Channel Nine MSN Withdraws Anti-Baba Video

Channel Nine MSN Withdraws Anti-Baba Video

Within 48 hours of Joe Moreno (a Pro-Sai Activist) sending Channel Nine MSN a scathing response to their biased and poorly researched Anti-Baba broadcast, the video was promptly withdrawn from their official website.

About the withdrawal of the Anti-Baba Channel Nine MSN video, Robert Priddy (a caustic defamer and critic of Sathya Sai Baba) said on his Anti-Baba WordPress blog:

Robert Priddy - An Admission

Robert Priddy Admission

Robert Priddy: NOTE: A reliable source from within the media has confirmed that Channel NineMSN withdrew the presence of its ‘Infiltrating a cult’ segment because the Sathya Sathya Sai cult threats of legal action. Media around the world, including SBS and The Age in Australia have refused to be intimidated by the powerful Sathya Sai Organisation. We will not be intimidated and continue to make available the footage!

Needless to say, a large & national news broadcasting company such as Channel Nine MSN (which is far larger and more viewed than SBS or The Age) would not have removed the video had there not been legitimate complaints about the content and disinformation in their video.

It is also important to note that if Channel 9 MSN was truly threatened with legal action, they (and their world-class legal reps) would not have discussed this information with (or divulged this information to) any casual outsider. This type of legal information (if true) would only have come from someone within the NineMSN company, thus proving (once again) that NineMSN A Current Affair was directly involved with Anti-Baba Critics, contrary to Robert Priddy’s claims that they were not.

Thank you Mr. Priddles for yet another confirmation of behind-the-scenes scheming and subterfuge between NineMSN A Current Affair and Ex-Devotees.

Also see:
- NineMSN A Current Affair Australia, Moiya O’Brien, SWARA, The Sathya Sai Organisation And Cult Accusations

Robert Priddy Dishonestly Alleges ‘Sathya Sai Baba Invites’

Robert Priddy Dishonestly Alleges ‘Sathya Sai Baba Invites’

On Robert Priddy’s Anti-Sai WordPress blog, he wrote an article about V. Ramnath and claimed matter-of-factly that Sathya Sai Baba personally “invited” him to india on three separate occasions. Needless to say, Robert Priddy is shameless distorting the truth, is obviously suffering from delusions of grandeur and is attempting to deceive gullible and naive readers into thinking that he had some sort of unique and personal relationship with Sathya Sai Baba (he did not).

Robert Priddy wrote:

robertpriddy.wordpress.com/2008/09/17/1248/
“Ramnath makes untrue assumptions: I was actually invited by Sathya Sai Baba to go to India several times – including the first time, and – as the Coordinator of the Sathya Sai Organization – to attend his EHV course in 1987 and come to his 70th Birthday too.”

Sathya Sai Baba never personally “invited” Robert Priddy to visit him in India on three different occasions. These are blatant untruths that can easily be refuted by sourcing material from Robert Priddy’s Pro-Sai book “Source Of The Dream”.


ROBERT PRIDDY’S FIRST TRIP TO SEE SATHYA SAI BABA:
How exactly did Sathya Sai Baba “invite” Robert Priddy to India the first time? In the chapter “Sai Answers A Call”, Robert Priddy said he wrote a letter to the Guru expressing a desire to see him in his “earthly incarnation”.

A friend of Priddy’s was to travel to Puttaparthi and took Priddy’s letter with him to India. When Priddy’s friend arrived at the ashram, he was told that Sathya Sai Baba was in Madras. However, the friend took Priddy’s letter with him “on an impulse” to bhajans and Sathya Sai Baba happened to arrive at that time. The Guru made rounds and took Priddy’s letter from his friend. That’s it!

Sathya Sai Baba never said one word to Robert Priddy or his friend that he should come to India. Since Robert Priddy currently contends that Sathya Sai Baba is a fraud, then Sathya Sai Baba taking his letter had no actual significance and did not constitute an “invitation”.


ROBERT PRIDDY’S 1987 TRIP TO SEE SATHYA SAI BABA:
Robert Priddy also alleged that Sathya Sai Baba personally “invited” him to an EHV course at Prashanti in 1987. Once again, Sathya Sai Baba never personally “invited” Robert Priddy to the EHV course at Prashanti in 1987.

In the chapter “The Rat In The Drum”, Robert Priddy narrated the entire story about his trip to Prashanti in 1987. Since Robert Priddy was turning 50 years old, he felt he needed to make a pilgrimage. Robert Priddy asserted that after chanting the Gayatri mantra in Norway, he would see gulls and various birds flying “without exception in the very direction of Puttaparthi”! After praying for “higher confirmation” and sending Sathya Sai Baba a “mental telegram”, he was convinced that Sathya Sai Baba answered his prayer after he rang his travel agent who said there was “no problem” and that he could wait “another week or so” before booking his flight (when earlier the same travel agent insisted he pay for the tickets within 24 hours). That’s it!

Sathya Sai Baba never said one word to Robert Priddy about coming to India to attend the EHV course in 1987. Since Robert Priddy currently contends that Sathya Sai Baba is a fraud, then the entire incident with the travel agent had no actual significance and did not constitute an “invitation”.


ROBERT PRIDDY’S TRIP FOR THE 70TH BIRTHDAY CELEBRATIONS:
Since Robert Priddy’s book was published before Sathya Sai Baba’s 70th birthday celebrations, one can only conclude that his visit to Prashanti for the 70th birthday celebrations was similarly based on “signs” he thought he received from the Guru. This is not surprising considering that Robert Priddy claimed he had a psychic telepathic connection with Sathya Sai Baba.


These are the typical types of exaggerations, embellishments and bold-faced untruths that Robert Priddy tells on almost a daily basis on his WordPress blog. Amusingly, Robert Priddy denies he has told a single lie. Since Robert Priddy and Ex-Devotees have miserably failed in their apathetic attempts to bring Sathya Sai Baba to “justice” in the past 10+ years, they resort to smears because the truth does not argue in their favor.

See:

- Sathya Sai Allegations REFUTED (An article defending Sathya Sai Baba and the Pro-Sai position held by various Sai Devotees, including Dr. Michael Goldstein, Thorbjorn Meyer, Phyllis Krystal, Indulal Shah, etc.)

