JamilEghrari

"little to no grasp of reality"

From someone who needs to get in touch with reality taking psychedelic punch and chucking up on mountains. Thanks for your words of Holy Wisdom. Monda and I will take note. LOL

Divooneh

To'ee o haft jadd o aabaadet, oghde'i. Akheh gooz be shaghigheh cheh kaari daareh, ay bee-hayyaa-e-bee-hameh cheez?! Cheraa shomaa Bahaa'ee-aa har vaght harkee behetoon harf-e-hesaab mizaneh naneh man ghareebam baazee dar miyareed o mizaneed be-haashiye o dasht-e-karbalaa! Maskhare'id shomaa!! Jeddan!!

Go see a counsellor yourself. You keep demonstrating time and again in every conversation here whenever this cult is brought up that you are genuinely mixed up and that the cognitive dissonance has pushed you so far into a condition of genuinely diagnosable clinical psychosis that you have little to no grasp of reality where this issue is concerned. Of course that diagnosis applies to 95% of the rest of your co-cultists as well, and not just to you, since I have yet to meet a Baha'i who was completely sane.

Now either answer the points, shut-up, or at least have the decency to not personalize the issues. Dale has pointed out specific issues. Answer him.

As for Monda: she's a nickle short of a dime herself from where I am sitting. And unless you know otherwise, Azadeh and I have no problems with each other. Of course you Baha'is would like to create a problem, but that's about something else. Haalaa javaab bedeh!

Mordeshoor-e-harchee aadam-e-khar-e-nafahm-e-gostaakh!

Nima (Nuri)

Stop egging for an argument. You are indeed behaving like a Divooneh. See a counsellor and stop being so confrontational. This blog was over a while ago. Let it go.

You may flag my message, but it is the best advice anyone can give you. It would also be for the benefit of your loved ones, and especially your children, who will pick up negative emotions.

With regards to this particular blog, it is like the rest. Just a continuous attack on Bahais - that is my view and many other peoples view. The attacks and the nature of the attacks instigated by you (you are the ringleader in all this) has been vicious and out of proportion to what this minority deserve. This is why most people have mentioned  to you in one way or another that you are channeling your energies and intellect in a negative way. Even people like Azadeh and Monda that you respect, forget half breed najes like me.

Anyway I will not be drawn into further pointless debates about Bahais with you as they are pointless. You will always hate them unless you accept part responsibility for entering a religion and then leaving it. This is what many people do and go on to lead happy lives, but it seems you will not let go of your anger. I hope that you will consider my advice as it is and has always been well meant and only for your own benefit. This is my last comment to you on a Bahai blog, as I no longer wish to be at the receiving end of your negativity. If you need a punchbag take up boxing again. Good luck. 

Sag (dog)

You chose the best handle for yourself. For that, I commend your honesty. You are indeed a little dog (sagkoochooloo).

Now stop personalizing the issues, deflecting to the peripheries with nonsense, and respond to the valid points Dale has raised. You keep personalizing the discussion, which is an argumentative fallacy. I understand that they teach you people this style of fallacious reasoning at RUHI institutes, but it does not make it a valid argument.

Respond to the actual points. 

Ya NUR

Sag

Dismissing me because I am bitter (because I was the victim of a religious scam; who wouldn't be after recovering from it and regaining his ability to think independently?) and suspicious of a complete stranger who says one thing ("I am an atheist") and does things that only Baha'is would do just shows why you should never be trusted by objective viewers. Even slamming me for making personal attacks (I shouldn't answer directly your idiotic posts; then why did you make them in the first place?) instead of directly dealing with what I said in the blog above and all the other blogs linked to it only shows your desparation to deflect people's attention from the damning evidence against the claims of the Haifa based Baha'i cult.

Peacefulness and harmony are wonderful things we should all have, but not at the expense of truth, justice and logical consistency. Any cult can appear to have peace and harmony among its members.......until the cult begins to destroy people's spiritual and intellectual lives. And when fraud is respected because it is religious,  we might as well have no religion. 

Dale Husband, the Honorable Skeptic

Mr Husband

I do not care for your opinion of me. You insist on making discussions personal insults and and accusations. When people do that they lose immediately. As I said, you are free to put your point across but you only demean yourself when you attack others and accuse them of all sorts. If you did "not care less" you would just agree to disagree like a gentleman and move on with your opinion. Live and let live, but you insist on the words "future confrontations", "scorned by me". That really sums your ilk up. My choices in life and definitions of atheist, etc are not defined by you. You only have an opinion, like others in a forum. You are acting like an arrogant bully.

