ALERT: Be Wary Of The Anti-Sai “SathyaSaiBabaNews” WordPress Blog

ALERT: Be Wary Of The Anti-Sai “SathyaSaiBabaNews” WordPress Blog

Robert Priddy (a caustic critic and defamer of Sathya Sai Baba) created yet another Anti-Sai WordPress blog entitled (misleadingly) “SathyaSaiBabaNews”. Robert Priddy already has an Anti-Sai WordPress blog specific to Sathya Sai Baba and he created another Sai-related WordPress blog to deceive unsuspecting Sai Devotees into thinking his blog is Pro-Sai when it most certainly is not.

Of course, this is not the first time that Robert Priddy attempted to deceive unsuspecting Sai Devotees with misleading website names. Robert Priddy anonymously purchased the Anti-Sai domain “” and he was prohibited from posting Sai-related material on that domain because it fraudulently and falsely attempted to present itself as an official website belonging to the Sathya Sai Baba Organization in the UK. Consequently, Robert Priddy changed the domain name to Read The Full Story Here.

Robert Priddy’s Known And Current Anti-Sai Websites As Of January 14th 2009:

  1. (472 webpages and counting)
  2. (92 webpages)
  3. (410 webpages)
  4. (8 webpages)
  5. (96 webpages)
  6. (29 webpages)
  7. (514 webpages and counting)
  8. (13 webpages and counting)

Robert Priddy’s Former Anti-Sai Websites (Most deleted for defamatory content):


There is little doubt that Robert Priddy is frantic and desperate to spam the internet with his Anti-Sai propaganda because his current robertpriddy Anti-Sai WordPress blog gets very little traffic and is apparently a major disappointment to him.

As a matter of fact, the following screencap of blog traffic (taken today, January 14th 2009) reveals that this Pro-Sai WordPress blog receives almost Ten Times more unique visitors than Robert Priddy’s extensive Anti-Sai WordPress blog. See For Yourself:

Objective Blog Stats Comparison

Objective Blog Stats Comparison

The truth of the matter is that Robert Priddy is a hopeless, obsessed and bitter critic of Bhagavan Sri Sathya Sai Baba. Robert Critchton Priddy’s profuse disinformation and monomaniacal propagandizing makes him appear mentally imbalanced and in need of orthodox psychological help.

Basava Premanand And The ‘Venkatamuni Murder’ Lie

Basava Premanand And The ‘Venkatamuni Murder’ Lie
Basava Premanand (a fanatic atheist, rationalist and skeptic) ridiculously alleged the following about Sathya Sai Baba:
Basava Premanand: “I have the records of more than a hundred persons destroyed by the Satya Sai Baba gang beginning with one Mr. Venkatamuni of Madres who was done away at Madurai in an air conditioned room and then after getting death certificates from doctors taken to Madras by Satya Sai Baba in his own car and cremated without giving any information to the police and thus hushing up the matter. Afterwards the doctors who gave the death certificates also succumbed to death. In these deaths the mode of operation is in five ways: 1. Death by car accidents; 2. Death by Heart failure; 3. Death by poisoning; 4. Death by hanging; 5. Death by drowning.”

Premanand’s Gutter Lie Refuted & Exposed By RadioSai
Mr. Venkatamuni’s son (Mr. Praveen Venkatamuni) has since come forward (at the request of RadioSai) and thoroughly refuted (on video) Premanand’s absurd and gutter lie that his father was “done away in Madurai”. Mr. Praveen Venkatamuni unequivocally stated that:

  1. His father was not murdered.
  2. His father died at Kodaikanal on June 13th 1966.
  3. Many people were present when his father died.
  4. No one suspected any foul play.
  5. His father’s funeral lasted 11 days with many family members present.
  6. There was no secrecy regarding his father’s death and funeral.