Anti-Sathya-Sai-Baba FECRIS Campaign Backfires

FECRIS And Friedrich Griess Endorsed And Publicized Psychic Psychotherapist Conny Larsson

FECRIS Conference: Brussels: Saturday 25 March 2006
“The Internationalisation Of Cults: A Danger To Human Rights In Europe?”
Guest Speaker: Conny Larsson
(FECRIS = Fédération Européenne des Centres de Recherche et d’Information sur le Sectarisme)
(FECRIS = European Federation of Centers of Research and Information about Sects)

(more…)

Rigmor Robert (Anti Sathya Sai Baba Cult Expert) Endorses Self-Proclaimed Prophet

Rigmor Robert (Anti Sathya Sai Baba Cult Expert) Endorses Self-Proclaimed Prophet
Rigmor Robert (Rigmor Robèrt) is a doctor, author, feminist, lecturer and psychotherapist residing in Sweden. Rigmore Robert is well known in Sweden for exposing the Jehovah’s Witnesses as a cult and exposing a Pentecostal Church in Knutby as a dangerous faith group. Rigmor Robèrt wrote the preface to Conny Larsson’s Anti-Sathya-Sai-Baba book entitled “Behind The Mask Of The Clown” and said (in part):

“But can we not leave them in peace, these gurus and apostolic preachers?… Unfortunately, no. What is needed here is to take a stand and speak out clearly, as Conny has done. One cannot disclaim responsibility for what goes on in closed religious groups by referring to freedom of the will or laws on religious liberty. We ‘out here’ must take a stand, because manipulative groups are dangerous. Those who believe themselves to be close to God and wish to remain close to their leaders can become ruthless towards others.”

Rigmor Robert’s comments about cults, cult leaders, gurus and apostolic preachers are rather enigmatic considering that she publicly endorsed, promoted and solicited the integrity and crediblity of Conny Larsson, who happens to be a cult-like leader and guru who claims he is a psychic trance medium for the spirit of Vyasa.

Maharshi Vyasa (who is believed to be an incarnation of Lord Vishnu) is considered an immortal sage who wrote the sacred texts to the Vedas, the Brahma Sutras, the Mahabharata, the Eighteen Puranas, the Bhagavad Gita and the Srimad Bhagavatam. For Conny Larsson to claim that he is channeling the spirit of Vyasa, he is presenting himself as a self-proclaimed prophet, guru and cult-leader whose words carry the authority of God and are to be considered on par with divinely inspired scriptures that are revered by hundreds of millions of Hindus around the globe!

However, Conny Larsson not only claims he is trance medium for the spirit of Vyasa, he also claims to be a spirit channeler, a pet psychic, a meditation guru, a yoga guru, a Vedic mantra guru, a devotee of Shankaracharya Swami Brahmananda Saraswati and a psychic therapist who can diagnose disease and illness by using a crystal pendulum (Ref)! Conny Larsson also runs the Vedic Master Website and publicly solicits himself with other psychics, mediums, spirit channelers and New Age practitioners (Ref).

It is nothing less than shameful and hypocritical that Rigmor Robert (a staunch anti-cult and anti-guru advocate) wrote the preface to Conny Larsson’s Anti-Sai-Baba book and vouched for his integrity and crediblity although he is a self-professed prophet, an alleged “internationally renown” psychic trance medium and a New Age guru.

It would appear that Rigmore Robert was conned by Conny Larsson into writing the preface to his book. Conny Larsson also conned the Indian rationalist, skeptic and atheist Basava Premanand into publishing his Anti-Sai-Baba book in English. Basava Premanand happens to believe that psychics like Conny Larsson are frauds, liars and cheats and is willing to pay anyone who can demonstrate alleged psychic abilities 100,000 Rs (Ref).

Reference

Anti-Cult, Conny Larsson, Cults, Ex-Cult, Gurus, Rigmor Robert Robèrt, Spirituality, Sweden, sathya sai baba, sathya sai baba news, Cult Leaders, Cult List, Famous Cults, Names Of Cults, New Religious Movements, Religious Leaders, Sects, World Religions

UK BBC ‘Secret Swami’ – The Ethics Of Using Hidden Cameras

On Barry Pittard’s WordPress blog (barrypittard.wordrpess.com, which contains numerous defamations, libels and slurs against Sathya Sai Baba), he wrote an article entitled “BBC Hidden Camera in ‘Secret Swami’. Ethical?”, which said (in part):

“Despite the alarums and excursions of Dr G. Venkataraman (and informally allied Sai Baba proxy defenders on the Internet whose libels and slanders are deemed by top lawyers in three countries to be extreme, widespread and highly actionable), the BBC had every just cause to shoot clandestinely.”

I would ask the reader how “ethical” he/she would consider being secretly filmed with a hidden camera in the privacy of his/her home and then having that film broadcast world-wide?

The Anti-Sai agenda of the UK BBC was clear. All of the negative media against Sathya Sai Baba was the direct result of critic’s behind-the-scenes subterfuge, unremitting propaganda and self-described “e-bombing campaigns”. Critics even boasted on Anti-Sai websites how they were responsible for and involved with various negative media exposures against Sathya Sai Baba. This holds true for The BBC Secret Swami, The Divine Downfall Interview, The Seduced Program, The Unesco Withdrawal, The U.S. State Dept. Warning, The Guardian Article By Paul Lewis, Michelle Goldberg’s Salon.com Article, etc.

Andries Krugers Dagneaux (former webmaster and current “Main Representative, Supervisor and Contact” for the largest Anti-Sai Website on the internet, hetnet.nl/~exbaba: Ref) made several very disturbing claims that Tanya Datta (correspondent for the BBC in the production of the Secret Swami documentary) and the BBC itself accepted and promoted the views of and were sympathetic with Ex-Devotees (Ref).

Furthermore, Barry Pittard purposely misrepresented the facts when he claimed that Dr. G. Venkataraman was allied with “proxy defamers whose libels and slanders are deemed by top lawyers in three countries to be extreme, widespread and highly actionable”. The “proxy defamer” that Barry Pittard mentioned actually refers to Joe Moreno. Although Ex-Devotees ceaselessly rant that Moreno is using proxy IPs, is “anonymous” and is a “proxy defamer”, they are so convinced of Moreno’s identity that they published his full contact details on Conny Larsson’s Anti-Sai domain along with a fraudulent screen-capture of his geocities website.

Regarding Alleged Libels, Slanders And ‘Top Lawyers’:
First and foremost, neither Dr. G. Venkataraman nor any other Sai Devotee or Pro-Sai Activist has been sued, served with a suit or even contacted by any lawyer for alleged “libels and slanders” (despite Barry Pittard’s questionable claims attributed to anonymous “top lawyers”). It is significant that although Barry Pittard claimed (again) he is in contact with anonymous “top lawyers” (from three countries, nonetheless), he has been unable (in the past 9 years since his defection) to assist any alleged victim to obtain legal representation or to assist any alleged victim to file a court case against Sathya Sai Baba in India. As a matter of fact, not even one alleged victim has even tried to file a basic police complaint or court case against Sathya Sai Baba in India despite:

  1. The lucrative prospect of a successful suit by money-hungry laywers (Sathya Sai Baba’s assets are assessed to be worth billions of dollars by ex-devotees).
  2. The offer of free “world-class legal resources” from Barry Pittard (Ref).
  3. Ex-Devotees and Barry Pittard’s constant claims that they are in correspondence with “international lawyers” and “top lawyers”.
  4. The vast publicity a lawsuit against Sathya Sai Baba would generate to their cause.
  5. The opportunity (whether the lawsuit is successful or not) to present to the world the alleged “evidence” they claim they possess.