You did not like the Bahai religion, that is fine, but others do and they have the right to practice their religion. Bahais do not pose a danger to anyone. Being an atheist or not has nothing to do with it. I genuinely hope that you find peace and get over your bitterness. That is my last response to you and hope that you will move on .

Sure, sag, I'm arrogant because I do not lie!

Why should anyone believe you? The only reason you attack me is because I do not put up with your false statements, but call them out for what they are. If that is rude, I plead guilty. We need to stop treating with kid gloves the kind of pathological dishonesty that has crippled religion for centuries. When I was a Baha'i, I mistakenly thought the Baha'i Faith would be an antidote to that sickness. Instead, it had also contracted the disease.

No atheist would act as you do, period. Stop lying and man up, Baha'i! Or keep lying and keep getting scorned by me. That is your choice. I couldn't care less, but at least I can always use this thread as damning evidence against you in any future confrontations with you.

Dale Husband, the Honorable Skeptic

It's the Big "I" again

"Sag, I have much more right to call myself an atheist than you do! "

What you are saying is that what you term "Haifain Bahais" should not have more "right" to call themselves Bahais than fringe groups, but you then ironically tell me that you have much more right to call yourself an atheist. I see.

"swallowing all the propaganda the Haifa Baha'i Faith puts out "

"Your fanatical spirit gives you away. And I don't like being lied to by anyone. "  

"I do NOT trust sag koochooloo at all. "

"Becoming an ass yourself ...  you do and it stinks worse than a dead skunk ... Dale Husband, the Honorable Skeptic "

We are all entitled to our opinions. If Bahais or others defend the Haifain Bahai Administrative Order it does not make them an "Ass", and disagreeing with you does not make anyone an "Ass". 

Given your insulting remarks and accusations, the more appropriate and accurate title for you is Dale Husband, Rude Arrogant Man.

Is this war still going on?

Sag, I have much more right to call myself an atheist than you do! Respecting individual Baha'is who do not make asses of themselves is one thing. Becoming an ass yourself by defending the party line of the Haifa Baha'i Administrative Order is quite another. That's exactly what I see you do and it stinks worse than a dead skunk, in light of the historical and scriptural evidence I've found that discredits the Baha'i Faith,  or at least the dominant version of it led by the Universal House of Justice.

Dale Husband, the Honorable Skeptic

Active Imagination (takhayyul-e-fa''aaliya/khiyaal-e-faa'el)

Is one of the most important Sufi (and generally gnostic) and magical meditative arsenal of choice. It is how every last one of the greats has ascended to the Other Side and beheld the Divine Visage. The Active Imagination as opposed to fantasy is the  realizing activity of the soul itself. There is a difference between conjecture/fantasy (vahm) and imagination (khiyal).

That said, your olive branch was a disengenuous (and rather lame) attempt of diffusing and thereby diverting a discussion that makes you uncomfortable given the fact that it speaks the truth and shows the warts you people desperately try to hide. As far as bigotry is concerned, it is all yours, so quit playing naneh man ghareebam. You Haifan Bahais especially express your hatred in various ways towards almost everyone under the Sun who disagrees with you. Yet when the gesture is reciprocated with genuine criticism and you are rightfully put in your places, you cry foul! You can dish out loads of it to others but can never take it yourselves. This has been your way from the moment that so-called prophet of yours made his claim in Edirne. The Haifan Bahai creed is not just an administration, there is an entire cultural support network that warps peoples minds like yours. That aspect is especially open to serious criticism whether you like it or not!

As for what you think of me: frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn!

As for Capt Ayhab: he's an idiot, and I'm not the only one who thinks so either so his opinion counts for nothing where I am concerned.  QED.

Ya NUR

You have an active imagination

My olive branch was to calm you down, I use humour to calm situations you may have noticed. I was only unhappy when you turned what was a peaceful gesture into something else, when you posted the "Sexaul Healing" video. It made other people like Captain Ayhab make remarks too which I am sure you remember. Someone beat me to flagging your post before it was deleted incidentally. My discussions on this website have nothing to do with gender and the reason I am unhappy with your behaviour is the bigotry aspect against Bahais, not your issues with Bahai Administration. I have said this to you before but you resort to name calling: Agent. So lets just agree to move on.

Facts are facts

Regardless of how they were made. As far as temper tantrums are concerned: I have your own temper tantrum saved from the blog I deleted before you flagged it. The one you were flirting with me with olive branches and wine bottles, I was leading you on and then you had the psychotic caniption!

