has produced a complex among its advocates. The Guardian
himself never ventures into the public" (225).

[The nsa regarding its lawsuit against Sohrab]: "The community of believers
at any given time represents many different stages of development, and the
hostility of the betrayer and the foe comes as a necessary and helpful test
of the individual believer's understanding and firmness. That is all, except
for the further consideration that the Faith acquires public influence and
esteem through the dramatization of its vital principles under onslaught or
denial" (227).

"My opinion is that, at whatsoever door the agitation may justly be laid, a
law court is at no time a fit place for controversy among the followers of
Abdu'l-Baha" (229).

"The outcome of this charge was the same as that of all the other charges:
it fell to the ground because it was totally unsubstantiated. All this is
funny, in a sense; and yet actually, it is not funny that those who signed
this document should so lend themselves to deception and untruth" (242).

"Creeds and articles of faith were formulated by succeeding generations of
theologians, men who had lost the vision of the Prophets and were wandering
in the waste desert of metaphysical speculations. This is what happened to
Christianity. It is happening to the Bahai Cause today--with only a
difference of terminology: The Bahai theologians call themselves
Administrators" (259).

Regarding the Apostle's Creed
"Precautions taken by the Founders. It was too much to expect that the Bahai
Cause would be immune to this process of stratification, but both
Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha did their very best to avoid such a calamity.
Through continuous explanations, they made vivid this danger in order that
the Bahai Movement might be fore-armed and protected from the errors of the
previous religions. They were most emphatic on the points that this Cause is
universal and all-inclusive; that it does not lead itself to the creation of
an hierarchical order; that its fundamental basis is unity and not
ecclesiastical distinctions; that it is essentially a spiritual fellowship
and not a sectarian corporation with exclusive privileges; that its charter
is freedom from worldly and material constitutions, and that its greatness
depends upon non-crystallization and open portals.... The above shows the
emphasis that Baha'u'llah placed on conduct, and on activity in the path of
God. Morality and not creeds, deeds and not words; service and not articles
of faith" (261).

"It took almost two centuries for Christian theologians to formulate *The
Old Roman Creed* and thus insert in the pure Faith a yard-stick and a
bludgeon. In this instance, however, it took only a few years for *Bahai
theologians*, under the more modern title of *Bahai Administrators*, to set
up *The Bahai Creed* which, reducing the Cause from spirit to matter, has
already become more authoritative and binding than *all* the teachings of
Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha" (263).

"Thus, within the narrow limits of less than six years after the departure
of Abdul Baha, a few American Bahais wrote the Declaration of Trust and
By-Laws, submitted them to Shoghi Effendi and received his sanction. In this
manner, the young Cause, so lately deprived of its great Protector, was,
without loss of time, shoved into an institution--a mere waif, the latest
one to enter the dark edifice of Religious Organization" (263).

"The above articles of Bahai Creed and Confession demonstrate that,
notwithstanding the warnings of Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha, their Cause is
today as handicapped and circumscribed as are any of the institutionalized
religions" (268-269).

Bahai Obscurantism
"These articles of the Bahai Creed are the harbingers to an era of
obscurantism in this glorious movement. They are compounded of bigotry in
all its gruesome forms and pave the way to moral darkness. This desire for
concentrated authority is in direct opposition to inquiry and enlightenment.
It is a mediaevalizing tendency. In the Middle Ages we had dry
scholasticism; in the Bahai Cause we have arid administrative legalism. The
Bahai Administration is the progeny of religious intolerance, obviously
injurious to spiritual freedom and ethical emancipation. The Articles of
Creed as quoted are implements of torture in the hands of a Bahai
Administrative Obscurantist. According to his standard, the Bahai Cause is
to be run, not by the fresh springs of inspiration, but by the elixir
distilled from the withered flowers of administrative theology" (270).

"The impulse to Bahai Obscurantism, or to any other form of obscurantism,
arises from a deeply rooted, if not an inherent, tendency in human nature to
distrust free inquiry. This tendency becomes aggravated when it operates in
the sphere of religion. An uneasy suspicion of knowledge and its results; a
dislike for a liberal and inquisitive mind, and a feeling of fear in regard
to independent investigation of the truth as for something not wholly good
for any one--these sentiments have contributed to the evolution of Bahai
Obscurantism, which is the herald of professional or class exclusiveness in
the Cause as exemplified by the National Spiritual Assembly, and the local
assemblies" (271).

"One observes the distortion of truth on the part of the Bahai Obscurantists
by their unwholesome preference for that which is secondary and derivative,
as contrasted with that which is primary and fundamental; by their leanings
toward the accretions and embellishments of administration, as contrasted
with the sources of inspiration; toward the peculiarities of theories and
creeds, as contrasted with the Bahai obligations which are universally
binding.
The dislike of the sophisticated, intellectualized Americans, like some of
the Bahai administrators, for those common, simple, universal realities of
the Bahai Cause, which are the very soul of this movement, has taken
practical effect in the substitution of mechanistic, legalistic,
administrative and organized authority for the seeing eye and illumined
heart--and the result has been a gradual diminishing of reliance on the
spiritual teachings of the Cause and a total absence of enthusiasm on its
behalf" (272).

"The Bahai message is a call to religious unity and not an invitation to a
new religion, not a new path to immortality. God forbid! It is the ancient
path cleared of the debris of imaginations and superstitions of men, of the
debris of strife and misunderstanding, and is again made a clear path to the
sincere seeker, that he may enter therein in assurance and find that the
word of God is one word, though the speakers were many" (275).

"If we throw away the shell--organization--at the very core we shall find
the kernel--Love--in all its splendor and simplicity--and that Love will
make us free! Throughout his life, Abdul Baha was most emphatic on this
subject: No organization, no ecclesiasticism and theology, no limitations
and restrictions in the Bahai Cause. On this tree, all the birds are invited
to build their nests and raise their broods. Toward this heaven, they all
can soar and flood the earth with their golden songs. In order to engrave
the vital principle of non-organization upon the minds of the Bahais, East
and West, North and South, Abdul Baha often spoke on this subject, with
power and authority" (277).

"The above clear and emphatic words of Abdul Baha were used in the course of
public addresses as one of the most characteristic teachings of the Cause.
They were quoted over and over again in numerous articles and sundry
publications. Abdul Baha had sounded the clarion call: No Organization in
the Bahai Cause; and the echo of this order reverberated through the
corridors of the minds and spirits, for a time--and then it died away"
(277-278).

"It remains a tragic commentary on the undeveloped nature of the American
Bahais that the institution of the Mashreq-Ul-Azkar, the erection of which
was intended to create centers of divine emotions, actually became the
mainspring for the organizing of a spiritual cause and was the origin of the
reduction of this movement to the status of an ecclesiastical order" (283).

"The tendency toward organization had, from the very beginning, existed
among the American Bahais, but it remained for Mr. Holley to develop it, to
officialize it, to make it obligatory and to place the details of Bahai
housekeeping (and not very good housekeeping at that) on a level with the
Teachings of the Revelator of the Modern Age" (291).