It is significant, however, that Barry Pittard was threatened with a legal suit by Ramanathan, Robert Priddy was threatened with a million dollar legal suit for defamation by Leo Rebello (Ref) and a legal threat against Anti-Sai Activists (the details of which are fanatically protected and withheld) forced them to put a disclaimer on their Anti-Sai websites stating that the information they provide about Sai Baba may not be entirely true or valid (Ref)!

More anonymous claims and misrepresentations against Sathya Sai Baba by Barry Pittard.

Relevant Links:
- Moreno Responds: Who Is Libeling And Slandering Whom?
- Alaya Rahm Self-Dismissed His Own Lawsuit Against The SSB Society
- Alaya Rahm – A 6-Year-Long Daily User Of Illegal Street Drugs And Alcohol
- A Scathing Response To Critics About Alaya Rahm’s Failed Lawsuit
- The Rahm Family – Allegations Examined
- UK BBC ‘Secret Swami’
- The Truth About The Alleged Sathya Sai Baba ‘Sex Scandal’

Former Followers Of Sathya Sai Baba On The QuickTopic Forum

Sathya Sai Baba On Quicktopic

QuickTopic Forum – An Introduction
QuickTopic is an instant messaging forum that allows anyone to create a board that can be used for online collaboration. These boards allow anyone to post any comment he/she chooses under the guise of complete anonymity. Even the board-moderator cannot view IPs unless the board has been upgraded to the Pro-version.


QuickTopic Board: “Sathya Sai Baba, 2005, Who Is He?”
On February 11th 2005, Freestone Wilson (a neutral party, open-minded to both sides of the Sai Controversy) created the QuickTopic board FE68KidtskS, which was named “Sathya Sai Baba, 2005, who is he?” After discussing the shocking behavior and vicious defamations being made by ex-devotees of Sathya Sai Baba on this board, Freestone Wilson (the original creator and moderator of the board) agreed to hand it over to Gerald ‘Joe’ Moreno. On April 3rd 2007, Moreno officially became the moderator for the the board and promptly ugraded it to the Pro-version, giving him access to the IP history for all posts.


What is an ‘IP’? Information About IPs:
An IP is an acronym for “Internet Protocol”, which is an address that can uniquely identify a computer-user to his/her ISP (Internet Service Provider). An IP usually resolves to a “netname” and country unless it is a proxy IP. Proxy IPs are generated by masking one’s real IP with an anonymous IP generated through an anonymous server. An IP contains 4 sets of numbers that are separated by periods (for example: 213.78.122.150). IPs usually fall within a “range” that makes the last 2 sets of number static. For example, the IP: 213.78.122.150 would fall into the IP range:

213.78.64.0 – 213.78.127.255

This means that the last 2 sets of numbers may vary between 64.0 to 127.255. Although these last 2 sets of numbers may be static, they will not change the ISP, netname or country that the IP resolves to and is not indicative of multiple users or different computers.


QuickTopic Deception By Tony O’Clery:
Tony O’Clery posted messages on QuickTopic, Wikipedia and Yahoo Groups that came from the IP range 24.207.0.0 – 24.207.127.255:

All of these IPs resolve to Delta, British Columbia, Canada and specifically identify O’Clery as the user. Tony O’Clery also posted under the IP range 24.207 on the QuickTopic Board and used the following fake names:

  1. sb cannot control karma
  2. J Edgar Hoover fbi
  3. sigmund freud
  4. pedohunter
  5. pedopatrol
  6. Angelic
  7. Joe Moreno
  8. nino
  9. Jedgar
  10. freestone wilson
  11. Juan
  12. sucked by baba
  13. joe108
  14. Simon Brace
  15. Simon
  16. bollocky bill
  17. Antoin O’Cleiragh
  18. Jai Hanumanji
  19. dingo
  20. tony o’clery
  21. CO2000

2925292424192912290929082907290529032902290128982984289128892887288428832848284628152779277827772775277427732770276927652762274427332739272227212717271627142711270927022700269826952691268526842682267426562653265126492645249720540091


QuickTopic Deception By Sanjay Dadlani:
Moreno discovered Sanjay Dadlani‘s onetel IP through his own website when he traced it to several of his kinky, deviant and perverted blogs, including his StreetBitches Blog. Needless to say, Dadlani also posted his pic on his Gaurasundara’s Blog and it links to his onetel ISP website.

Under his user-name of “Sai Baba EXPOSED”, Dadlani posted under the IP ranges 212.85, 158.94 and 213.78 on the QuickTopic Board and used the following fake names:

  1. James
  2. bandbox3
  3. bandbox2
  4. Marquis de Sade
  5. Sathya Sai Baba
  6. Swami says
  7. Jehosaphat
  8. Bhivash
  9. Somasundaram
  10. Om Sai
  11. Josephine Kabutla
  12. edward
  13. Agnes Wiggsbottom
  14. kick his head in

2808279327762763260525702547250123602358235623482345232923032295228822712238223622312198183915301164073006450643064206400639063706260622061306110420


QuickTopic Deception From The ‘saibabaexpose’ Website:
Anti-Sai Activists falsely attributed a QuickTopic post to Moreno that he did not make. They also selectively edited Moreno’s comments without providing links to his actual posts.


QuickTopic Deception From Robert Priddy:
Robert Priddy posted under the IP range 84.208 on the QuickTopic Board and used the following fake names:

  1. Lisa demoniser
  2. bandbox

297027880143

Robert Priddy made anonymous posts on the QuickTopic Board and attempted to spam it with links to Anti-Sai websites.