Your obsession with that alias notwithstanding, the handle Covenant is completey irrelevent since that is another person not under discussion here, and besides their post and parody of Husayn 'Ali Nari is spot-on humorous, whatever cultists such as you believe otherwise. Good on him, or her -- never  did figure out whether Covenant was a man or woman!

Ya NUR

Are you upset?

"I can conjur up full-blown people like Dale Husband to say word for word what I have been saying here about you for months"

Hmmm and that is how facts are made in your world, eh? Your charming friend Covenant has also made a return just now after 7 months, with his Bahai artwork. The timing must be a coincidence.

---------------------------

//iranian.com/main/blog/covenant/bahaullah

by Covenant
12-Apr-2010
 

New of Picture of Baha'u'llah recently being circulated among baha'is. Thanks to Mr. Koroush Zahedi of Tihran for sending me this.

---------------------------

So you are having a full temper tantrum then.

Welcome

Eminently. I can conjur up full-blown people like Dale Husband to say word for word what I have been saying here about you for months. Your imaginary psychiatric profession can't even do that.

Ya NUR

Thanks

As a Magician and Prophet you must be right! Silly me ....

To quote Dale Husband

Therefore your claim of being an atheist yada yada yada yada is  disengenuous and arguably an outright lie. Given this, your further claim to being a psychiatrist is also the same. Once again I draw people's attention to the Bahai tactics and techniques below, which can also be found here:

//bahaicultfaq.blogspot.com/

Ya NUR

Nuri jan

Something bothering you?

By the way, as a atheist and psychiatrist none of this is my law or standards. I will always be straight with you or anyone else as I see things and be fair. What is slander and vilification is you making false accusations against people continuously (BIA Agent, paedophile, among many) and then acting like a victim. Like some bully in a playground that wants to get his own way at any cost to those around him. And just having the last word is childs play.

You cannot have double standards in life and be expected to be taken seriously. And please be aware people who use this website are not the type of sheepish audience you are used to, and will not be fooled by your copying pasting the same old material over and over again as some form of defense against your own appalling behaviour and dishonesty.

Now, nothing personal! And don't have too many nightmares.

Bahai Tactics & Techniques/Bahai Dishonesty

"Slanderous Vilification" = The Baha'i
Technique - Ad Hominem, Libel, Slander, Demonize, Scapegoat, Ostracize,
Shun, Banish, Backbite, Defame, Vilify, Discredit, Smear, Revile,
Suppress, Attack, Bully, Intimidate, Threaten, Malign, Blackball,
Deceive, Coerce, Silence, Harass... etc., etc.... CAUTION NON-BAHAIS

1. As far
as possible they hold back from responding
2. Then they claim no knowledge of the given
issue by feigning ignorance
3. After the exposer has exposed they will
try to divert to secondary and
totally peripheral and irrelevent side-issues
4. The exposer is then painted as someone
with an axe to grind, biased,
deluded (while they, the bahaim, still have not responded to the main issue exposed)
5. Next they relate mental instability and
insanity to the exposer, i.e.
shoot the messenger
6. Then,
the last tactic, is to wheel out several dubious personas on the scene who claim to be neutral non-bahai observers who then begin attacking the exposer as well as the issue
exposed while supporting the
bahais and their issues as so-called non-bahais

//www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/technique.htm
Professor
Juan Cole, University of
Michigan, June 12, 1998:

"Let me ask you why in the world you think
that I would risk my professional reputation by publicly stating
falsehoods? ...The very technique of the more glaze-eyed among these
people is to unbearably bully a Baha'i whom they don't like, use
unjustified threats of declaring him or her a CB [Covenant Breaker
(heretic)] to silence the individual, and if the person will not be
silenced, then to depend upon the gullibility of the Baha'is in refusing
to listen to any victim's story because, of course, the Baha'i
institutions are infallible and divinely guided and could never do
anything wrong. It is a perfect racket. Of course, this technique of
making liberals go away has been enormously successful, and ex-Baha'i
liberals have no credibility with the remaining Baha'is nor do most of
them have any energy to continue to make a case, either to the Baha'is
or the outside world, for the incredible abuses that go on inside this
organization ostensibly committed to tolerance!"