"The spirituality that one could somehow feel in the two previous
constitutions is utterly missing in this portentous and formidable
Declaration of Trust [1926]. It is an ice-bound, juridical document. Its
articles are like hailstones that pierce and cut into the heart of the
reader; its phrases are so wind-laden that they transform the balmy
atmosphere of the Paradise of Abha into the frigid immensities of Nova
Zembla; it is the apotheosis of an inflexible organization, the hypostasis
of the machine; it is the Bastille of Paris, the Tower of London and the
Concentration Camp of the Third Reich all rolled into one, and striking
terror into the soul of a most hardy champion of freedom of conscience!"
(305).

"The point that I want to establish and which I believe is already proven
beyond the shadow of a doubt, is that the *Declaration of Trust* and
*By-laws* originated in the brain of an American, or in the brains of
Americans and that the Bab, Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha had nothing to do
with it" (308).

"The officials now began to soft-pedal the phrase: *The Bahai Cause is not
an organization*, and to remove it, little by little, from conspicous places
in their literature; yet, to their discomfiture, the words remained engraven
on the minds of the people" (318).

"Thus, the campaign developed, increasing in momentum and presently *all*
reports, programs, lectures, publicity, radio broadcasts, annual
Conventions, youth activities, membership, elections became *colored* with
expressions becoming to the Administration; until finally in 1928, a book
containing the early letters of Shoghi Effendi was published under the title
*Bahai Administration*. This book, with the authority back of it,
crystallized the plan and made the name permanent" (319).

"Only the old Bahais can appreciate what the writer means by *the
elimination of any non-Bahai views* It was no gentle elimination, but
actually a Hitlerian purge conducted with full present-day Nazi efficiency.
And as to *re-education!* That is where the *give-away* comes in; for in
that period, which the writer frankly designates as dating from the
departure of the Master, the poor simple Bahais were educated along totally
different lines from those which they knew and loved, and which they
believed to be the *Cause*" (320).

"Here then, in plain language, we have nine Hitlers, or nine Mussolinis, or
nine Stalins, all rolled into one; or probably we have a few of each
species, combining their authority over, not 80 million Germans and more
than 100 million conquered peoples, 45 million Italians and 175 million
Russians, but over the conscience and activities of 2584 plain, simple,
folksy, democratic Americans. With such paraphernalia to hold them in order,
these American Bahais must indeed be the most unruly and rebellious people
on the face of the earth!" (323).

"Adbul Baha told his followers that the Bahai Cause was not a *new*
religion, and that it was their mission to carry the leaven of tolerance
into all circles, thus little by little, demolishing sectarian lines of
demarcation; yet the Administration has adopted a policy of complete
RELIGIOUS ISOLATION, raising such iron-clad frontiers around their
constituents that none of them can overstep them or presume to adhere to the
injunction of Baha'u'llah: *Associate with the people of all religions with
joy and fragrance*" (325).

"In this manner has the Administration adopted a policy of SOCIAL ISOLATION,
impossible to reconcile with the contents of most of the addresses delivered
by Abdul Baha in Europe and America, for these deal with the abolition of
political boundaries, the eradication of social limitations, the ensuring of
the economic prosperity of mankind and the establishment of a new
commonwealth of humanity based on freedom, justice and peace. And again, as
our minds dwell on the Teachings, now so completely obscured, we come with a
shock on the words of Baha'u'llah: *Oh people . . . be intent on the
betterment of the world and the training of nations*" (327).

"This is the building up of a theocratic order, so intransigent, so
frightful, that nothing hitherto imagined can match it. Shoghi Effendi is
indeed correct in saying that his system is unique and has no parallel in
all the annals of history!" (333).

"An integral part of an organization is *funds* and *fund raising*, and from
this dreary aspect of concerted effort the Bahai Administration is not
exempt; in fact, the National Spiritual Assembly has so accentuated the
subject of contributions that *money* ranks alongside of *authority* as the
second feature in italics of the Cause as it stands today" (333).

"Everybody who accepts the Faith at the hands of the Administration places
himself or herself under the severe obligation of contributing funds to the
movement, while those who acquire the Teachings through other channels
undergo no taxation whatsoever. It is evident that the Administration,
having in mind the dram of world dominion (which dream seems to include one
of universal taxation), would consider such independent individuals or
groups as a menace to its plan for temporal power, and this undoubtedly
explains, in part, the disfavor in which The New History Society is held"
(336).

"My Object. I have herein outlined the circumstances which led to the
founding, development and establishment of the Bahai Administration, an
institution which by this time has so identified itself with the Cause that
the large majority of Bahais feel that this universal movement, born in
Persia, is unauthentic without the trade-mark: *Made in the United States*.
Like an octopus, this sinister organism has wound itself about its victim,
while the *faithful*, ever obedient to authority and power, stifle
whatsoever instincts of responsibility that yet remain in their hearts. Now,
I do not flatter myself with the hope of making even a dent on the
consciousness of those who follow the Administration; such is not my object
in writing this book. I merely wish to set down, as a record for the future,
a few notes of historic importance, believing that no one else is possessed
of the knowledge, the documentation and the *will* to do so. In addition, I
am inserting the views of an individual who loves the Cause devotedly and
who believes that he understands, in some measure, the liberal and lofty
intentions of Abdul Baha. Perhaps, some day, when mankind has learned much
through suffering, a few scholars will look through these pages and gain a
new impression of the movement. But, this is for the future and what the
future holds, no man knows"(337).

"For the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. Now, the Lord is that
spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty." Epistle of
Paul, II Corinthians, Chapter 3, Verses 6 and 17. Quoted (353).

"Baha'u'llah was a champion of religious liberty, an apostle of intellectual
freedom and the advocate of man's emancipation from the fetters of dogmas
and creeds. His teachings inaugurated an era of human brotherhood on a
logical foundation, and made a royal circle of universal understanding among
the religions, nations and races. Consequently, the Bahai Cause stands for
equality, and this equality of course can have no meaning except equal
rights for *all*; nor can there be a functioning of equal rights unless the
individual is allowed liberty to act according to his best judgment and the
dictates of his conscience" (357).

"In the words of Baha'u'llah which I have repeatedly quoted throughout the
preceding paragraphs, we plainly see that the supreme mission of this
Prophet has been to confer upon the population of the entire earth the
inalienable rights of liberty of religion, of speech and of the press.
Evidently, emancipation of mind and spirit is a fundamental doctrine of the
Bahai Cause, even as it is an elementary law of the United States. It
originates in the liberation of a moral personality, working towards the
Highest Good--the *Supreme Concourse*, or in Christian terminology, the
Kingdom of Heaven" (362-363).

"According to Hitler's policy makers, the Nazi regime of dictatorship is set
at one thousand years; but, to the National Spiritual Assembly such a period
is but a short and fleeting moment. Its vision is far more grandiose;
indeed, it envisaged a *perpetual* dictatorship to be imposed on every
aspect of spiritual life, backed by the laws of the United States" (370).