Read for yourself:

Excerpts of a conversation between Mr. Praveen and Prof. G. Venkataraman

G. Venkataraman: This is from the article written by an Icelander now living in Sweden. He says a lot of horrible things. This is what he says: ‘In a bold style, Mr. Venkatamuni of Madras, India was killed at Madurai by ‘Sai Baba gang’ and then after getting death certificate from the doctors, taken to Madras by Sathya Sai Baba in his own car and cremated without giving any information to the police, and thus hushing up the matter. Afterwards, the doctors who gave the certificates also succumbed to death. The narration can be read in August 1993 volume of the ‘Indian Skeptic’. Now this is a very clever way of speaking. The first question to you is when did your father die? And please tell us how he died.

Mr. Praveen Venkatamuni: My father breathed his last on Swami’s lap on June 13, 1966. At that time, somewhere around May, Swami had come to Chennai en-route to Kodaikanal (then, Madras) and told my mother: “I am taking Venkatamuni with me, have you any objection?” She said: ‘No Swami, I have no objection, You can take him to Kodaikanal’. So, we left in a fleet of cars. I was a part of the entourage along with Mr. Goganeni Venkateswara Rao, Mr. Kamavadhani, Mr. Chini Rao – the third son of Mrs. Anjali Devi, the film actress, Mr. Dasaratharama Reddy and a few others. So, we were all there and I was about 14-15 years old at that time. We all went to Kodai Kanal and stayed in the guest house of Mr. Narasimhachary, who was a long-standing devotee of Bhagavan. It was situated right on the lake.

We stayed there for about 10-15 days and Swami used to go round the lake on a walk and we used to accompany Him. Lots of people used to come and look at Him and return. This was in May-June 1966. And a couple of occasions, we went boating in the lake too. Few used to come to see Swami at that time. He was very free and I was given the duty of carrying His tambulam (beetle leaf) box. I did not know how to prepare it but was given the duty to carry it all along wherever Swami went.

So we were there for about 10-15 days and after that we began to return. We left Kodai Kanal and reached Madurai, where the organization had organized a public meeting for Bhagavan. We stayed in Mr. Subramanyam Chettiar’s house in Satya Sai Nagar. It was very hot, being June, and the public program with a Divine discourse was organised. Swami was supposed to leave for Brindavan the next day by car. My father and I were supposed to return to Madras. So, Swami was asking us if we would like to accompany Him to Brindavan, but my father said that it was already 15 days since he had come and he had a lot of work to attend to at his office. So, he asked to permit him to go to Madras first, and then visit Brindavan.

We were all staying in Mr. Chettiar’s house. We had booked tickets to return to Madras by train for June 14. And Swami was to leave on the morning of June 15. On June 13 was scheduled Swami’s discourse. We were all staying with Swami and had dinner with Him on the 13th. Being summer, Swami suggested, “Why don’t we have beds in the open terrace?” Swami was in His room and we were all sleeping in the open terrace. We finished dinner and returned to His room, and we were sitting and discussing about Swami’s discourse and Him on the terrace.

Suddenly, Swami walked onto the terrace and we all stood up. Swami asked all of us to sit down. Then, He went and sat on the bed of my father, which was on the floor. So, father starting getting up as a mark to respect for Swami, and he said, ‘Swami, I am feeling very giddy; I am going to faint’. So, Swami immediately stood up, caught hold of him and made him sit down slowly saying: “Venkatamuni, everything will be alright. Don’t worry, I am here”. And at the same time, he had a bout of breathing trouble.

We were all there watching the entire incident, about 10-15 people, including the members of the Chettiar family. So, immediately, Swami made him sit on the bed and He too sat beside him. Swami then put my father’s head onto His lap (though my father was reluctant), and just then he breathed his last in Swami’s lap.

We were all simply watching. We thought he has fainted as he was a diabetic. I was a kid then and did not know much about the right medication in such situations. A doctor was summoned who confirmed his death. We were all taken aback; we did not know what to do. Swami took control of the entire proceedings and said that we were leaving to Madras the same night. So, police permission was obtained. I was told a doctor’s death certificate was also obtained. I am not able to recall who the doctor was. But the doctor’s certificate and the police certificate were surely obtained.

The documents were perfect. And the same night, maybe within 1 hour, we all left to Madras along with the body. I was sitting next to Swami. Mr. Raja Reddy was also there driving the car. Father’s body was coming in a separate car behind Swami’s. We reached Madras early the next morning. My elder brother and my mother, at that time, had gone to Vijayawada for a wedding. So, they were returning the same day. They got to know that Swami is coming to Madras and had also got some unclear news about my father merging with Swami. We drove straight to our house.