Professor
Juan Cole, February 23, 1999:

"There
is nothing to be puzzled by. Right wing Baha'is only like to hear
the sound of their own voices (which are the only voices they will
admit to being "Baha'i" at all). Obviously, the world is so constructed
that they cannot in fact only hear their own voices. They are
forced to hear other
voices that differ from theirs. This most disturbs them when the
voices come from enrolled Baha'is or when the voices speak of the Baha'i
faith. The way they sometimes deal with the enrolled Baha'is is to
summon them to a heresy inquiry and threaten them with being
shunned if they do not fall silent. With non-Baha'is or with
ex-Baha'is, they deal with their speech about the faith by
backbiting, slandering and libelling the speaker. You will note
that since I've been on this list I have been accused of long-term
heresy, of "claiming authority," of out and out lying (though that was retracted, twice), of
misrepresentation, of 'playing fast and loose with the facts,' and
even of being 'delusional.' I have been accused of all these
falsehoods by *Baha'is*, by prominent Baha'is. I have been
backbitten by them. This shows that all the talk about the danger a sharp tongue can do, all the talk
about the need for harmony, for returning poison with honey, for a
sin-covering eye, is just *talk* among right wing Baha'is. No one
fights dirtier than they when they discover a voice they cannot
silence and cannot refute....

BAHAI
TACTICS according to Henry Tad
//groups.google.com.au/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/thread/0c1210a627cdaae3

8: THEORY OF BAHA’I LYING & EQUIVOCATION

See
Susan Stiles Maneck,
//bahai-library.com/bsr/bsr06/62_maneck_hikmat.htm
WISDOM AND DISSIMULATION IN THE BAHA’I
WRITINGS: The Use and meaning of
Hikmat in the Baha’i Writings

QUOTE

"In many cases hikmat calls for the apparent suspension of a
Bahá'í principle in order to ensure the protection of the Faith."

Comment: In other words Baha'is may lie under any circumstance to ensure
the protection of their organizational cohesiveness.

See
as well,

Haifan Baha'is lied about the late Ayatollah
Montazeri's 2008 fatwa
//montazerifatwabahai.blogspot.com/2010/02/bahais-lied-about-late-ayatollah.html      

Bahai Internet Agency

//www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Baha%E2%80%99i_Internet_Agency

The Bahá’í Internet Agency states on its website that it
"assists the global Bahá’í community in its use of the Internet,
providing technical support to Bahá’í institutions and supporting
promising initiatives of individuals. Established in 2004 by the Universal House of Justice, the
Bahá’í Internet Agency operates under the guidance of the International
Teaching Centre."[1]

[hide]

• 1 Baha’i Internet Agency
  Whitepapers
• 2 Monitoring use of the
  social networking site Facebook
• 3 Prior communication
  from the International Teaching Centre to Baha'i academics regarding
  Internet activities
• 4 Members
• 5 Resources and articles
• 6 Contact
  • 6.1 Related Sourcewatch
    articles
  • 6.2 References

"The Baha’i Internet Agency has made available a number of new
position papers on the theme of the Baha'i Faith and engagement with the Internet.
Social networking, blogosphere and folksonomies all get a look in. We
have linked the papers here on our domain."[2]

• Individual Initiative on the Internet
• Participation and the Internet
• Blogging and the Baha'i Faith
• Podcasting
• Guidelines for Internet Communication
• Understanding Online Social Networks
• Responding to Criticism and Opposition on the Internet
• Basics of Search Engine Optimization
• Building Internet Communities[3]

These documents (accessible in the resources section) claim to lay out a
code of behavior encouraged by the official Baha'i bodies regarding
online activities. Of particular note is the Baha'i Internet Agency's
stated position on dealing with online criticism and discussion, given
the activities of the Baha'i organization documented by Professor Cole">Juan Cole and Frederick Glaysher [4]

The document Responding to Criticism and Opposition on the
Internet states, "As you well appreciate, the extent to which such
technology advances the work of the Faith depends, of course, on the
manner in which it is used. As a medium for Bahá'ís to exchange views,
it imposes on participants the same requirements of moderation, candour,
and courtesy as would be the case in any other discussion. Likewise,
those involved should avoid belittling the views of one another. In this
regard, the House of Justice has noted your understandable repugnance
at an apparent temptation to use misleading and invidious labels like
"traditionalists" and "liberals", which divide the Bahá'í community. To
the extent that this divisive habit of mind may persist in the Bahá'í
community, it is obviously a carry-over from non-Bahá'í society and a
manifestation of an immature conception of life. If Bahá'ís were to
persist in this mode of thinking, it would bring to naught even the most
worthwhile intellectual endeavour, as has so conspicuously been the
case with societies of the past. Most important of all, as with any
exploration by Bahá'ís of the beliefs and practices of their Faith,
electronic discussion will serve the interests of the Cause and its
members only as it is conducted within the framework of the Bahá'í
Teachings and the truths they enshrine. To attempt to discuss the Cause
of God apart from or with disdain for the authoritative guidance
inherent in these Teachings would clearly be a logical contradiction.
(Dec 10, 1992 to an individual) We have been asked to advise that there
is no objection to the conduct of a chat room…which appears to be
similar to a fireside meeting except that it takes place over the
Internet. In general, Bahá'í institutions should not interfere with it.
However, you may emphasize that, in their efforts to teach the Faith,
the friends should refrain from engaging in argumentation and disputes,
concentrating more on introducing the Faith to participants. (January
26, 2003 to a National Spiritual Assembly) The House of Justice feels
that, when Bahá'ís are teaching in an online “chat room” and
Covenant-breakers intrude upon the discussion, the friends should not
feel obliged to sign off simply because Covenant-breakers are present in
this virtual space. They should, however, refrain from knowingly
engaging the Covenant-breakers in discussions and, in any case, should
avoid being drawn into contentious or disputatious situations. (October
27, 1997 to an individual)[5]