"Yet, the while I ask these questions, I know very well that our supposed
sins are far greater than these, and more serious: We do not surrender our
religious liberty nor submit to the corporate and ecclesiastical authority
of the National Spiritual Assembly. We turn to Baha'u'llah without asking
permission. We carry the name of Abdul Baha in our hearts and on our lips.
We spread the ideals of peace and brotherhood as taught by these, our
beloved Masters. We hold meetings and deliver lectures on spiritual subjects
relative to the Bahai Cause. We write and publish leaflets, pamphlets and
books on the Bahai Movement. Yes, we perpetrate all these actions, in love
happiness and freedom; we have stepped out into the open spaces of service,
unmindful of obligations imposed on us to remain on perpetual parole and on
perpetual probation; and these crimes have been committed in broad daylight,
unblushingly and with no tremors of fear. Indeed, we are fully aware of the
fact that few Bahais would have acted as we have" (371).

"Now, the National Spiritual Assembly turns the key, opening toward Baghdad
and pours reproaches upon the officials of that city because, in their
dealings with the Bahais, they do not put into practice *the principle of
liberty of conscience and religion* as embodied in their Organic Law. Then,
this same Assembly turns the key opening toward New York and pours
reproaches, even more vehement, upon a group of Bahais in The New History
Society, because they have allowed themselves to put into practice *the
principle of the liberty of conscience and religion* as taught by
Baha'u'llah and Adbul Baha, and as embodied in the Bill of Rights" (376).

"Now, the point which I again wish to call to the attention of the reader is
the contradictory attitude of the National Spiritual Assembly which, on the
one hand, puts forward such a stupendous amount of time, energy and money to
lift the ban on entry of Bahai literature in *Persia*, on the basis of *the
power of religious freedom and international communication customary in
modern times*; while, on the other hand, it spends a very appreciable amount
of time, energy and money to place a ban on this same literature in the
*United States* (380).

"To my mind, the major tenor of Bahai life is the process of the
transmutation of authority into liberty; of tradition into freedom of
thought and action; it is the ceaseless renovation of habits and customs and
the incoming and outgoing of the spirit of truth to and from the heart of a
Bahai. No individual or group should have dictatorial rights over other
individuals or groups, and everyone should be allowed to function as a Bahai
according to the dictates of his conscience.

In our striving after freedom of conscience and liberty, we have been
accused by the National Spiritual Assembly of a tendency to break away from
the divine government; of a destructive effort to atomize the distinctive
teachings of the Cause; of planning to bring about dissolution of discipline
and order. But the National Spiritual Assembly has lost sight of the
important fact that a human Bahai personality must possess the moral
privilege of expressing itself in thought and action, and that it is
entitled, through divine right, to emancipation which in itself is the
essence of discipline and the substratum of the divine order.

A moral Bahai personality has two aspects. The first is the universal
aspect, which I call the religious or the spiritual, in virtue of which
every Bahai ought to have complete and unchallenged right to idealistic and
ethical self-expression. Here, freedom of conscience holds court with no
rival; here, we enjoy liberty of thought, undivided and whole. Then, there
is the individual aspect, to which I ascribe legal or state obligations.
Here, the individual Bahai, as a member of society, is called upon to
observe the laws of the State and realize the fact that, although he is free
to break any of these laws, he is at the same time liable to be hauled into
court and punished for his infractions.

Today, in the civilized world, there is *no* religious tribunal that can
*compel* a man to appear before it on account of his so-called heresies or
unbeliefs in the doctrines of the church. In the moral sphere, there is no
judge to condemn a person. The religious authorities may excommunicate him,
but such an act will not be legal in any state court and will simply be
regarded as the decision of a group of ecclesiastical disciplinarians.

In brief, the relation subsisting between an individual Bahai and his group
must be conditioned by the incontrovertible postulate that, as a moral
personality, he shall have all rights to think and act spontaneously and
consistently according to his own spiritual insight" (381-382).

"Independent Investigation. A fundamental law of religion and philosophy is
freedom of inquiry and investigation, together with the inalienable right of
each individual to express the result of his search without any external
control or official supervision. *Censorship* as applied to the fruits of
the spirit is the negation of the spirit itself" (385).

"On his visit to this country, Abdul Baha was asked: What is the greatest
thing you have seen in America? and he answered: *The greatest thing I have
seen in America is its freedom" (386).

"A Dramatic Change. This attitude of religious liberalism and freedom of
conscience; this *idealization* of the *liberty of thought and right of
speech*; this *right of unrestricted individual belief* came to an end with
the departure of Abdul Baha from this life, in 1921. Immediately, a sudden
and dramatic change of principle and policy was inaugurated, for Shoghi
Effendi, the Guardian of the Bahai Cause, in a letter dated March 5, 1922,
created a censorship to be applied not only to all Bahai writings and books,
but to all other matters as well.... This desire to control the thoughts and
actions of the Bahai community, this drive toward the centralization of
authority, this creation of a board of censorship, this plan of bringing
under the full jurisdiction of the National Spiritual Assembly *all* matters
pertaining to the Bahai Cause is, to say the least, in strange and
incomprehensible contrast to the broad tolerance and liberality of
Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha" (387-389).

"With such intensive control exercised over every department of the Bahai
Cause, the believers become mere automata, having no will of their own, no
incentive and no initiative to start any original undertaking; for, they are
at all times conscious that, at any moment, the heavy hand of the National
Spiritual Assembly may fall upon them and destroy their labors" (391).

"What a system! Apparently we are a lot of wayward children. Every word,
spoken or written, must be scrutinized; every action must be controlled. We
are, indeed, according to these extraordinary orders, as dead men in the
hands of an undertaker. Why, in heaven's name, become Bahais? What benefits
do we receive from this spiritual totalitarianism?" (391-392).

"This Reviewing Committee or Board of Censorship is patterned on the church
authorities of the Middle Ages whose function it was to suppress the
expression of free thought" (392).

"If in any realm more than any other we need freedom, it is in the domain of
religion. History has shown us that censorship may deprive a nation of its
best leadings and inspirations. Again, I assert that no man or body of men
is wise enough or tolerant enough to be entrusted with power controlling the
expression of thought, either in the Catholic Church or outside of it. The
right of free speech and free press is the most precious possession of man,
and there is no authority on the face of the earth which has the right to
withhold it" (394).

"Having placed all kinds of iron fences around the Kingdom of Bahai thought,
closing the *Way of Freedom* that Baha'u'llah had *opened* and sealing *the
Fountain of Knowledge* which was intended to flood the earth with its
salubrious waters, the legislator of the Reviewing Committee solemnly
affirms:--

The purpose of this statement is to assure proper protection of the
interests of the bahai faith, while providing sufficient freedom of action
to individual believers under all circumstances.

In reading the above *statement* one cannot help wondering what are the
particular *interests of the Bahai Faith* which need *proper protection!*
Does God and His Truth stand in need of the protecting arm of the National
Spiritual Assembly? Or, is it the people who are to be protected from
contamination through the Love of God; and are we to combine in a union to
bar the common run of humanity from access to the life-giving words of
Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha?