QuickTopic Deception By UsedByBaba:
UsedByBaba posted under 7 IPs with the ranges 59.92, 59.144, 61.11, 61.17, 210.211, 221.134 and 202.43 on the QuickTopic Board and used the following fake names:

  1. abused for15years
  2. Anand krishnamurhti
  3. Angel
  4. Angelic
  5. Angeilc
  6. Anonymus
  7. baba
  8. balarama
  9. Barbara Dent
  10. blldexter
  11. CO2000*
  12. CO2OOO
  13. CO2000
  14. From CNN IBN
  15. Jedgar
  16. Joe
  17. Joe 108
  18. joe 108
  19. Joe Moreno
  20. Juan
  21. lalu_panju (usedbybaba)
  22. lalupanju
  23. lenin999@yahoo.co.uk
  24. Lisa
  25. Lisa,,with joe108
  26. Meera
  27. Meera Powar
  28. raghav
  29. sai baba
  30. Sathya Sai Baba
  31. sathyasaibaba
  32. Simon
  33. Simonbrace
  34. Simon Brace
  35. Someonenew
  36. Susan Olorenshaw (a person not involved with the Sai Controversy)
  37. The Real Truth Seeker
  38. Truth Seeker
  39. USB
  40. USEDBYBABA
  41. usedbylallupanju
  42. usedbylalupanju
  43. unknownstudent
  44. V.Prahaladh

295329522951295029492948294729462945294429432940293929352934292329222921291529142886288228802872287128302826282528242823282228212820280528042802280027982796277227662753275227512750270727062705269226882677266826662664266226612659265026472646264226272625262426232609260725572383237223542338233123302314230423002299229022892282228122802279227822772275226222602259225822572256225522482247224522442243224221852184218321812180215820632053201118611837183617481739173817361732173117291725172317221719171317111710170617041702169916961695169416921691168916881686168516841676167516551636163516321629162816271622162016191609160716061605160216011584158215791578155615531551093309190918086808270461046004220417041504130331032903280326032103190317031603140311026502570256


QuickTopic Defamations By Barbara Dent:
Barbara Dent posted under the IP ranges 4.242 and 4.255 on the QuickTopic Board and used the following names:

  1. Barbara
  2. Barbara Dent
  3. Carolyn/KickBaabaaa’ass
  4. Carolyn/KickBaabaaa’butt
  5. Barbara the Barbarian
  6. Amen
  7. Kickbaabaa’s Ass
  8. Mother Bear
  9. Carolyn

References From QuickTopic Board FE68KidtskS
206319611958195619541951194919471944193619351934193319131912191118841870186918681857181012611215118711691167115811571154112810961095109310921089108710791073104010391009978972970900888865873872

Money – Sex – Gurus – Swamis & The Misleading Association With Sathya Sai Baba

Sathya Sai Baba With Swami Karunyananda

Money – Sex – Gurus – Swamis & The Misleading Association With Sathya Sai Baba

In recent days, Robert Priddy, Barry Pittard, Serguei Badaev and other Anti-Sai Activists have been raising a huge hullabaloo on Anti-Sai websites and their WordPress blogs over an article that appeared in the UK The Times newspaper. The article in question was entitled “Money and sex tarnish Indian guru image” and was written by Jeremy Page.

Needless to say, the article in question did not (either directly, indirectly or otherwise) make a single reference to Sathya Sai Baba. The article is as follows:

First there was the Indian swami, or holy man, who was arrested last week for allegedly raping under-age girls and found to be keeping a tiger pelt, drugs and pornographic videos in his ashram.

Then a second one in Kerala, upset by a local newspaper report, tried to shoot himself in the head in a police station in front of television cameras. A third swami from the same state is now on the run after being accused of failing to repay a loan of one million rupees (£12,000) that he took out in his former life as a film producer.

Swamis have been revered in India for thousands of years, originally as leaders of Hindu religious schools or sects who were often believed to have healing and other divine powers. But the latest cases have exposed the seamier side of many gurus, some of whom claim millions of followers — including top politicians — and become hugely rich from donations. They have also set the government of Kerala — one of two communist states in India — on a collision course with religious groups after a state minister declared that most swamis were frauds.

“They’re conducting all kinds of criminal and material activities behind their spiritual exteriors,” G. Sudhakaran, Kerala’s minister for temples, told The Times. “Ninety per cent of them are fake and criminals. There are so many swamis who have enlightened the hearts and minds of people, but these people are fakes with no idea about spirituality. They are only interested in women and money and muscle power.” His comments outraged many devout Hindus, who consider swamis to be beyond reproach — even above the law.

The minister’s remarks were hailed by atheists and rationalists as a rare example of a senior government official speaking out about a problem that has plagued India for centuries.

“This isn’t just a problem confined to Kerala — the same thing happens everywhere else,” Narendra Nayak, the president of the Federation of Indian Rationalist Associations, said.

“You have all sorts of illegal things going on in ashrams, but police won’t go in there because they’re holy places.” Dr Nayak alleged that many swamis abused their holy status to launder money for politicians, businessmen and criminals and to provide a safe place for their clients to drink and have sex with prostitutes.

Part of the problem, he said, was that the swamis were not regulated by any central religious or government body. James Vadakkumcherry, a former teacher at the Kerala police training college who is doing a study on bogus swamis, said that there were about 50 or 60 such “holy men” in Kerala alone.

Santhosh Madhavan — Swami Amritachaitanya — was arrested in March and faces multiple charges including fraud, rape and possessing narcotics. He is accused of sexually assaulting and making pornographic films with several under-age girls.

Police also say that he had been wanted by Interpol since 2004 for allegedly defrauding a Dubai-based Indian woman called Serafin Edwin of 4.5 million rupees when he was visiting the Gulf. She says that she gave him the money to buy a hotel in her name in Kerala but he says it was payment for astrological and other services.

When police raided his four-storey mansion they allegedly found a tiger pelt, drugs, a police uniform and pornographic videos. Some reports said that the videos included secret recordings of “VIP guests in action on the bed”. The case prompted one newspaper to run an exposé on alleged bogus swamis, featuring Himaval Maheswara Bhadranandaji, who stormed into the newspaper’s offices and put a gun to his head, injuring himself before being arrested.
Reference

The Times article dealt specifically with Swamis and alleged Gurus who were arrested and formally charged for various crimes.

In stark contrast, however, Sathya Sai Baba has never (ever) been charged with any crime, sexual or otherwise. Nor have any alleged victims even tried to file a basic police complaint or court case against Sai Baba in India. Leave it to critics to distort news articles (as they often do) with irrelevant comparisons and equally irrelevant commentaries.

The Truth About The Alleged Sathya Sai Baba ‘Sex Scandal’

Sathya Sai Baba And The Alleged Sai Baba Sex Scandal

Introduction To The Alleged Sathya Sai Baba ‘Sex Scandal’:
Many people have not properly educated themselves regarding the facts pertaining to the Sathya Sai Baba Controversy and the alleged ‘Sai Baba Sex Scandal’. This article was created out of the necessity to provide the general public with factual and verifiable information about the many online smear & hate campaigns waged against Sathya Sai Baba by Ex-Devotees.