"In general, the House of Justice has no objection to Bahá'ís'
participating in public, unmoderated discussions about the Faith,
whether those discussions take place in person or through some form of
electronic communication. The wisdom of participating in particular
discussions, must, of necessity, depend upon circumstances prevailing at
the time. When, through such discussions, the Faith is attacked or
erroneous information about it is disseminated, it may become necessary
for individual Bahá'ís to actively defend it. In some circumstances,
however, to avoid participating in argumentative exchanges, attracting
attention to enemies of the Faith, or engaging Covenant-breakers, it
will be more appropriate to withdraw from the discussion. While the
institutions of the Faith may, on occasion, find it necessary to offer
the friends guidance related to theirparticipation in particular
discussions, generally this, too, is a matter left to the individual.
(October 27, 1997 to an individual) Thus, if any participant in an email
discussion feels that a view put forward appears to contradict or
undermine the provisions of the Covenant, he should be free to say so,
explaining candidly and courteously why he feels as he does. The person
who made the initial statement will then be able to re-evaluate his
opinion and, if he still believes it to be valid, he should be able to
explain why it is not contrary to either the letter or the spirit of the
Covenant. The participants in such a discussion should avoid
disputation and, if they are unable to resolve an issue, they should
refer the point to the Universal House of Justice since, in accordance
with the Will and Testament of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, “By this body all the
difficult problems are to be resolved…” and it has the authority to
decide upon “all problems which have caused difference, questions that
are obscure, and matters that are not expressly recorded in the Book.”
In this way the Covenant can illuminate and temper the discourse and
make it fruitful." (February 16, 1996 to an individual)"[6]

Current guidelines are also given for conduct in discussion forums:

"Discussion Forums

• 1. Each forum has a slightly different culture and usually some sort
  of terms of use. Learn the standards of expected behavior before
  posting.
• 2. Do not feed negative discussion threads. Not only is this a waste
  of time, but also it has the unintended consequence of making the
  thread appear more interesting to visitors because of all the postings.
  Let negative postings die on the vine—do not water them.
• 3. See if your question or topic of interest has already been
  addressed. Long-term members can become frustrated with numerous
  postings on topics that have been covered multiple times.
• 4. Avoid quoting extensively from previous postings when there is no
  reason to do so.
• 5. Avoid posting statements such as “me too” or “I agree.” These
  postings simply clutter the discussion forum.
• 6. Using ALL CAPs is considered yelling in the on-line medium. You
  should never find yourself in need of yelling. New people often turn on
  the caps lock button to add emphasis—don't.
• 7. Having multiple screen names and identities is allowed in
  discussion forums. While obscuring one’s identity is acceptable, lying
  about oneself is not.
• 8. Pick a screen name that gives a good impression of you. On the
  Internet others cannot see you, so, to some extent, your screen
  identities represent you and represent the Faith if you identify
  yourself as a Bahá’í.
• 9. If you are running and/or moderating a discussion board, make the
  rules of conduct obvious and clear-cut. Be specific about guidelines
  rather than simply exhorting everyone to “be nice.” Enforce the rules
  equitably. Nothing ruins a discussion board faster than perceived bias
  and favoritism."[7]

In February, 2008, Matthew Weinberg, Program Director for the
Baha'i Internet Agency, released the following email letter on behalf of
the Haifan Baha'i administration (see Baha'i Faith). The letter refers to the
activities of the "Covenant-breaker Martin Lavallee", a member of the
schismatic Orthodox Baha'is and warns members of the Haifan
Baha'i community against possible 'exposure' to this individual arising
from contact on the social networking site, Facebook. "Covenant breaking"
is a term employed by the Haifan Baha'is to refer to groups and
individuals who challenge "the authority of the center of the Baha'i Faith", which in this context refers to
the authority of the Universal House of Justice, and
is considered "the most serious spiritual offence that a Bahá'í can
commit. It's called Covenant-Breaking and is considered to be a
spiritual disease and is punished by expulsion from the community."[8]