Yet, in regard to the clause which provides *sufficient freedom to
individual believers*, probably, it is appropriate to offer a vote of thanks
to the National Spiritual Assembly for this largesse on their part, so
royally meted out. *Sufficient freedom?* Of course! It is a superfluity,
even beyond our deserts. Why should we be grasping? As intellectual and
spiritual bondsmen to the National Spiritual Assembly, we must accept our
lowly station, and in all obsequiousness stoop to pick up the crumbs that
fall from the table of our Administrative masters! Who are we, and what are
we that we should dare to even *think* of more freedom? The members of the
National Spiritual Assembly are all-wise, and they say that it is
sufficient. So, sufficient it is and sufficient it must be! We should ask no
questions. As model slaves, it is fitting that we obliterate ourselves
before our superiors. We should pray that we be characterized with the
qualities of meekness, deference, compliance and subserviency. We should, in
all humility, present our allegiance to these shepherds who have assembled
us under the overhanging rock of their salvation and who, in solicitude for
us, have set aside appropriate and *sufficient* pasture-land, where in we
may graze and offer them our thanksgiving at dawn and at sunset" (397-398).

"A Divine Legacy. Just the same, there are some who cannot blot out the
memory of the Bahai Cause as it was taught once upon a time and who, in
spite of prevailing conditions, yet hold to the teachings of Baha'u'llah and
the universal expositions of them as dispensed by Abdul Baha. Man's reason
contains a truth which has existed since the dawn of human history: his
spirit is enveloped with a light which was enkindled by God at the very
foundation of creation. This is no other than a divine legacy reserved for
us by the Maker of the Universe. The Prophets appeared upon the earth to
remind us of these preternatural truths, which so consistently have been
defaced by spiritual charlatans and perverted by superstitious
organizations. In our own times, Baha'u'llah came to restore these lost
truths through the free exercise of rational and celestial faculties; and
now, while powerful influences, actually *within* the established Faiths,
have arisen to assist mankind in this process of emancipation, the National
Spiritual Assembly of the Bahais of the United States and Canada, pitifully
claiming to represent the foremost liberal element in religion, has formed
another set of dogmas wherewith to throttle free thought and subvert the
essential liberty of human expression in all its diversified manifestations.
Censorship, in the social domain, is an outmoded tyranny; in the spiritual
realm, it is unwholesome and impracticable. Censorship is not wanted
anywhere, especially in the Bahai Cause; and if we allow it to retain the
upper hand in the great movement that has been entrusted to us, we will set
ourselves up before the world and in the face of history as false trustees,
and as men and women unworthy and unfit to call ourselves Bahais" (398-399).

"The leaders of the Bahai Administration in America have for years been
carrying on an ideological flirtation with the totalitarian religious
systems of the past, copying their methods and procedures, and manifesting
the while a pride and satisfaction as if they had discovered an entirely new
system. Nevertheless, the incomparable worth of Baha'u'llah's genius lies in
the fact that he has constructed for the children of this generation a
spiritual fortress which shall protect the rights of man against the
encroachment of all religious dictators, whether in the Bahai Administration
or outside of it" (401).

"A Dangerous Doctrine. In considering the problem of fear, let us for a
while study the writings of Shoghi Effendi, the Guardian of the Cause, and
see how he handles this vital subject.... The three published volumes of
Shoghi Effendi are *Baha'i Administration, The World Order of Baha'u'llah*
and *The Advent of Divine Justice*, which works consist of the letters which
he has addressed to the National Spiritual Assembly in the course of the
last 20 years. Now, I have read these three books and find that the words
*enemies* and *adversaries* are greatly featured. Baha'u'llah has said:
*Consort with all men with joy and fragrance, yet Shoghi Effendi, in his
very first letter, dated January 21, 1992, written after his assumption of
the guardianship, recommends *the absolute shunning of whomsoever we feel to
be an enemy of the Cause. (*Bahai Administration, page 16.) Now, I cannot
bring myself to the point of believing that *absolute shunning* of
whomsoever we *feel* to be the enemy of the Cause is a principle of
Baha'u'llah. Is every one going to let his *feelings* guide him in the
matter? Can we not take for granted that frail human beings as we are, a
great deal of personal caprice and spite may enter into our calculations as
to *who* is the enemy of the Bahai Cause? This is a very dangerous doctrine,
and yet one finds it in different forms throughout Shoghi Effendi's
communications. He practically never mentions the names of the *enemies* or
*adversaries* to whom he constantly refers. He simply creates ogres and
bogey men, and fills the hearts of the Bahais with apprehension and fear. In
this way, the fountain-head of free and open comradeship is dried up and the
flowers of loving-kindness wither away" (409-410).

"Fear Complex. Through the publication and wide distribution of these
instructions, the National Spiritual Assembly and its followers have come
down with an acute attack of ecclesiastical goose-flesh and much energy is
spent in locating these *enemies* and in unearthing their *plots*. Gossip
becomes fact, and facts assume distorted proportions. Consequently, a chain
of correspondence is established among the various Spiritual Assemblies, the
object of which is to hunt down the enemies and expose them. Meanwhile,
hatred is engendered and the spirit of tolerance, mercy and forgiveness is
trampled underfoot" (418-419).

"In regard to being an *enemy of the Faith*, to this I definitely make
objection; nor do I allow this statement to pass without making flat denial.
If the upholding of the freedom of the Cause, is enmity to the Cause; if the
teaching of the Bahai principles, is *instilling* poison into the minds of
the hearers, then I assert, and without reserve, that Baha'u'llah and Abdul
Baha were enemies of the Cause, *par excellence*, and that their words were
the essence of poison upon poison" (425).

"Thus, it is made most difficult for Eastern people of all faiths and creeds
to come in contact with American Bahais and to learn of the Cause; and then
to cap this gorgeous structure of exclusiveness and intolerance, a bar is
made, preventing even the American Bahais, travelling from one city to
another, from visiting local Assemblies or having a chat with individual
believers, if these travelers happen to be unarmed with the proper
*credentials*.... Segregation! They name, is indeed, Bahai Organization!"
(429).

"Thus, we can see that Shoghi Effendi and the National Spiritual Assembly
throughout these years have built a segregated community--a community, the
members of which are taught to suspect the motives and actions of the most
innocent--an isolated, self-centered, self-satisfied community, living
behind the iron walls of a prison which Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha thought
to destroy" (431).

"Now, I deny the temporal and spiritual right of excommunication as
exercised in the past by the ecclesiastical institutions; and I reject
claims to the same prerogatives which are maintained today by those who hold
themselves as the shepherds of the flocks. Long enough has religion been
defaced by this inhuman contraption, operated by so-called *holy* men! Long
enough have these far-from-holy-men manipulated the conscience of mankind
through their demoniacal devices and, terming themselves the Vice-Gerents of
the Most High, imposed their anti-spiritual and anti-social dogmas on a
defenseless and innocent humanity! The people of the world must awaken to
the realization that God, who is the fountain-head of all blessings, was
not, is not and will never be an excommunicator. He is no God of wrath and
vengeance, but a God of understanding and compassion. All those who sat on
the thrones of authority, expelling and anathematizing the *dissenters*, did
not themselves know what faith meant and had no share in the truth that they
pretended to promulgate. The greatest service that could be rendered to
religion is to lift from its brow the dark curse of excommunication and to
demand, nay to insist, that this law be struck out from the creeds of all
faiths. As long as it retains its place, even theoretically, in the Articles
of the Confessions of various sects and denominations, the establishment of
the principles of a Universal Religion and a Univesal God will remain an
impossibility. Therefore we, the people of the world, must eradicate from
the pages of our spiritual consciousness the language of hate and
denunciation, and obliterate from our religious books the rules of expulsion
and anathema" (434-435).