Swami stayed at Madras for those 11 days in Mr. Venkateswara Rao’s house. He was there until the last ceremony was completed. He used to come to our house everyday and give us talks, encouraging us all the time. He said that my father had merged in Him. He affirmed that there was no punarjanma (re-birth) for my father. That was the first time somebody merged in Swami while on His lap.

Everyday harikatha (singing of God’s glory) was held for all the 11 days in the compound of our house. Most of our closest relatives who were also present at that time were against Swami. Though, now everyone has come into Swami’s fold. Even though they were against Swami at that time, they had to attend the rituals for the eleven days. After everything was over, Swami came and blessed my mother and us, and then left for Brindavan.

G. Venkataraman: Pardon me for asking this. But because all sorts of unfounded allegations have been made, I have to ask you this. Did your relatives, who did not believe in Swami, have any suspicion of any foul-play in all this?

Mr. Praveen Venkatamuni: No, Sir. My relatives did not cast any ill-feeling, or uttered even a single adverse word about the whole incident.

G. Venkataraman: So, they thought that his death was natural, as anyway, he was a diabetic. How old was he at the time of his death?

Mr. Praveen Venkatamuni: He was 55.

G. Venkataraman: So, there was no question of even a trace of any such suspicion by anyone, including your mother.

Mr. Praveen Venkatamuni: Absolutely none, sir. Nobody had any suspicion, whatsoever.

G. Venkataraman: Were you at any time conscious of the fact that certain things have been said against Swami about this incident? Or, are you surprised to hear what I told you just now?

Mr. Praveen Venkatamuni: This is news to me. I am hearing about this for the first time.

G. Venkataraman: You know, there are reasons, why I am asking you all this. First, you told me that your father passed away in 1966. The man who is making the allegation is quoting an article that was published in the ‘Indian Skeptic’ in August 1993. I am wondering, who is this man who came and investigated it? Did any of them come and ask you about anything?

Mr. Praveen Venkatamuni: None so far. Nobody has approached me or my family members.

G. Venkataraman: And still, they have written this. Here is a very strange sentence which gives a hint of how things are done. The person writes that ‘afterwards, the doctors who gave the death certificate also succumbed to death’. Everybody dies… The way it is written looks as something criminal was done to get rid of someone. You know, technically all that the sentence says is that the doctor is going to die. Everybody is going to die, for that matter. But the context in which it is written, is somewhat disturbing. The fact is that in 1993, for whatever reason, ‘Indian Skeptic’ – I had never heard of this journal before – writes an article and they don’t even bother to verify facts and this is quoted as the ‘holy truth’.

Mr. Praveen Venkatamuni: Even I have not heard about this journal till date.

G. Venkataraman: Now, let us spend the rest of the time the way it should be done. This is entirely for the record. First of all, let me start with the recall of what Swami said in 2006 in Trayee. You tell us the story after giving the background to it.

Mr. Praveen Venkatamuni: Swami gave a talk during a Trayee session in Brindavan on Sunday, June 4, 2006. And this has been penned down by my son who was doing his B.Com in Brindavan. This is the incident narrated by Swami. The note goes as below:

Swami had called for a Trayee Session. I was lucky to be seated in the first row and was doubly blessed in getting the golden opportunity of pressing the Divine Lotus Feet of our Lord. As the session went on, Swami suddenly looked at me and said: “Whenever I visited Madras, I stayed in the house of Venkatamuni, which is in 2nd Cross…”. He again looked at me when I said, it was Surya Rao Road, to which Swami said “Yes”. Swami narrated that the house was filled with people when He gave darshan. Swami continued to say that He asked Susheelamma (Venkatamuni’s wife) whether Venkatamuni should be with her or be with Swami; and she had said that he should be only with Swami.