"28 February 2008

To All National Spiritual Assemblies

Dear Bahá'í Friends,

We have been requested by the World Centre to alert you to the
current activities of the Covenant-breaker Martin Lavallee on
Facebook.com. This individual administers the "Orthodox Bahá'is" page on
Facebook and also has a personal page on the site. There have been
recent instances where Bahá'í youth with accounts on Facebook have
unwittingly accepted invitations from Lavallee to be a "friend" or to
become "members" of the Covenant-breaker page. Further, as a consequence
of the Facebook networking scheme, if an individual accepts a direct
invitation from Lavallee or any other member of his group, the "Friends"
list (with e-mail addresses) of that individual becomes exposed. In
this way, those with insincere intentions have the potential to directly
contact an increasing number of Bahá'is, interactions that could pose a
threat to the spiritual well-being of youth and other believers who are
not deepened in the Covenant.

Each National Assembly will need to determine the necessity and most
appropriate manner of discreetly informing believers of this situation
in consultation and with the assistance of the Counsellors. In doing so
it will of course be important to avoid creating undue anxiety or
curiosity about the nature of Covenant-breaker material on the
Internet..

It is our intention to provide more general guidance in the near
future about how online social networks can be constructively and safely
used by Bahá'ís.

With loving greetings,

Matt Weinberg Program Director Bahá'í Internet Agency

cc: Members of the Continental Boards of Counsellors"[9]

In illustrating the coercive measures historically employed by the
Baha'i organization in dealing with internet based criticism, Professor Cole">Juan Cole cites a 1996 letter to a Baha'i academic from Stephen Birkland, Member of the Continental
Board of Counsellors in the Americas, written in consultation with the
International Teaching Centre (the body currently responsible for the
administration of the Baha'i Internet Agency[10]), stating that "The International Teaching
Centre has asked me--with the knowledge of the Universal House of
Justice--to warn you that your promulgation of views contrary to the
Teachings was damaging to the Cause. If you were to resume in any
fashion this course of action, the effect would be to bring you into
direct conflict with the Covenant."[11]

Letter of Counselor Stephen Birkland to a Baha'i Academic: Imposing
Fundamentalism as the Official Ideology of the Baha'i Faith

"Continental Board of Counsellors for the Protection and Propagation
of the Baha'i Faith in the Americas

16 July 1996

Dear X:

When I telephoned last May to ask for a second meeting to discuss in
greater depth a number of concerns touched on in our earlier
consultation, you indicated that you would prefer that I put these
issues in writing. This letter, which has benefited from the comments of
the International Teaching Center, seeks to respond to your request. As
I explained, my reason for the proposed meeting was a desire to assist
you in understanding how a number of your postings to the members of . .
. [an] . . . internet forum you created last year were in conflict with
the Teachings of the Baha'i Faith, and how their persistent promotion
by you was becoming harmful to its interests. As you know, a special
responsibility for the protection of the Faith is one of the primary
functions assigned to the institution of the Counsellors.

While I have not archived your . . . postings, I retained a handful
of them which seemed to me particularly inappropriate and disquieting in
the context of a discussion ostensibly intended as a serious study of
Baha'u'llah's Message. Copies of some of these which illustrate the
issues mentioned here are enclosed for your reference.

Essentially, your statements convey an image of the Faith in which
the Covenant, although it is fundamental to Baha'u'llah's Message, has
little substance beyond a kind of nominal legitimacy and certain very
narrowly defined functions assigned to its central institutions. The
broad and unique authority explicitly conferred on the Guardianship and
the Universal House of Justice in the Writings of the Founders of the
Faith is systematically whittled down to a point that would, if taken
seriously, paralyze the ability of the Cause to carry out the mission
laid on it by its Founder.

The issue is not one of your having views which may be incompatible
with the Teachings. Baha'i life is a continuing endeavor to understand
and implement the truths of the Revelation of God to which we are
committed. Nor would expressions of opinion during discussions among
groups of Baha'is, however misleading or objectionable some of these
comments might seem to many members of the community, normally be
matters that the institutions of the Faith would feel responsible to
take up. What has aroused the concern of the International Teaching
Centre with respect to your . . . interventions, and has disturbed many
of your fellow believers, has rather been a pattern of comment that
appears to reflect a calculated and determined effort on your part, in
the name of detached scholarly discussion, to impose on the presentation
of Baha'u'llah's Message a strongly held ideological view that
contradicts the authoritative and explicit interpretation of Baha'i
Texts.