"The Bahais are therefore called upon, by the Revelator himself, to speak in
the language of love and to protect themselves from the dust of lies; and
the greatest lie of all the ages is that a compassionate God is the
excommunicator of His own children or that He approves excommunication in
His Name" (436).

"Bahai Administration Follows Suit. The few quotations from the writings of
Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that their
central aim was the abolition of all exclusive acts and of every sectarian
tendency. This one all-embracing spirit distinguishes their cause from all
the past religions. Yet, *alas, this limitation, this explusion, this
excommunication*, which Baha'u'llah and Abdul Baha entreated their followers
to renounce and cast away, these evil spirits of a by-gone age, these
gibbering goblins of a lost generation have been taken up by the National
Spiritual Assembly of the Bahais of the United States and Canada and
incorporated in the fundamental laws of their ecclesiastical organization.
The pity of it is that Shoghi Effendi falls in line with their medieval
orthodoxy, with the result that today the Bahai world is witnessing
religious persecution, heresy-hunting and excommunication according to
standard pattern. In addition to this, the National Spiritual Assembly does
not permit its *recognized* followers to join any organization, political or
religious, and the Bahais are required to cancel any membership they may
have in such bodies. Thus, it seems to me that this is not at all *the New
World Order of Baha'u'llah* but the very old world order of intolerance,
fanaticism, exclusion and spiritual isolation which Baha'u'llah came to
destroy. Thanks to the labor and ingenuity of the National Spiritual
Assembly and Shoghi Effendi, these liabilities of the dark ages have been
recaptured and embodied bag and baggage in this modern and one-time healthy
movement" (441-442).

"Now, do we want to bring into the Bahai Cause these relics of barbarism,
these inventions of the devil? One may legitimately argue that such
conditions will never return to our world. Yet I answer: So long as a single
man claims this power and the right to exercise it, and a subservient group
yields to his authority, the potential danger of a return to the practices
of the Middle Ages *exists*.... On the other hand, it is not difficult to
picture the establishment of a type of spiritual cruelty which would not
necessitate the burning of heretics at the stake. This is the 20th Century,
in spite of the European nightmare, and it is probable that we will content
ourselves with more refined methods of persecution. We are able to
propagate, by subtle and *civilized* methods, rumors that in time will
destroy the character of those whom we are pleased to point out as enemies.
Just keep hammering at it, persistently, unremittingly, and, in time, men
will be ready to call white black, and day night" (446-447).

"Every soul, in accepting the Bahai Cause, makes a covenant with
Baha'u'llah, and that Covenant, neither Shoghi Effendi nor the National or
Local Assemblies can ever break. Its foundation is in the deeps of
consciousness, and God alone knows its dwelling-place" (448).

"As a result of the doctrine of excommunication propounded by Shoghi Effendi
and upheld by the National Spiritual Assembly, the Bahai Cause has taken up
all the characteristics of the Church of Rome and, unless this doctrine is
publicly repudiated, it will be subject to the same spiritual diseases, with
gradual corruption and disintegration" (451).

"The Black Plague. The doctrine of excommunication, appropriated by Shoghi
Effendi, is peculiarly the weapon of the Dark Ages of intolerance and
ignorance. No other dogma is so distinctly the creation of an irreligious
era. It is the black plague in the realm of the mind; it is religious
assassination and spiritual murder; it is an abomination unto the Lord of
Mercy and Truth. The spiritual and cultural manifestations of the
Renaissance as well as the courage and sacrifice of thousands of lovers of
freedom contributed to wrest (to all intents and purposes) the power of
excommunication from the hands of the Roman Catholic Church and to establish
in Europe and America the age of the liberty of Religion. Does it then seem
credible that Shoghi Effendi is so unmindful of the history of the past that
he has brought himself to believe that he can bring back into the Western
world the doctrine of excommunication? Are the members of the National
Spiritual Assembly so blind to the significant events in the United States
during the last hundred and fifty years that they hope to succeed in
establishing on these shores a religious tribunal, with authority to expel
from the Cause those believers whom they are unable to brow-beat into
submission?" (453).

"If the Bahai Cause aspires to spread its teachings far and wide and gain
the respect and devotion of mankind, now or in the future, it must purge
itself of *all* the religious limitations of the past. It must submit to a
process of complete self-purification and then dedicate itself to the
progressive, spiritual, social and intellectual interests of our fellowmen.

The doctrine of excommunication has *not one* good thing in its favor. It
has set men against men and class against class. It has made the leaders of
religions suspicious and revengeful, leaving behind an accursed memory. It
is beyond my comprehension why Shoghi Effendi, the Guardian of a Universal
Movement, wishes to revive this practically lifeless corpse and so inflict a
mortal injury upon the Cause!

In the face of this overriding danger, which is embodied in Shoghi Effendi's
claim that as the supreme head of the Cause he has the power to
excommunicate or expel the believers, thereby depriving them of their
spiritual heritage, no other choice is left to me but to sound the alarm. I
have been impelled by motives beyond my control to present this problem
before the Bahai world, before the public in general, and before the
conscience of an awakening society which, little by little, is becoming
aware of the mission of Baha'u'llah (454)."

"Herewith I appeal to Shoghi Effendi, as the Guardian designated by the
Master, to preserve the democracy of the Bahai Cause, to protect the vital
dignity of man, to obliterate all the traces of negation, to herald the
universality of the Message of Abdul Baha, and, in so doing, to *expel*
expulsion and *excommunicate* excommunication. Such an excommunication
would, indeed, be worthwhile!" (455).

**Independent investigation!* The least that can be said of this principle
of Baha'u'llah is that the very mention of it has, by this time, become
*heresy*" (509).

"Shoghi Effendi expresses *his abhorrence* of political affairs. There is
the point! The Guardian, living thousands of miles away, unfamiliar with the
democratic processes of the New World, finds them distasteful, chooses to
*abhor* them, and then expects all his followers to alter their palates so
that they also may abhor them. I myself cannot help questioning the method
of bringing personal taste into the problem at all" (508).