Then Swami narrated that he had taken him to Kodai Kanal and once they returned, they stayed in Madurai. All were seated, when suddenly Venkatamuni told Swami that he was feeling giddy. Swami asked him to come to Him. Venkatamuni came to Swami, held His Lotus Feet and breathed his last while still holding onto His Lotus Feet. The second son of Venkatamuni who was just 15 years old was present when this happened. He had not even cried on seeing that his father was no more. He said that when Swami is with him, he does not need anything else.

Swami sat by his side in the car all the way to Madras. Even Susheelamma did not weep as she was sure that her husband had attained mukti (liberation) by breathing his last at the Lotus Feet. She told Swami what else she can pray for? Swami remarked that after Subbamma, it was Susheelamma who used to cook food for Him. She used to pack and bring even the curry leaves from Madras for cooking. Once Swami asked her as to why she was straining herself? Then she sent the cook who was in their house to cook food for Swami. His name was Vishwanath. She told Swami that he would do the cooking for Swami. Even when she was 80 years old, she would climb the stairs up and down to serve Swami.

Once she told Me that her children should be married. She had two sons and one daughter. Swami said that He performed the marriage of her first son, who has a son and a daughter. The son studied at Puttaparthi and Swami got him married too. He is now in Delhi employed in a reputed company. Swami said that He also performed the marriage of the daughter in Puttaparthi. He continued further saying that He performed the marriage of the second son of Sushelamma (i.e., myself) too.

He asked me to stand up so that all could see me and asked to be seated. Then, Swami said that I have a brother and all members of my family pray to Swami for mukti (liberation) and all of them listen to the words of Swami. If these boys go out, they will get good positions, but they all obey the words of Swami, and they are all very happy. Whoever listens to the words of Swami will always be happy. Swami pointed out to me and said that while joining this college, my mother told me not to join any groups and should always think of Swami, do service and behave well.

Then He asked, ‘Did she not tell you?’ I nodded my head. And then, Swami said that yesterday, my mother had come to Brindavan and asked Him how her son was doing. Swami told her that he was doing well and there is nothing to worry. Then Swami said that my father had so much confidence in God even from his tender age. Swami continued by saying that all should have faith in God. He said that nobody was as devoted to Him as Sushelamma. Her devotion to Swami had no limits; she was an example of a great devotee.

Swami mentioned about each and every member of our family and how each of them listens and obeys His words with faith and love. He said that it requires the ‘punyam’ (good fortune) of countless previous births to be with Swami. Swami has set our family as an example for others. He spoke continuously without a break or interruption. Swami was very happy when He spoke about our family. And at the end He gave a big smile.

This is how he has recorded the talk.

RadioSai Interview ReferenceRadioSai Videos Reference

Therefore, Basava Premanand blatantly lied about Mr. Venkatamuni. It is apparent that Basava Premanand received inaccurate and embellished information regarding the death of Mr. Venkatamuni. Instead of researching and verifying facts, Basava Premanand blindly believed and publicly published wholly inaccurate information about Venkatamuni’s death as the irrefutable truth.

Basava Premanand cannot provide a scintilla of credible or verifiable evidence to back up his absurd claims that Mr. Venkatamuni was murdered and that the doctors who issued his death certificate were similarly murdered. Basava Premanand is notorious for his frenzied, childish and laughable conspiracy theories against Sathya Sai Baba. Furthermore, Robert Priddy (one of the main spokespersons for the Anti-Sai Movement) widely dispersed Premanand’s gutter accusations about Venkatamuni on his Anti-Sai blog and Anti-Sai websites.

RadioSai’s rebuttal (obtaining a first-hand testimony from Venkatamuni’s son, recorded on video) is another elucidative example that exposes the gutter, smear, hate and defamation campaigns waged against Sathya Sai Baba by critics and ex-devotees.

Well done, RadioSai!


Reference (With Videos)

Sathya Sai Baba And The Idi Amin Picture

Sathya Sai Baba And The Idi Amin Picture

On the ExBaba Domain, a fake picture of Sathya Sai Baba holding hands with Idi Amin was created and published by Reinier Van Der Sandt (a caustic critic and defamer of the guru):

Fake Picture Of Sathya Sai Baba Holding Hands With Idi Amin

Fake Picture Of Sathya Sai Baba Holding Hands With Idi Amin

Although critics and ex-devotees continually boast how “honest”, “credible” and “non-vindictive” they are, their actions speak volumes for them to the contrary. The truth of the matter is that critics of Sathya Sai Baba are thoroughly dishonest, non-credible and vindictive individuals who continually attempt to con the general public with their viperine scribbings, fake and/or sexually deviant composite images and unsubstantiated accusations.

Reinier Van Der Sandt’s fake picture of Sathya Sai Baba holding hands with Idi Amin was published in Basava Premanand‘s Indian Sceptic tabloid. Reinier’s fake picture was skewed, air-brushed and made black & white by the Indian Skeptic in a brazen attempt to deceive their readers into thinking that the fake picture was an original. See for yourself:

Exposing The Idi Amin Fake Picture

Exposing The Idi Amin Fake Picture

What was the end result of the Indian Skeptic’s subterfuge? One of the Indian Skeptic’s readers (by the name of Sean G. Stanton) submitted an entry to the ex-baba guestbook expressing shock and surprise that Sathya Sai Baba was literally holding hands with Idi Amin! Sean G. Stanton said:
Comment From Sean G Stanton On ExBaba

Comment From Sean G Stanton On ExBaba

Why does Sairadio never protest the pedophilia of Sai Baba. Why is Sairadio so enraged by the recent post by a person named Missy. The Indian Skeptic published in India with readers around the world a cover photograph on their magazine showing Sai Baba holding hands with the violent former dictator of Uganda Idi Amin. Everyone knows Idi Amin was known for his mass killings, extreme human rights abuses, the destruction of the Ugandan economy, and was even thought to be a cannibal.

He is known for the expulsion of Asians from Uganda. He was known to “love wealth more than human life” and terrorized his people. He was called the ” Butcher of Uganda.” Is this Sai Baba’s idea of his own words ” Love all Serve All Help Ever Hurt Never.” ?

The post that the Sairadio wants to have removed is not to far fetched considering who some of Sai Baba’s friends may be.

First and foremost, Sean G. Stanton incorrectly called RadioSai “SaiRadio” several times. Secondly, Sean G. Stanton blindly believed the fake picture was authentic and gullibly accepted it without question although he is apparently an admirer of rationality, logic, science and double-checking facts! Thirdly, Sean G. Stanton is obviously unaware that not even one parent has lodged a formal complaint, basic police complaint, public grievance or court case against Sathya Sai Baba in India for the alleged molestation of his/her child. When parents are not protesting against Sai Baba, why should RadioSai?

Strangely enough, an internet search for the name “Sean G. Stanton” turned up a result for a “Sean G. Stanton” (age 30 residing in Gorham, Maine) who was arrested for operating under the influence of alcohol and attaching false plates to his car on 12/30/07. He received a $700 fine and a $150 fine (Ref).

One will notice how Reinier Van Der Sandt added the following clarification to Sean Stanton’s post:

[NOTE by ExBaba admin: The photo is a constructed image to illustrate the closeness that did exist between Sathya Sai Baba and Idi Amin (reported by Dr. G. Venkataraman on RadioSai]

Needless to say, the Indian Sceptic tabloid did not say one word about the image being a composite or a fake picture. Nor did the Indian Skeptic publish the original composite created by Reiner Van Der Sandt. Rather, the Indian Skeptic took the fake picture and altered it in an attempt to deceive their readers into thinking it was genuine. They suceeded.

These are the types of gutter individuals who have misled so many people about Sathya Sai Baba for so many years. The truth is now out and everyone can see and verify it for him/her self.

Also see:
Sathya Sai Baba And Idi Amin – The Facts

Why Is Robert Priddy Citing A Channeler & Medium Against Sathya Sai Baba?

Why Is Robert Priddy Citing A Channeler & Medium Against Sathya Sai Baba?

Robert Priddy (an ex-devotee who worshipped Sathya Sai Baba as God Incarnate for 17-26 years) has been widely promoting, citing and endorsing the Anti-Sai Activist Conny Larsson on his Anti-Sai websites and Anti-Sai WordPress blog (even as recently as October 14th 2008).

The widely dispersed core allegations against Sathya Sai Baba can be directly traced to two highly questionable characters in the Anti-Sai Movement, i.e., Conny Larsson and Tal Brooke. Although a separate article has been devoted to Tal Brooke, his religious fundamentalism, Christian extremism, experimentation with LSD and his defection from the Sai Movement due to an “out of body demonic encounter” (more than likely a drug-induced bad trip), this article will focus more on Robert Priddy and his psychic friend and co-conspirator Conny Larsson.

In Robert Priddy’s Pro-Sai Book Source Of The Dream, he talked several times about Conny Larsson and there is little doubt that Conny Larsson’s defection from the Sai Movement was the primary reason for his defection as well. Robert Priddy even attended a meeting at Stockholm Royal in Sweden and sat next to multi-millionaire Conny Larsson as a panelist member speaking against Sathya Sai Baba (Ref). Within the last few years, Conny Larsson has developed from a vocal ex-devotee to an “internationally renowned” psychic trance medium for the spirit of Maharshi Vyasa (amusingly, a claim that Christian Tal Brooke would argue to be demonic and Satanic in nature).

During Conny Larsson’s metamorphosis into a psychic channeler and spirit medium, Robert Priddy purposely suppressed and avoided all discussion of Conny Larsson’s psychic claims on his Anti-Sai websites (obviously fearing the repercussions that one of the founding members to the Anti-Sai Movement would be perceived to be a loon, charlatan and possible schizophrenic who hears “spirit voices” in his head). Even more amusing is Robert Priddy’s ceaseless trashing and bashing of psychics, channelers and mediums as con-men, liars, frauds, “true believers” and “absurd charlatans” belonging to the lunatic fringe seen in cults, ashrams and religious movements (see Priddy’s WordPress article entitled “SATHYA SAI BABA ‘CHANNELERS’ AND MEDIUMS”).

Robert Priddy can often be seen siding with Indian rationalists, skeptics and atheists and demands “scientific investigation” into Sathya Sai Baba’s purported miracles and world-wide manifestations. However, when it comes to Psychic Conny Larsson, Robert Priddy puts aside his pseudo-rationalistic, pseudo-skeptic and pseudo-scientific beliefs and openly praises, endorses and cites Psychic Conny Larsson as a man of integrity and honesty! This type of hilarious public posturing is dishonest and blatantly hypocritical. Needless to say, Robert Priddy is unable to make a sober or consistent argument against Sathya Sai Baba without shooting himself in the very same foot he so often sticks into his mouth.

Further adding to the overwhelming hypocrisy of it all, is the fact that Robert Priddy once professed belief in “elementals, elves, fairies, leprechauns, gnomes, trolls, water spirits, animal and plant spirits or ‘devas’ , angels, invisible helpers, shaman ‘spirits’, ‘allies’, UFOs, extra-terrestrials, possessive demons, Satan, Pan-figures and other demi-gods” (Ref).

Robert Priddy also attributed his most profound spiritual experiences to LSD-Induced hallucinations, which he has been praising for well over 30+ years. Even Robert Priddy’s son, Kai Nicolai Priddy, is a “true believer” in Astrology and is the webmaster and registrant for the Abacus Astrology Domain (Ref). Robert Priddy refuses to say one word about his own son’s “superstitious” beliefs although he trashes and bashes others for their “lunatic fringe” beliefs on his Anti-Sai WordPress blog.

Robert Priddy ceaselessly attempts to portray himself as an intelligent, scientific and rational individual even though his current friendship, association and Anti-Sai Activism with Psychic Trace Medium Conny Larsson speaks for him to the contrary.

These are the typical types of questionable characters who are attempting to smear, defame and ridicule Sathya Sai Baba. The truth is now out and there is no stopping it.


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: IPs usually fall within a “range” that makes the last 2 sets of number static. For example, the IP: would fall into the IP range: –

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 –

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


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


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


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
  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
  41. usedbylallupanju
  42. usedbylalupanju
  43. unknownstudent
  44. V.Prahaladh


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

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.

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.

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.”

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.