When I raised some of my concerns with you during our discussions in
February, it became clear from your many--and often vehement--reactions
that this understanding of your point of view is quite accurate. Indeed,
these comments left me with the impression that you feel no compunction
in disagreeing with Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l-Baha themselves when their
statements come into conflict with your strongly held personal
convictions.

The nature of the problem which your activities were creating for the
Baha'i community were clarified when you accidentally posted to the . .
. forum a private message apparently intended for a smaller group of
participants, identified by you as "Majnun." You cannot be unaware of
the sense of betrayal experienced by your fellow Baha'is, who had
believed themselves engaged in a scholarly exploration of Baha'u'llah's
purpose, when they read a statement which appeared to lay out a cynical
"winning strategy" designed to use the . . . forum to spread
disinformation, attack the United States National Spiritual Assembly,
and bring the administrative processes of the Cause into discredit. Nor
should you be surprised at the dismay caused by your readiness, in this
same statement, to recognize a parallel between the activities of this
inner group and those of the notorious Covenant-breaker Ahmad Sohrab. It
was keenly disappointing to all of us who respected both your adherence
to the Cause and your professional credentials, that you failed to
immediately explain what seemed a disturbing departure from standards
which participants in such a forum had every right to expect.

In a statement posted over a year and a half ago--and repeated this
past May when you adivised participants that you were closing down the .
. . forum--you explained with great frankness the beliefs that motivate
you. Please let me be equally candid, then, in expressing my opinion
that, if you were today to advance such views in support of an
application for enrollment in the Baha'i Faith, no Baha'i Assembly would
accept your application or regard you as fulfilling the basic
requirements for Baha'i membership set out by the Guardian:

"Full recognition of the station of the Forerunner, the Author, and
the Ture Exemplar of the Baha'i Cause, as set forth in Abdu'l-Baha's
Testament; unreserved acceptance of, and submission to, whatsoever has
been revealed by their Pen; loyal and steadfast adherence to every
clause of our Beloved's sacred Will; and close association with the
spirit as well as the form of the present day Baha'i administration
throughout the world--these I conceive to be the fundamental and primary
considerations that must be fairly, discreetly and thoughtfully
ascertained before reaching such a vital decision." I regret the bald
tone of this necessarily brief and constrained presentation of my
concerns as a Counsellor. As I say, it seeemed to me greatly to be
preferred if we could have discussed such important matters face to
face, in an unhurried atmosphere of respect both for your personal
convictions and the integrity of the Faith's Teachings. You are the only
one who can know whether in your heart you do indeed believe in
Baha'u'llah as the Manifestation of God to our age. Baha'i institutions
do not have the right to pry into believers' innermost convictions, but
they do have the obligation to counsel individuals whose dissemination
of personal beliefs is doing harm to the interests of the Faith. The
International Teaching Centre has asked me--with the knowledge of the
Universal House of Justice--to warn you that your promulgation of views
contrary to the Teachings was damaging to the Cause. If you were to
resume in any fashion this course of action, the effect would be to
bring you into direct conflict with the Covenant."

With sincerity and concern,

Stephen Birkland, Member Continental Board of Counsellors in the
Americas

cc: The International Teaching Centre Continental Board of
Counsellors in the Americas National Spiritual Assembly of the United
States

Further documents from Professor Cole">Juan Cole's website relating to this and other issues can be
accessed at Baha'i
Documents

• Matthew Weinberg- Program Director
• Thane Terrill - Director of Information
  Services at Baha'i International Community's United Nations Office

Bahai Internet Agency Whitepapers

• Individual
  Initiative on the Internet, accessed September 12, 2009.
• Participation and the Internet
• Blogging and the Baha'i Faith, accessed September
  12, 2009.
• text" title="//www.bcca.org/bia/podcasting.pdf" rel="nofollow">Podcasting,
  accessed September 12, 2009.
• Understanding Online Social Networks, accessed
  September 12, 2009.
• Guidelines for Internet Communication, accessed
  September 12, 2009.
• Responding to Criticism and Opposition on the Internet,
  accessed September 12, 2009.
• Basics of Search Engine Optimization, accessed
  September 12, 2009.
• Building
  Internet Communities, accessed September 12, 2009.
• Baha'i
  Blog Survey - Pheonix Conference (M. Naeimi), accessed September
  12, 2009.
• text" title="//www.bcca.org/bia/BCCA-bosch.ppt" rel="nofollow">Cultivating
  the Roots Presentation, accessed September 12, 2009.
• NEBY
  Fest Presentation, accessed September 12, 2009.
• The Internet Perspective, accessed September 12,
  2009.