"Yes, my gentle reader! Although I admit that it is almost too quaint to be
true; for the punishment meted out by Shoghi Effendi to the Bahais who do
not accept his ruling of non-participation in the political affairs of the
United States is--believe it, if you can--non-participation in the political
affairs of the Bahai movement. Actually, the recalcitrant Bahais, who
persist in co-operating with their government for the progress of the
Democracy which their forefathers established on these shores, are deprived
of membership in the Bahai political machine, an institution which has
incorporated within itself all the stratagems, tricks and juggleries of
Tammany Hall in its most flourishing days. Thus, the recalcitrant Bahai can
no longer attended the Annual Bahai Conventions and sit behind closed doors
in its secret sessions; he can no longer apply himself to electioneering,
possibly for Tenth or Fifteenth Term candidates; he can no longer go to the
Bahai polling booths nor take advantage of the Bahai absentee vote; he can
no longer share in the little privileges that are allowed to members in good
standing nor bask in the sunlight that is shed upon the humble by those who
sit in High Places. Alas! He must resign himself to non-participation in
Bahai political affairs, now and for evermore, as the price for being a
self-respecting citizen of the United States, and for having tried to make
his country a better place to live in" (512-513).

"An *organized religion* is hard, dour, rigid, iron-handed and iron-hearted;
it is stern, arrogant, coercive and merciless. An *administered religion*
has been, is and ever shall remain an *arrested religion*; for the premise
that a few individuals or a network of individuals are able to organize or
administer the spiritual realities of God, is an assumption as false as it
is impertinent, and as outlandish as it is sacrilegious. Here is the test of
the true religion: Does it unite the minds and hearts of the people in the
task of developing a stable society and a humane civilization? Does it make
us more tolerant, more sympathetic, more compassionate, more joyous, more
sincere, more loving? If it accomplishes these things, then it is religion,
indeed, and it comes straight from the Creator of the Universe" (519).

Excerpts from Mirza Ahmad Sohrab. Broken Silence: The Story of Today's
Struggle for Religious Freedom.
New York: Universal Publishing, 1942. Reprinted. H-Bahai: Lansing, Michigan,
2004.
Sohrab's entire book may be downloaded in one click. 29 megabytes.
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/Sohrab.zip

http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/diglib/books/P-T/S/sohrab/Broken.htm
(Please note that in its use of the tactic of fundamentalist "slanderous
vilification," the headnote on H-net violates the NEH, MSU, and H-Net's own
democratic principles regarding scholarly and academic debate and
discussion. The associated links and attempts to discredit Sohrab with bogus
legal opinions further substantiate fanatical Baha'i abuse and undermining
of the democratic principles that support H-Net, yet another indication of
the methods of fanatical baha'is.)

Other works by Sohrab:

Mirza Ahmad Sohrab. Abdul Baha's Grandson: Story of a Twentieth Century
Excommunication New York: Universal Publishing for The New History
Foundation,
1943. Reprinted. H-Bahai: Lansing, Michigan, 2004.
http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/diglib/books/P-T/S/sohrab/ABG.htm

Mirza Ahmad Sohrab. The Will and Testament of Abdul Baha, An Analysis. New
York: Universal Publishing,
1944. Reprinted. H-Bahai: Lansing, Michigan, 2004.
Entire book may be downloaded in one click:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/SohrabAWT.zip 3 megs.

Sohrab, Mirza Ahmad. The Story of the Divine Plan. Taking Place during, and
immediately following World War I. New York: The New History Foundation,
1947. Digitally republished, East Lansing, Mi.: H-Bahai, 2004.
http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/diglib/books/P-T/S/sohrab/SDP.htm

Mirza Ahmad Sohrab. My Bahai Pilgrimage. Autobiography from Childhood to
Middle Age.
New York: New History Foundation, 1959. Reprinted. H-Bahai: Lansing,
Michigan, 2004.
Entire book may be downloaded in one click:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/SohrabMBP.zip 8 megs.

Also excerpted from Mirza Ahmad Sohrab. The Will and Testament of Abdul
Baha, An Analysis.
New York: Universal Publishing, 1944. Reprinted. H-Bahai: Lansing, Michigan,
2004.
Entire book may be downloaded in one click:
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/archives/SohrabAWT.zip 3 megs.

"In *Section 3*, Abdul Baha enjoins his followers to implicitly obey Shoghi
Effendi as the Guardian of the Cause, and, to all intents and purposes, to
accept him as an infallible leader. The matter of obedience is accentuated
to such a degree that it apparently reduces the status of the believers to
the level of intellectual and spiritual serfdom. If one takes Abdul Baha's
injunctions literally (and the present-day Bahais are super-literalists),
agreeing that to obey Shoghi Effendi is to obey God and to oppose him is to
oppose God, there is no escaping the conclusion that the Master asks of us
the surrender of our wills, minds and reason to the Guardian--a surrender
which is fraught with far-reaching consequences for it implies a betrayal of
the very Bahai ideals which the Master himself spent his life sharing with
the world. Doubtless, the deepest and the most searching desire of every
enlightened Bahai is to obey God and Abdul Baha; but are we really honest
with ourselves, are we sincere in our faith in Abdul Baha, if we believe and
teach that he deliberately wished to divest us of all our reasoning
faculties and turn us into a community of fawning, cringing, snivelling,
mealy-mouthed sycophants, flatterers and flunkies before the awesome throne
of the Guardian? To interpret this section of the Will in such a literal
sense, is, to say the least, utterly short-sighted and a complete subversion
of all the glorious teachings of the Bahai Cause" (53).

"Now, it is to be hoped that we understand Abdul Baha's purpose when he
enjoins us in his Will to obey the Guardian at all times, and at all costs.
I know that he did not mean us to divest ourselves of the rights and
prerogatives of our God-given reason. I am certain that he did not desire us
to turn into abject creatures in order that the sadistically-minded might
enjoy the sight of our mental misery and spiritual poverty. I am confident
that it was not his intention that we look upon the Guardian as the
incarnation of an infallible God; and I naturally would expect that the
Guradian himself would be the very last person to impose on his followers
such inhuman servitude. It would seem clear that he is much more in need of
wide-awake, independent and resourceful cooperators than of timorous serfs,
deprived of self-respect and of the respect of their fellows.

It is my considered opinion, arrived at in all sincerity, that Abdul Baha
wished the Bahais to gather, most loyally and devotedly, around Shoghi
Effendi to serve the Cause of Baha'u'llah as he himself had served it; and
although there is apparent contradiction between this section of the Will
and his lifelong teachings, we would, if we could but master the prophetic
nomenclature and phraseology, realize that they are the two aspects of the
same questions, worded differently, but to be understood in the one spirit.

Loyalty to the Group or Loyalty to God. Besides, a very important point is
this one: The appointment of Shoghi Effendi to the guardianship
automatically cancelled the provision for succession as specified by
Baha'u'llah in his Will. The situation was extraordinary; therefore,
extraordinary and unequivocal terms must have seemed necessary in order
that, after the Master's departure, the believers should not be left in a
state of uncertainty which might lead to their breaking into two camps.