WordPress Blogs Used As A Tool For Anti-Sai Propaganda:
Robert Priddy, Barry Pittard, RFJ Sandt, Sanjay Dadlani and Brian Steel have resorted to obsessive, repetitive and almost daily smear campaigns against Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba, Sai Devotees and Sai Proponents through hundreds of webpages, websites, forums, blogs, free-press-release websites and their own WordPress blogs (Ref):

robertpriddy.wordpress.com
sathyasaibabanews.wordpress.com
barrypittard.wordpress.com
briansteel.wordpress.com
brianestil.wordpress.com
exbabablog.wordpress.com
saibabaexposed.wordpress.com

These WordPress blogs contain articles and links that defame, ridicule and libel Sathya Sai Baba, Sai Devotees and Sai Proponents in the most vile, derogatory and malicious ways. Even Netscape and Digg banned Robert Priddy, Barry Pittard, Brian Steel and various other Ex-Devotees for their spam-like solicitation of Priddy & Pittard’s defamatory WordPress blogs (Refs: 01020304). It is also important to know that Priddy, Pittard, van der Sandt, Dadlani and Steel were never sexually abused and never witnessed an incident of alleged abuse.

It is also a fact that Barry Pittard was threatened with legal action by Ramanathan and Robert Priddy was threatened with a million dollar legal claim for defamation by Leo Rebello (Ref). Anti-Sai Activists were threatened with a highly secretive legal suit (whose particulars they refuse to divulge) that forced them to put disclaimers on their Anti-Sai websites that state the information they provide against Sri Sathya Sai Baba may NOT be true, accurate or valid (Ref)!

Countering The Allegations With Factual Information:
Many Sai Devotees do not believe the allegations against Sathya Sai Baba based on rational, reasonable, intellectual, factual and common sense observations. No need to resort to “divinity” claims or “true believer” claims. Some of these rational, reasonable, intellectual, factual and common-sense observations are:

  • Alleged victims have never (ever) filed a basic police complaint against Sathya Sai Baba in India for alleged improprieties (Ref).
  • Alleged victims have never (ever) filed a court case against Sathya Sai Baba in India for alleged improprieties (Ref).
  • Sathya Sai Baba has never (ever) been formally charged with any crime, sexual or otherwise (Ref).
  • Alleged victim’s contradictory stories, questionable claims, revealing personal comments and internet behavior strongly argue that they are not credible (Refs: 0102).
  • Although it is claimed that alleged victims filed “affidavits” and were willing to testify in a court of law in India against Sai Baba (Ref), they have never been able to obtain the representation of a lawyer despite:
    • The lucrative prospect of a successful suit (critics allege that Sathya Sai Baba’s “empire” is worth over a billion dollars).
    • The offer of free “world-class legal resources” from Ex-Devotees (Ref).
    • Ex-Devotees constant claims that they are in correspondence with “international lawyers” and “top lawyers” from three countries.
    • The opportunity (whether the lawsuit is successful or not) to present to the world the alleged “evidence” they claim they possess (but are withholding for reasons of secrecy and confidentiality).
    • The vast publicity a lawsuit against Sathya Sai Baba would generate to their cause.
  • Ex-Devotees have alleged that “hundreds” to “thousands” of “minors”, “children” and “male youth” have been molested by Sathya Sai Baba. Needless to say, all of the alleged victims (including their mothers and fathers) have all (without exception) failed in their legal duty of “mandated reporting” and are thereby (using critic’s arguments) “accomplices in sexual molestation crimes”. When no one (including mothers, fathers and/or relatives) has filed a basic police complaint, public grievance or court case against Sathya Sai Baba in India for the alleged molestations of “children”, why should Sai Devotees make complaints or launch investigations based on internet rumors spread by people who have proven themselves (time and again) to be pathological prevaricators? These indisputable facts strongly solidify the argument that Sathya Sai Baba never molested children (Ref).
  • Several alleged victims dubiously claimed that Sathya Sai Baba literally and miraculously transformed his penis into a vagina (and vice-versa) by snapping his fingers, clapping his hands or blowing on his fingertips (Ref).
  • Alleged victim’s stories and accounts are mostly repeated, clarified, explained, changed, furthered and argued by non-victims who were never abused themselves and who never witnessed an incident of alleged abuse themselves. Even going back to 2001, Anti-Sai sympathizers rightly questioned the hearsay allegations against Sai Baba (Ref).
  • Some of the most vocal voices in the Anti-Sai Movement (i.e., Robert Priddy, Barry Pittard, Sanjay Dadlani, Tony O’Clery, Conny Larsson and R.F.J. Sandt) have obsessively resorted to deceit, gutter tactics, defamations, blatant misrepresentation of facts, hostility and outright prevarication. This type of shocking and very disturbing behavior has effectively negated critic’s self-professed and alleged credibility.
  • The Anti-Sai Movement is an extremist hate group that continually attempts to incite anger, hatred and malice against Sathya Sai Baba. Barry Pittard (one of the main spokespersons for the Anti-Sai movement) attempted to incite Islamic Terrorists to slaughter Jews and foreigners at Sathya Sai Baba’s ashrams in Puttaparthi and Whitefield (Ref). Ex-Devotees (particulary Barry Pittard, Reinier Van Der Sandt, Barbara Dent and Tal Brooke) have openly boasted about their attempts (and successes) to polarize Christians against Sathya Sai Baba (Ref). The anonymous SaiBaba-Invigilator blog speciously claimed that Sathya Sai Baba promotes “Tantric Corpse Eating” (Ref). Sanjay Dadlani (under the pseudonym “kick his head in”) said that someone should murder Sathya Sai Baba (Ref) and even rejoiced when a Sai Baba temple was bombed by a terrorist (Refs: 0102). Kevin Shepherd (a critic who has never seen and was never devoted to Sai Baba) spuriously alleged that Sathya Sai Baba is allied with terrorists. The rationalist Indian Skeptic magazine published a fake picture of Sathya Sai Baba holding hands with Idi Amin and attempted to pass it off as an original picture (Ref). Basava Premanand claimed that the “Sathya Sai Baba Gang” murdered over a hundred people, including Mr. Venkatamuni (since proven a bold-faced lie). These are just a few examples (out of scores) that reveal the true modus operandi of critics and ex-devotees that wholly negates their so-called “credibility” and “integrity”.
  • Several critics of Sai Baba (i.e., Robert Priddy, Sanjay Dadlani, Tony O’Clery, UsedByBaba, Barbara Dent and R.F.J. Sandt) have used numerous incognito internet names, attempting to pass themselves off as various individuals, including Pro-Sai activists. This type of fully documented and very disturbing online behavior (Refs: 0102) strongly argues that many of the allegations against Sai Baba may be entirely fabricated by mentally unsound people whose primary goal is to deceive.
  • Critics have ridiculously asserted (with no proof whatsoever) that Sathya Sai Baba is a “pedophile” who runs elite pedophile and human trafficking rings by shipping Negros to India from New York’s ghettos for sexual purposes (Ref). Despite these absurd and outlandish allegations, Sathya Sai Baba and the Sai Organization have never (ever) been charged or implicated with any pedophile rings or people trafficking rings (either directly, indirectly or otherwise). Nor have any reputable media agencies or independent journalists been able to confirm even one single instance of alleged pedophilia and/or human trafficking related to Sai Baba or the Sai Organisation.
  • The widely dispersed core allegations against Sathya Sai Baba can be directly traced to Conny Larsson, a vocal critic and founding member to the Anti-Sai Movement. Shortly after his defection from Sathya Sai Baba in 1999, Conny Larsson developed from a vocal ex-devotee to an “internationally renowned” self-proclaimed prophet and psychic trance medium for the spirit of Maharshi Vyasa. During Conny Larsson’s metamorphosis into a psychic channeler and spirit medium, Ex-Devotees have purposely suppressed and avoided any and all discussion about Conny Larsson’s psychic claims and obviously fear the repercussions that one of the founding members to the Anti-Sai Movement would be perceived to be a loon, charlatan and possible schizophrenic (as Conny self-disclosed his psychiatric diagnosis made by a psychiatrist of him being “psychoinfantile”, which is also known as Histrionic Personality Disorder). Moreno has argued that Conny Larsson’s self-disclosed history of his life-time involvement with psychiatrists, psychotherapists and deprogrammers might explain why he now claims to hear “spirit voices” in his head and claims to see and communicate with dead people and dead animals (Ref).
  • The widely dispersed core allegations against Sathya Sai Baba can be directly traced to Tal Brooke, a fundamentalist and evangelical Christian who believes that all Gurus are in a state of perfect demon possession and that all Eastern Philosophies, New Age Beliefs and Hindu Beliefs are evil paths leading to Satan. What does this say about the integrity and objectivity of Tal Brooke’s claims against Sathya Sai Baba? 99% of the allegations against Sai Baba are linked (in one way or another) to Tal Brooke and his religiously-fueled propaganda, which he solicits to this day with expensive Google advertisements soliciting his Anti-Baba book.
  • Former Followers have a nasty habit of sexualizing everything pertaining to Sathya Sai Baba and Sai Proponents. This deviant and perverse sexualization of Sai Baba is a highly prevalent tactic employed by former followers (Ref), even with absurd claims that Sai Baba is engaging in questionable sexual acts in full view of thousands of devotees while being recorded on video. For example, see the edited Ex-Baba movie clip entitled Sai Baba Groin (approximately 950kb, wmv file). Robert Priddy (one of the main spokespersons for the Anti-Sai movement) attempted to portray Sathya Sai Baba as a homosexual and transvestite (Ref). Ex-Devotees have also maliciously accused Joe Moreno of being sexually abused by Sathya Sai Baba despite his many repeated clarifications to the contrary (Ref). Robert Priddy has openly falsified sexual molestation claims against Moreno (Refs: 0102030405) and Reinier van der Sandt (the webmaster and registrant for the largest Anti-Baba domains on the world-wide-web) has similarly published falsified and fraudulent sexual abuse libels against Moreno on the ExBaba Domain (Ref). Moreno has also been targeted by critics and hundreds of webpages have been created to defame and libel him (Ref). Ex-Devotees have even resorted to screencap fraud against Moreno. This type of blatant dishonesty strongly suggests that critics are not as truthful, sincere or compassionate as they claim to be.