Website: //www.bcca.org/bia/

• Matthew Weinberg
• Baha'i Faith
• Bahá'í Computer
  And Communication Association

1. ↑ Bahá'í Internet Agency,
   accessed March 31, 2009.
2. ↑ Baha'i Internet Agency, Association for Baha’i Studies,
   accessed March 31, 2009.
3. ↑ Homepage of the Bahá'í
   Internet Agency, accessed March 31, 2009.
4. ↑ Baha'i Censorship, accessed September 12, 2009.
5. ↑ Responding to Criticism and Opposition on the Internet,
   accessed September 12, 2009.
6. ↑ Responding to Criticism and Opposition on the Internet,
   accessed September 12, 2009.
7. ↑ Guidelines for Internet Communication, Baha'i
   Internet Agency Whitepaper, accessed September 12, 2009.
8. ↑ Covenant, The, and Covenant-breaker by Moojan Momen],
   Baha'i Library Online, accessed March 31, 2009.
9. ↑ "Baha'i Internet Agency:the dangers of Facebook friends",
   article and official Baha'i Internet Agency letter, posted to Orthodox
   Baha'i website, March 7, 2008, accessed March 31, 2009.
10. ↑ Bahá'í Internet Agency,
    accessed March 31, 2009.
11. ↑ Letter of Counselor Stephen Birkland to a Baha'i Academic,
    accessed September 12, 2009

Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them

“Truthfulness is the foundation of all human virtues” is what Baha’u’llah taught the Baha’is.  Now, read the teachings of Unitarian Universalist (so-called) Baha’is in the next two paragraphs and judge for yourselves:

“We also sometimes participate in Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and other spiritual congregations. UBs must keep their Unitarian beliefs secret in conservative Baha'i Faith communities.”

“Bahais who live in Islamic countries that forbid organized Bahaism are allowed by the Unitarian Bahai Association to hide their Bahai faith and publicly identify and worship as Muslims, while maintaining a private relationship with the UBA.”

Thanks to the Internet, anyone with $12.95 can register a domain name and make all kinds of unsubstantiated claims on a website.  Cheaper yet, create cyber groups or associations for free.  Claims remain empty unless they are backed up by facts and confirmed by appropriate entities.

I can claim to be an American citizen, but I’m not unless the State Department confirms it.  I can claim to be an attorney and a physician, but I’m not unless the Bar and Medical Associations say that I am.  Similarly, I can claim to be a Baha’i, but I’m not unless the Baha’i Faith, as an organized global community, verifies my claim.  There’s no prefix, suffix, or empty claim that can make a non-Baha’i a Baha’i.  

Also, the expressed concerns of anti-Baha’is for the faith’s rate of growth are, at best, disingenuous.

Additionally, well-intentioned intelligent people do not refer to the Catholics as Vatican-Catholics nor do they refer to the Baha’is as Haifan-Baha’is.   

It does not concern me how individuals, as a private matter, accept or reject God or religions.  It does, however, concern me when concerted efforts are made to purposefully hijack or damage the good name and reputation of the Baha’i Faith and its adherents.

“Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?  Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.  A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.  Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.  Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. “ – Matthew 7 / Christian Bible

We’ll see.

Anvar,
A Baha’i without any artificial prefix, suffix, or hyphenation.

Live and let live

.... don't let religion take over.

Message from the BIA in your mind ...

Nope

Just a realist where you BIA hacks are concerned, and not prepared to give your kind any inches or quarters or allow you to have the last word. Nothing personal ;-)

Ya NUR

Shame ...

you're an angry b*gger aren't you? Anyway, wish you peace.

I never said you are an enemy

But for what it's worth, you can lump your opinions. Cheerio ;-)

Ya NUR

Good :)

Be happy and stay cool. Noone here is your enemy, just giving honest opinions, that's all. cheers.

Stupid, and typical. Metallica is better!!

Metallica - Nothing else matters

Ya NUR

Great song, lighten up Man!

Looks like you have spooked yourself

Silly childish games like yours is the last desperate straw you BIA hacks always grasp for when you have lost the argument and your medley is exposed for what it is.

Look behind yourself now, and put some underwear on that naked Emperor while you're at it.

Ya NUR

Spooooooooky!!!

Look behind you! BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!