I am fully conscious of the fact that what I have here written is pure and
unadulterated blasphemy in the eyes of the National Spiritual Assembly of
the Bahais of the United States and Canada, which has abrogated all the
universal teachings of the Cause and placed in their stead blind and
unquestioned obedience to Shoghi Effendi and, through his authority, to
themselves. This attitude of subservience and servility among the believers
has been studiously cultivated by Mr. Horace Holley who, in an article . . .
writes: *The individual conscience must be subordinated to the decisions of
a duly elected Spiritual Assembly*. Now, it happens that Abdul Baha thought
otherwise, as can be seen in *A Traveller's Narrative*, written as far back
as 1874. After referring to a number of historical cases in which organized
groups, official and non-official, have tried in the past to interfere with
*the conscience of man*, he writes:

'These are effectual and sufficient proofs that the conscience of man is
sacred and to be respected; and that liberty thereof produces widening of
ideas, amendment of morals, improvement of conduct, disclosure of the
secrets of creation, and manifestation of the hidden verities of the
contingent world. Moreover, if interrogation of conscience, which is one of
the private possessions of the heart and the soul, take place in this world,
what further recompense remains for man in the court of divine justice at
the day of general resurrection? Convictions and ideas are within the scope
of the comprehension of the King of kings, not of kings; and soul and
conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of
[His] servants.' --A Traveler's Narrative, 91.

With this divine exposition before them, which states that the *soul and
conscience are between the fingers of control of the Lord of hearts, not of
His servants*, how do the members of the National Spiritual Assembly in
general and Mr. Horace Holley in particular dare to *subordinate* conscience
to *the decisions* of *any* Spiritual Assembly, elected or otherwise? do
they think that the public is willing to overlook the teachings of the
Master? Abdul Baha's words remain in black and white, and neither the
Administration nor its followers can tear these pages from the volumes of
immortal literature.

I myself hold to the individual conscience. I believe that it is the *still,
small voice* which has been placed in our hearts to guide us aright. I
consider that the crimes of the nations and religions are perpetrated
because of the fact that the people place loyalty to the *group* above
loyalty to God; and I know that Baha'u'llah came to awaken the individual,
and through him to save the world. Therefore, I do not propose to condone
injustice, wherever it appears; nor to appease, nor to stand aside and let
affairs take their course. I am a Bahai, responsible to my Maker and to
Abdul Baha, and I do not yield one jot nor one jota of my love and reverence
for my Master in studying out his Will to the best of my ability and in
drawing my sincere conclusions" (56-58).

"In earnestly investigating these issues with mind and conscience, even as
Bahais are commanded to investigate all things, I can arrive at no plausible
answer, except it be that the plan of Abdul Baha was a draft made on broad
lines to be carried out with the elasticity required by the times. I explain
some of the knotty points as follows:--

Should the Bahai Cause be actually operated along universal lines, as was
intended by the Founders, it is logical that it should spread to all parts
and inspire the leaders in every department of practical thought and action.
Abdul Baha said that a man who lives his life according to the teachings of
Baha-O-Llah is already a Bahai; he did not say that a man who writes his
name on the dotted line, prepared by the Bahai organization, is a Bahai.
According to this concept, the plans of Baha-O-Llah and Abdul Baha in regard
to the election of the members of the House of Justice by *universal
suffrage*, or by *universal suffrage, that is by the believers*, merge into
one.

Again: according to Abdul Baha, the members of the House of Justice *are
under the unerring guidance of God*, and themselves are freed from error;
while the Guardian (to whom he ascribes a yet higher station) is simply
*under the unerring guidance of God*--even as we all are, for the word
unerring, applies in this instance to God, not to the Guardian. Then, how
can a member of the House of Justice who is *freed from error* be considered
unfit and expelled by the Guardian, concerning whom no such claim has been
made?

This cannot be explained; therefore, I believe that Abdul Baha was giving an
ideal picture of the Members, showing what they should be; and, by the same
token, in exalting the Guardian, he was depicting the type of guardian that
he so much desired and hoped for.

Meanwhile, much depends upon the *first* Guardian of the Cause. Should he
use his position to act as a servant of humanity, even as the Master did,
striving ever to maintain the democracy in the Bahai movement that is its
fundamental principle..." (98-99).

The h-net version of Sohrab's Broken Silence suppresses FOUR very important
pages from the original that are presented here below. These pages were
obviously not left out by oversight but reveal how the Baha'i administration
operates and uses individual "scholars" and publicly funded institutions to
suppress, revise, and distort understanding of its own history to suit its
designs.

Mrs. Chanler emphasizes liberty and the universal and non-exclusive nature
of Baha'u'llah's Teachings.

Describes the declarations of twenty-eight people to the Bahai Cause.

Mrs. Chanler and Sohrab's lawyers refute the claims of the National
Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United States. The New York Supreme
Court later also upheld Mrs. Chanler and Sohrab's right to use the name
Bahai.

Hon. Lewis Stuyvesant Chanler, as Lieutenant-Governor of New York State, in
1906. H-Net, a tax supported Internet system, for scholarly study, also
funded by Michigan State University, a publicly-funded institution, is being
used by fundamentalist Baha'is to suppress the fact that a former
Lieutenant-Governor was the husband of Mrs. Chanler, and supported her and
Sohrab, morally and financially, in their decades-long battle to preserve
their human right to freedom of speech and conscience.

See H-Net's "slander vilification" at
http://www.h-net.org/~bahai/diglib/books/P-T/S/sohrab/Broken.htm

Shunning > Menu
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Shunning.htm

Compare Sohrab to Baha'i faith and Its Teachings by William McElwee Miller


Baha'i Censorship - See Website

unread,
Jan 18, 2007, 7:17:44 AM1/18/07
to
Ruth White, Is the Bahai Organization the Enemy of the Bahai Religion? 1929.
22 pages. Discusses the unauthenticated Will of Abdu'l-Baha. The foremost
British handwriting expert of the day, Charles Ainsworth Mitchell, judged
it to be a fraud, writing to White on June 3, 1930, “A minute comparison of
the authenticated writing [of Abdu'l-Baha] with the writing on every page of
the alleged will....has failed to detect in any part of the will the
characteristics of the writing of Abdul Baha” (from White's Bahai Leads Out
of the Labyrinth . 259. New York : Universal Publishing Co., 1944).

Ruth White. Is the Bahai Organization the Enemy of the Bahai Religion? An
Appendix to Abdul Baha and the Promised Age. New York: J.J. Little and Ives
Company, January 1929. Reprinted. H-Bahai: Lansing, Michigan, 2004.
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/Ruth%20White.htm


--
Frederick Glaysher
The Baha'i Faith & Religious Freedom of Conscience
http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/


Baha'i Censorship - See Website

unread,
Jan 20, 2007, 12:01:53 PM1/20/07
to
Hermann Zimmer, A FRAUDULENT TESTAMENT Devalues the Bahai Religion Into
Political Shoghism. 1973. freebahais.com

http://freebahais.com/

bjwa...@yahoo.com

unread,
Jan 22, 2007, 8:24:58 AM1/22/07
to
Dear Frank, Thank you for clarifying this issue. Barbara

Reform Bahai Faith

unread,
Jan 23, 2007, 9:46:57 AM1/23/07
to
Friends,

Souls continue to enter the Reform Bahai Faith from all over the United
States, Canada, Europe, and other parts of the entire world, asking for
guidance, care, direction, sustenance.

While Quaker John Woolman walked the highways and byways of America, Reform
Bahais surf the electronic information highway that now girdles and unites
the earth.

