Links
Archives
- 12/01/2003 - 01/01/2004
- 02/01/2004 - 03/01/2004
- 07/01/2005 - 08/01/2005
- 08/01/2005 - 09/01/2005
- 09/01/2005 - 10/01/2005
- 11/01/2005 - 12/01/2005
- 12/01/2005 - 01/01/2006
- 01/01/2006 - 02/01/2006
- 02/01/2006 - 03/01/2006
- 05/01/2006 - 06/01/2006
- 06/01/2006 - 07/01/2006
- 07/01/2006 - 08/01/2006
- 09/01/2006 - 10/01/2006
- 10/01/2006 - 11/01/2006
Set up to expose the current Bahai administration and its agents on-line
Friday, July 29, 2005
Marshall-Bacquet clique
Interesting observations by Wahid Azal on t.r.b (29/07/05):
>One of the Talisman rules is that "Discussion is confined to issues in the mainstream, Haifan tradition; messages about other traditions are not permitted."
An open admission of liberal baha'i cultist triumphalism and exclusivism is always well received on this end, proving once again my axiomatic dictum that the Marshall-Bacquet clique are no more than a more obnoxious species of baha'i fundamentalist cultism, and so therefore should be targetted for total evisceration from the face of contingency in the same manner as those other fundamentalist cultists amongst their brethern.
>That's not part of the Haifan tradition.
It seems that nothing under the divine canopy of existence is part of the Haifan tradition. Life itself seems to be the antithesis of the Haifan tradition, ergo why nothing other than death is compatible with it. Thank God almighty that the Haifan tradition is on its last legs and will be no more in a few short generations. May the archangels above hastily level the mount of that unholy town into dust so that the world may no longer be subjected to this wretched, satanic Beast and Whore of Babylon, its despicable antichristic tradition and its demonic servants such as Steve Marshall.
>One of the Talisman rules is that "Discussion is confined to issues in the mainstream, Haifan tradition; messages about other traditions are not permitted."
An open admission of liberal baha'i cultist triumphalism and exclusivism is always well received on this end, proving once again my axiomatic dictum that the Marshall-Bacquet clique are no more than a more obnoxious species of baha'i fundamentalist cultism, and so therefore should be targetted for total evisceration from the face of contingency in the same manner as those other fundamentalist cultists amongst their brethern.
>That's not part of the Haifan tradition.
It seems that nothing under the divine canopy of existence is part of the Haifan tradition. Life itself seems to be the antithesis of the Haifan tradition, ergo why nothing other than death is compatible with it. Thank God almighty that the Haifan tradition is on its last legs and will be no more in a few short generations. May the archangels above hastily level the mount of that unholy town into dust so that the world may no longer be subjected to this wretched, satanic Beast and Whore of Babylon, its despicable antichristic tradition and its demonic servants such as Steve Marshall.
Tuesday, July 26, 2005
We haven't got the time
Baha'i hired agent Paul Hammond displaying his research skills on trb (25/07/05):
avicenna9012...@yahoo.com wrote: > Yes, I have provided proofs. Just search for it.
> Henry Nah - we haven't got the time to go wading through your piles of posted shit to find the one pearl that you *say* is in there somewhere.
Repost it here, to prove that you're not lying - otherwise, given your record, that's the safest assumption.
Paul
avicenna9012...@yahoo.com wrote: > Yes, I have provided proofs. Just search for it.
> Henry Nah - we haven't got the time to go wading through your piles of posted shit to find the one pearl that you *say* is in there somewhere.
Repost it here, to prove that you're not lying - otherwise, given your record, that's the safest assumption.
Paul
Saturday, July 23, 2005
What's it gonna be, yes or no?
On 23 Jul 2005 10:20:29 -0700, sman...@jam.rr.com wrote:
>However, Karen was honestly trying to help this >girl and in the end I think she succeeded. Now what's your excuse?
So, her writings produced a good effect, yes?
But then you say here: On 16 Jul 2005 23:07:21 -0700, sman...@jam.rr.com wrote:
>But for that very reason her writings are more likely to sow more seeds of doubts than the rest of you three put together.
Here, you seemingly disapprove of her writings.
What's it gonna be, yes or no? Does she have to submit her writings for review to satisfy you? Trust me on this one; her writings on Shirin would not have passed review.
But behold the good effect of her "success" (your word).
Peace,
Chris
>However, Karen was honestly trying to help this >girl and in the end I think she succeeded. Now what's your excuse?
So, her writings produced a good effect, yes?
But then you say here: On 16 Jul 2005 23:07:21 -0700, sman...@jam.rr.com wrote:
>But for that very reason her writings are more likely to sow more seeds of doubts than the rest of you three put together.
Here, you seemingly disapprove of her writings.
What's it gonna be, yes or no? Does she have to submit her writings for review to satisfy you? Trust me on this one; her writings on Shirin would not have passed review.
But behold the good effect of her "success" (your word).
Peace,
Chris
Ruhi a lesson without education
Rod Wicks in response to the Ruhi method - t.r.b 22/07/05:
Reiki is a massage during which you are not touched.
Ruhi is a lesson in which you are not educated.
Fuse them and you have the foundation of Baha'i due process in which counselling occurs without it ever having reached your ears.
Would you like an empty cup with coffee written on it now?
Reiki is a massage during which you are not touched.
Ruhi is a lesson in which you are not educated.
Fuse them and you have the foundation of Baha'i due process in which counselling occurs without it ever having reached your ears.
Would you like an empty cup with coffee written on it now?
Tuesday, July 19, 2005
Well-crafted Crap
Steve Marshall wrote the following about Susan Maneck on trb 20/07/05:
Susan is doing an excellent job of glossing over some very unpalatable material. I think her skill at spin, muddying of the waters and deflection are truly admirable. Granted, she is talking crap, when you get down to it, but it's very well-crafted crap, and I feel you should acknowledge that.
Susan is doing an excellent job of glossing over some very unpalatable material. I think her skill at spin, muddying of the waters and deflection are truly admirable. Granted, she is talking crap, when you get down to it, but it's very well-crafted crap, and I feel you should acknowledge that.
Saturday, July 16, 2005
'Historical' not political
On S.R.B. (15/07/05) Susan Maneck wrote:
Dear Adrian,
At the same time, we should allow aspersions to be caste on a Baha'i because they disagree with what an individual member of the House says. For instance when while Mr. Doug Martin was in the United States recently he made some comments which seemed to support US policy in the Middle East which I, as a historian of the Middle East very much disagreed with (he called these remarks 'historical' not political.) Likewise he stated that the Baha'is had 'voted for Ruhi with their feet' whereas in fact we had been given no alternatives. Now, those are not things that come from either the Writings of the Universal House of Justice and while Mr. Martin is certainly entitled to his personal opinions I am just as entitled to disagree with them.
warmest, Susan
Thursday, July 14, 2005
Will they stop at giving your mother a scolding?
Susan Maneck justifying bullying family members of ex-Baha'is (trb 15/07/2005):
Like you, my gloves are off too, because the NSA called up my family
and scolded my mother for allowing me to enmbrace Islam.
Really? Now why don't you tell us what the Muslims will do to you if you ever decide to leave Islam like you left the Baha'i Faith? Will they stop at giving your mother a scolding? Or does Islamic law not allow them to kill you?
Susan
Like you, my gloves are off too, because the NSA called up my family
and scolded my mother for allowing me to enmbrace Islam.
Really? Now why don't you tell us what the Muslims will do to you if you ever decide to leave Islam like you left the Baha'i Faith? Will they stop at giving your mother a scolding? Or does Islamic law not allow them to kill you?
Susan
Why is talking with Baha'is such a tiresome, painfull chore?
Here is Rod Wicks responding to AO phony agent Paul Hammond on his usual diversionary tactics:
Thanks Paul....I appreciate the effort....though futile it will prove to be ;-)
After all these years I still can't get over the amount of time that must be dedicated to advising online Baha'is-
"No, I never said that ....No, that's your 'straw man'....No, I don't believe due process necessitates the utilization of anal probing aliens".
Ok, I made the last one up and they may well be necessary to the implimentation of due process within Baha'i......but, why... why...why is talking with Baha'is such a tiresome, painfull chore?
Why do they so frequently dedicate so much time to the generation of spurious bullshit? Why are they so frequently evasive to the point of slimyness?
I've never encountered anything like it in secular society....what is it about religion that turns people into deaf, dumb and blind nutters?
Rod the ingrate ;-)
Thanks Paul....I appreciate the effort....though futile it will prove to be ;-)
After all these years I still can't get over the amount of time that must be dedicated to advising online Baha'is-
"No, I never said that ....No, that's your 'straw man'....No, I don't believe due process necessitates the utilization of anal probing aliens".
Ok, I made the last one up and they may well be necessary to the implimentation of due process within Baha'i......but, why... why...why is talking with Baha'is such a tiresome, painfull chore?
Why do they so frequently dedicate so much time to the generation of spurious bullshit? Why are they so frequently evasive to the point of slimyness?
I've never encountered anything like it in secular society....what is it about religion that turns people into deaf, dumb and blind nutters?
Rod the ingrate ;-)