The Secret Agenda Of The ‘Secret Swami’:
Alaya Rahm, one of the prime ‘witnesses’ who alleged sexual impropriety against Sai Baba, self-dismissed his bogus lawsuits against Sathya Sai Baba, Dr. Michael Goldstein and the American Sathya Sai Baba Society (Ref) on the advice of his lawyer and after a damaging video-taped deposition was obtained from Lewis Kreydick (a ‘witness’ cited by Alaya Rahm himself). Joe Moreno (a Pro-Sai Activist) provided a scanned index to all relevant court records on his Pro-Sai website, saisathyasai.com.

In “Response To Form Interrogatories” in Alaya Rahm’s self-dismissed lawsuit against the Sathya Sai Baba Society (Form Interrogatory No. 6.3, Set One) Alaya Rahm fully admitted that he had been a daily user of illegal street drugs and alcohol from 1995 – 2005. Consequently, during Alaya Rahm’s “Divine Downfall” and India Today Anti-Sai interviews and during the filming of the BBC Documentary “Secret Swami” and the “Seduced By Sai Baba” Danish Documentary, Alaya Rahm was under the influence of illegal street drugs and alcohol while relating his alleged sexual encounters with Sathya Sai Baba. This crucial information wholly undermines Alaya Rahm’s credibility and irreparably compromises the integrity of his claims. Needless to say, Alaya Rahm’s alcoholism and drug addiction have been purposely suppressed from the general public by Anti-Sai Activists, the Rahm Family and the media (Ref).

Critic’s responded to Alaya Rahm’s failed lawsuit by wholly misrepresenting the facts (Ref) and heavily cited an alleged and secretive letter written by Attorney William Brelsford (Alaya Rahm’s pro-bono lawyer). Then critics flip-flopped and accused Attorney William Brelsford of incompetence (Ref) even though they adamantly refuse to remove his “seriously deficient” comments from their Anti-Sai websites.

These are verifiable facts about the Sai Baba Debate & Online Controversy and despite the alleged ‘Sai Baba Sex Scandal’, the absurd allegations of ‘Elite Pedophile Rings’, the absurd allegations of ‘Human Trafficking Rings’, claims of ‘Murder’, claims of ‘International Racketeering’, claims of being affiliated with ‘Terrorists’ and ‘Terrorism’, accusations of bribery, allegations of ‘Serial Sexual Abuse’, claims of fraud, fakery and deceit, etc. (the list of gutter accusations goes on and on), Sathya Sai Baba and the Sai Organization have never (ever) been charged with any crime.

Ex-Devotees and critics are desperate to smear Sathya Sai Baba and their numerous libels, defamations and shocking online behavior are recorded on the internet as testaments to this fact.

Important Related Links:
- Alaya Rahm Self-Dismissed His Own Lawsuit Against The SSB Society
- Alaya Rahm – A Decade-Long Daily User Of Illegal Street Drugs And Alcohol
- A Scathing Response To Critics About Alaya Rahm’s Failed Lawsuit
- The Truth About The ‘Secret Swami’ Program
- The ‘Open Letter’ To The Prashanti Council – Defamations Addressed
- Prof. Venkataraman Writes About The Sai Controversy
- Bryan Ronald Wilson (Emeritus Professor) Describes The Apostate Syndrome

For further information, please feel free to contact Joe Moreno.

Bryan Ronald Wilson, Emeritus Professor, Describes The Apostate Syndrome

Bryan Wilson (1926 – 2004), Emeritus Professor at All Souls College, Oxford was one of the most well known British scholars of religion and wrote extensively about New Religious Movements and apostates (ex-members who become openly critical of the group they were once a member of). In an article entitled Apostates and New Religious Movements, Bryan R. Wilson’s description of apostates fits Ex-Devotees of Sathya Sai Baba perfectly. Wilson wrote:

“Apostasy may be considered no less to occur when a single erstwhile believer renounces his vows and his former religious allegiance…Some of the lurid stories of monastic life, purportedly related by apostated monks and nuns — the celebrated case of Maria Monk was widely publicised — turned out to be largely fictional, but were much used by the anti-Catholic propagandist media of the day. In the present age of religious pluralism, in which a spirit of ecumenism prevails among many of the major Christian denominations, and in which the so-called ‘switching’ of allegiance from one of these movements to another is not uncommon, the charge of apostasy is less frequently heard. But since c. 1960, with the appearance in western society of various new minority movements which have distinctive religious teachings and which require a strong sense of specific commitment, a member who departs is likely to be regarded as apostatizing, and all the more so, of course, if that member then proceeds to ridicule or excoriate his former beliefs and to vilify those who were previously his close associates.

In recent decades, given the emergence of so many new religious bodies which make strong demands on the loyalty of their members, instances of apostasy have become matters of considerable attention for the mass media. The apostate’s story, in which he is usually presented as a victim, is seen as good news-copy for the media, particularly if he offers to ‘reveal’ aspects, and perhaps secrets, of the movement to which he formerly belonged. In consequence, apostates receive perhaps an unwarranted amount of media attention, particularly when they are able to present their previous allegiance in terms both of their own vulnerability and the manipulation, deception, or coercion exercised by the leaders and members of the movement into which they were recruited. Because these accounts are often the only information normally available to the general public about minority religions, and certainly the most widely disseminated information, the apostate becomes a central figure in the formation (or misformation) of opinion in the public domain concerning these movements.

Academic scholars interested in religious minorities, and in particular sociologists, in whose field this subject matter particularly lies, normally pursue their scholarly enquiries by a variety of well-recognized methods. They gather their data not only by archival research and the study of printed matter and documents, but also by participant observation, interviews, questionnaire surveys and, directly to the point at issue here, from informants. Apostates are often very willing informants, but sociologists generally exercise considerable caution with respect to this possible source of evidence. As I have written elsewhere, in discussion of the sociologist’s techniques of inquiry:

Informants who are mere contacts and who have no personal motives for what they tell are to be preferred to those who, for their own purposes, seek to use the investigator. The disaffected and the apostate are in particular informants whose evidence has to be used with circumspection. The apostate is generally in need of self-justification. He seeks to reconstruct his own past, to excuse his former affiliations, and to blame those who were formerly his closest associates. Not uncommonly the apostate learns to rehearse an ‘atrocity story’ to explain how, by manipulation, trickery, coercion, or deceit, he was induced to join or to remain within an organization that he now forswears and condemns. Apostates, sensationalized by the press, have sometimes sought to make a profit from accounts of their experiences in stories sold to newspapers or produced as books (sometimes written by ‘ghost’ writers). [Bryan Wilson, The Social Dimensions of Sectarianism, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990, p.19.]

Sociologists and other investigators into minority religions have thus come to recognize a particular constellation of motives that prompt apostates in the stance they adopt relative to their previous religious commitment and their more recent renunciation of it. The apostate needs to establish his credibility both with respect to his earlier conversion to a religious body and his subsequent relinquishment of that commitment. To vindicate himself in regard to his volte facerequires a plausible explanation of both his (usually sudden) adherence to his erstwhile faith and his no less sudden abandonment and condemnation of it. Academics have come to recognize the ‘atrocity story’ as a distinctive genre of the apostate, and have even come to regard it as a recognizable category of phenomena [A.D. Shupe, Jr., and D. G. Bromley, 'Apostates and Atrocity Stories', in B. Wilson (ed.), The Social Impact of New Religious Movements, New York, Rose of Sharon Press, 1981, pp. 179-215.] The apostate typically represents himself having been introduced to his former allegiance at a time when he was especially vulnerable — depressed, isolated, lacking social or financial support, alienated from his family, or some other such circumstance. His former associates are now depicted as having prevailed upon him by false claims, deceptions, promises of love, support, enhanced prospects, increased well-being, or the like. In fact, the apostate story proceeds, they were false friends, seeking only to exploit his goodwill, and extract from him long hours of work without pay, or whatever money or property he possessed. Thus, the apostate presents himself as ‘a brand plucked from the burning,’ as having been not responsible for his actions when he was inducted into his former religion, and as having ‘come to his senses’ when he left. Essentially, his message is that ‘given the situation, it could have happened to anyone.’ They are entirely responsible and they act with malice aforethought against unsuspecting, innocent victims. By such a representation of the case, the apostate relocates responsibility for his earlier actions, and seeks to reintegrate with the wider society which he now seeks to influence, and perhaps to mobilize, against the religious group which he has lately abandoned.

New movements, which are relatively unfamiliar in their teachings and practices, and the beliefs and organization of which are designed in terms that are new or newly adapted, are most susceptible to public suspicion; If they have secret or undisclosed teachings, or appear to be exceptionally diligent in seeking converts, or have a distinctive appeal to one or another section of the community (e.g., the young; students; ethnic minorities; immigrants, etc.) or if the promises of benefit to believers exceed the every-day expectations of the public at large, then they may easily become objects of popular opprobrium or even hostility. The atrocity stories of apostates, particularly when enlarged by the sensationalist orientation of the press, feed these tendencies, and enhance the newsworthiness of further atrocity stories. Newspapers are will known to recapitulate earlier sensationalist accounts when locating new stories in similar vein about particular movements — a practice designated by some sociologists as the use of ‘negative summary events.’ ['This refers to the journalistic description of a situation or event in such a way as to capture and express its negative essence as part of an intermittent and slow-moving story. An apparently isolated happening is thereby used as an occasion for keeping the broader, controversial phenomenon in the public mind.' -- James A. Beckford, Cult Controversies: The Societal Response to New Religious Movements, London, Tavistock, 1985, p. 235.] By this means, the dramatic import of each apostate’s story is reinforced in its significance, to the detriment of objective and ethically neutral enquiry into religious phenomena of the kind undertaken by academic sociologists. Contemporary religious bodies, operating in a context of rapid social change and changing perceptions of religious and spiritual belief, are likely to be particularly susceptible to the disparagement and misrepresentation which occurs through the circulation and repetition of the accounts of apostates.

Neither the objective sociological researcher nor the court of law can readily regard the apostate as a creditable or reliable source of evidence. He must always be seen as one whose personal history predisposes him to bias with respect to both his previous religious commitment and affiliations, the suspicion must arise that he acts from a personal motivation to vindicate himself and to regain his self-esteem, by showing himself to have been first a victim but subsequently to have become a redeemed crusader. As various instances have indicated, he is likely to be suggestible and ready to enlarge or embellish his grievances to satisfy that species of journalist whose interest is more in sensational copy than in a objective statement of the truth.”

INFORMATION ABOUT BRYAN RONALD WILSON
Bryan Ronald Wilson is the reader Emeritus in Sociology in the University of Oxford. From 1963 to 1993, he was also a Fellow of All Souls College, and in 1993 was elected an Emeritus Fellow.

For more than forty years, he has conducted research into minority religious movements in Britain and overseas (in the United States, Ghana, Kenya, Belgium and Japan, among other places). His work has involved reading the publications of these movements and, wherever possible, associating with their members in their meetings, services and homes. It has also entailed sustained attention to, and critical appraisal of, the works of other scholars.

He holds the degrees of B.Sc. (Econ) and Ph.D. of the University of London and the M.A. of the University of Oxford. In 1984, the University of Oxford recognized the value of his published work by conferring upon him the degree of D.Litt. In 1992, the Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium awarded him the degree of Doctor Honoris Causa. In 1994, he was elected a Fellow of the British Academy.

At various times he has held the following additional appointments:

  • Commonwealth Fund Fellow (Harkness Foundation) at the University of California, Berkeley, United States, 1957-8
  • Visiting Professor, University of Ghana, 1964
  • Fellow of the American Counsel of Learned Societies, at the University of California, Berkeley, United States, 1966-7
  • Research Consultant for the Sociology of Religion to the University of Padua, Italy, 1968-72
  • Visiting Fellow of The Japan Society, 1975
  • Visiting Professor, The Catholic University of Louvain, Belgium, 1976; 1982; 1986; 1993
  • Snider Visiting Professor, University of Toronto, Canada, 1978
  • Visiting Professor in the Sociology of Religion, and Consultant for Religious Studies to the Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand, 1980-1
  • Scott Visiting Fellow, Ormond College, University of Melbourne, Australia, 1981
  • Visiting Professor, University of Queensland, Australia, 1986
  • Distinguished Visiting Professor, University of California, Santa Barbera, California, United States, 1987
  • For the years 1971-5, he was the president of the Conférence Internationale de Sociologie Religieuse (the world-wide organization for the discipline); in 1991 he was elected Honorary President of this organization now re-named as Société Internationale de Sociologie des Religons
  • Council Member of the Society for the Scientific Study of Religion (United States) 1977-9
  • For several years, European Associate Editor, Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion
  • For six years, Joint Editor of the Annual Review of the Social Science of Religion.
  • He has lectured extensively on minority religious movements in Britain, Australia, Belgium, Canada, Japan, and the United States, and occasionally in Germany, Finland, France, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden.
  • He has been called as an expert witness on sects in courts in Britain, the Netherlands, New Zealand and South Africa and has provided evidence on affidavit for courts in Australia and in France. He has also been called upon to give expert written advice on religious movements for the Parliamentary Home Affairs Committee of the House of Commons.

Among other works, he has published nine books devoted in whole or in part to minority religious movements:

  1. Sects and Society: the Sociology of Three Religious Groups in Britain, London: Heinemann and Berkeley: University of California Press, 1961; reprinted, Westport, Conn., United States; Greenwood Press, 1978
  2. Patterns of Sectarianism (edited) London; Heinemann, 1967
  3. Religious Sects, London: Weidenfeld and Nicholson; New York: McGraw Hill, 1970 (also published in translation in French, German, Spanish, Swedish and Japanese)
  4. Magic and the Millennium, London: Heinemann, and New York: Harper and Row, 1973
  5. Contemporary Transformations of Religion, London: Oxford University Press, 1976 (also published in translation in Italian and Japanese)
  6. The Social Impact of the New Religious Movements (edited) New York: Rose of Sharon Press, 1981
  7. Religion in Sociological Perspective, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1982 (also published in translation in Italian; Japanese translation in preparation)
  8. The Social Dimensions of Sectarianism Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990
  9. A Time to Chant: the Soka Gakki Buddhists in Britain, [with K. Dobbelaere] Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994 (Japanese translation in preparation).

He has also contributed to more than twenty-five articles on minority religious movements, to edited works and learned journals in Britain, the United States, France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Japan, and to the Encyclopedia Britannica, the Encyclopedia of Social Sciences, and the Encyclopedia of Religion, and is currently preparing a contribution for the Encyclopedia Italiana.

Reference

Barry Pittard & Robert Priddy Associate Themselves With Proven Perverts

Barry Pittard is the self-professed “international coordinator in attempts to bring Sai Baba to justice” and is the founder of the bogus “global coalition” F.D.S.S.B.. His sidekick is the Anti-Sai Extremist from Oslo Norway, Robert Priddy. Although Barry Pittard and Robert Priddy have thrust themselves into the limelight as being the main spokespersons for the Anti-Sai Movement, they purposely suppress the fact that they explicitly, unabashedly and wholly endorse, promote and associate themselves with proven and known perverts, sexual deviants and pathological liars.

The following screen-caps show how both Pittard & Priddy solicit Sanjay Dadlani’s “Sai Baba EXPOSED” blog on their wordpress.com accounts (click on thumbnails to enlarge):
Robert Priddy Promoting Sanjays BlogBarry Pittard Promoting Sanjays Blog

Barry Pittard and Robert Priddy see absolutely nothing wrong with Sanjay Dadlani’s homosexual-fantasizing slurs, Jesus Sex Fetish and Boot Sex Fetish. Although Sanjay went around secretly stalking innocent women (calling them “bitches” and “sluts”, saying “they want it”, calling Mothers “MILFs”, photographing females and teenagers up their dresses and under tables and publishing these photos on his streetbitches blog), Barry and Robert are right there holding hands with Sanjay. Shame on Barry Pittard and Robert Priddy!

Sanjay even posted on the QuickTopic Forum (using multiple fake names, including female names) and made disgusting comments under the name “Marquis de Sade”, even duplicating a post about a Priest ejaculating on the face of a little girl, as related by her brother. Sanjay even posted under the name “kick his head in” and said that someone should murder Sathya Sai Baba (of course, this is the same guy who rejoiced when a Sai Baba temple was bombed). Nice friend you have there, Barry & Robert.

Barry Pittard and Robert Priddy are fully aware of Reinier van der Sandt’s very disturbing admission to viewing child pornography. Barry and Robert purposely ignore the fact that Reinier used numerous fake names on the SSB2 Yahoo Group and hold hands with him as well (as can be seen with their association with him through the exbaba website).

Barry Pittard and Robert Priddy defend, promote and endorse perverts, defamers and liars. What does this say about Barry & Robert? I think the answer is self-evident. As they say, “Birds of feather flock together”.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 107 other followers