For those of you who might be unaware of it, I must inform you that the
Wilmette and Haifan Baha’is on December 6, 2006 commenced a lawsuit against
the Orthodox Baha’i Faith and the Bahá'ís Under the Provisions of the
Covenant, alleging in the courts of Illinois copyright and trademark
infringement. Court documents can be found on the Internet via
www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/

While the Wilmette NSA has since the 1930s repeatedly attempted to settle
issues of religious doctrine, liberty, and conscience in the courts of the
United States of America, I urge Reform Bahais to eschew such misguided
efforts to decide theology under the guise of corporate legalisms as
unseemly and contrary to the very spirit of brotherhood and unity that Baha’u’llah
and Abdu’l-Baha taught. Let us recall Abdu’l-Baha’s luminous Words, “This
movement eludes organization -- it is the realization of a new spirit.”

In the contentious context of this latest sullying of Baha’u’llah’s Faith,
we might reflect too on this passage from “On Bahai Liberty”:

“Reform Bahais choose to leave those who choose hatred, denunciation,
shunning, endless and unproductive argument and recrimination over Abdu’l-Baha’s
Will and Testament, seeking justification for fanaticism, over the Will of
Shoghi Effendi, which he never wrote or implied, or over the successors he
never intended or appointed, or over the oppressive organization Baha’u’llah
Himself never envisioned nor proclaimed.” www.reformbahai.org

Surely the many decades of denunciation and recrimination over Abdu’l-Baha’s
purported will, by those of all ideological viewpoints who claim to be its
guardians and interpreters, demonstrates how flawed it is, as it was judged
in 1930, and that the Baha’i Faith was led down the wrong path by those
attempting to use a fraudulent will for their own benefit. Reform Bahais
distinguish themselves by returning to the indisputable central Teachings of
the Faith, the oneness of God, religion, and humanity, leaving those who are
motivated by lust for power and control to coerce and discredit one another
in the legal system.

Surveying the last eighty-five years of Baha’i history, Reform Bahais can
not doubt for a single moment that our sister denomination has shown us what
Abdu’l-Baha meant when he said, “The Bahai Movement is not an organization.
You cannot organize the Bahai Movement.”

Let us together seek His meaning in “The Bahai Movement is the spirit of the

age. It is the essence of all the highest ideals of this century. The Bahai
Cause is an inclusive movement. The teachings of all religions and societies

are found here.”

Is this not the time to build the Reform Bahai Faith, to seek together how
it is not an “organization” but yet a “Movement”?

I call again upon Reform Bahais to consider a Convocation to seek His Will.

Frederick Glaysher
Reform Bahai Faith
www.reformbahai.org
January 22, 2007

Reform Bahai Faith

unread,
Jan 24, 2007, 8:09:11 AM1/24/07
to
See Update for the latest information regarding the threat to Bahai
Religious liberty by the Wilmette NSA in the courts of Illinois.

http://www.reformbahai.org/update.htm

--
Frederick Glaysher
95 Theses - On Bahai Liberty
The Reform Bahai Faith
www.ReformBahai.org

Reform Bahai Faith

unread,
Jan 25, 2007, 8:53:32 AM1/25/07
to
Friends,

The Reform Bahai Faith is continuing to grow. Will you
help the Reform Bahai Faith strive to understand what
Abdu'l-Baha meant when he said Bahai could not be
organized yet was a Movement?

Viv

unread,
Jan 25, 2007, 9:02:45 AM1/25/07
to

On 25 Jan, 13:53, "Reform Bahai Faith" <SeeWebs...@reformbahai.org>
wrote:


> Friends,
>
> The Reform Bahai Faith is continuing to grow.

When may we hope to see this growing membership reflected in other
people posting on its behalf?

Will you
> help the Reform Bahai Faith strive to understand what
> Abdu'l-Baha meant when he said Bahai could not be
> organized yet was a Movement?

Perhaps this is something to be explored at your Convocation?

>
> --
> Frederick Glaysher
>Founder and Proprietor
> The Reform Bahai Faithwww.ReformBahai.org

David Wurmfeld

unread,
Jan 28, 2007, 2:00:58 PM1/28/07
to
Reform Bahai Faith wrote:
> Friends,
>
> The Reform Bahai Faith is continuing to grow. Will you
> help the Reform Bahai Faith strive to understand what
> Abdu'l-Baha meant when he said Bahai could not be
> organized yet was a Movement?
>

I have been out of touch with the Baha'i community since 1976 (I was
raised in a Baha'i Home) I am starting over again with what I believe to
be a clean slate, and I am confused by the moniker "reform Baha'i".
Could someone inlighten me with the concept?

Thanks,

David,
Melbourne, Florida

Asparagus

unread,
Jan 30, 2007, 8:34:19 PM1/30/07
to

"David Wurmfeld" <dwur...@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:45bcf2e8$0$5757$4c36...@roadrunner.com...

We apologise for the lack of courtesy here. Somebody should have replied to
you

We would have but we are not Baha'is. We cannot answer your question.

>
> Thanks,
>
> David,
> Melbourne, Florida


Abraxas

unread,
Jan 30, 2007, 8:46:11 PM1/30/07
to

Path: g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!
border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!
local01.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.bt.com!news.bt.com.POSTED!not-for-
mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 30 Jan 2007 19:34:21 -0600
From: "Asparagus" <k...@spimspam.com>
Newsgroups: talk.religion.bahai,alt.religion.bahai
References: <1168030650....@v33g2000cwv.googlegroups.com>
<1168400540.7...@k58g2000hse.googlegroups.com>
<353bq2lsoisibu5tf...@4ax.com>
<45A5B681...@usq.edu.au>
<2jbcq29guvh6pte0p...@4ax.com>
<45AC51F6...@usq.edu.au>
<gccpq21lr1936a7bc...@4ax.com>
<45AD8D73...@usq.edu.au>
<IOqdnSA4IvTNjjPY...@comcast.com> <sLWdnUu0FcH2-
DLYnZ2dnU...@comcast.com>
<7rmdnYbeHKeY1i_Y...@comcast.com>
<YKqdnWrWmph8givY...@comcast.com>
<wNqdndMcV4DlxyrY...@comcast.com>
<IPmdnXIRDtTDKyXY...@comcast.com>
<45bcf2e8$0$5757$4c36...@roadrunner.com>
Subject: Re: Reform Bahai Faith is continuing to grow
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2007 01:34:19 -0000
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3028
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Response
Message-ID: <Cd-dnd8U6ZKAbyLY...@bt.com>
Lines: 31
NNTP-Posting-Host: 86.133.146.117
X-AuthenticatedUsername: NoAuthUser
X-Trace: sv3-Asy2yRL+YBNWx2M+mbDIp/U+6v26ijaiCVwWX1rlngn606QSZ
+nFSkQKz69nwaEGusr+ndW5KzhN+xS!
G3Yj9NZ2U9brZorJklAI4X29xAqP9X8lyMyd8CFTB22BmXazBBB1k5/UfIAZXm+R
+V0cIc1B6h6d
X-Complaints-To: ab...@btinternet.com
X-DMCA-Complaints-To: a...@btinternet.com
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your
complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.32

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages