When "Paul Andrew Hammond" was a Baha'i

[NUR]

First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."

-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003


http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/month/1996-04?_done=%2Fgroup%2Fsoc.religion.bahai%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fmonth%2F1996-04%3F&pli=1


Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"

Also note the continual usage of the plural pronoun "we".


Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
From: Paul Hammond <***@euro-pa.demon.co.uk>
Date: 1996/04/03
Subject: Re: Praying to Baha'u'llah
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

Allah-u-Abha Stephi: So we can talk about sexual exploits adults have
with children, the best way to inject heroin, how to rob a bank? The
point is I have seen discussions of Abdul Baha having only an average mind
and not being able to grasp the complexities of modern socity, I have
seen that Shoghi Effendi wrote to individuals so his writings do not
apply to the community,

I find it interesting that John puts discussion of Abdu'l-Baha and
Shoghi Effendi on a level with Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime.

We certainly must talk about Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime, for if
we do not fully understand a problem, how can we possibly hope to
solve it in the world ? Burying our heads in the sand and pretending
problems do not exist just will not do.


But leaving this to one side, I find the suggestion that Baha'is
should
not dare to even consider the possibility that Abdu'l-Baha was just
an
average man with an average mind, or that it would be off limits for
a
Baha'i to try to discover the context of Shoghi's words in order to
understand them better absolutely shocking!


To begin with, non-Baha'is have no idea who Abdu'l-Baha is. How can a
Baha'i communicate with a non-Baha'i if they are unwilling to remember
a time when they had not heard of the Master? How can they cope with
the argument that Abdu'l-Baha was an unremarkable man if they've never
been allowed to consider the possibility themselves, and therefore
worked out for themselves just WHAT it was about Abdu'l-Baha that was
so wonderful? We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one.


In my opinion, it is the actions and history of His life which
convince
one of the greatness of Abdu'l-Baha, and of Shoghi Effendi. These
actions and history are not increased one iota just because of the
fact
that thousands of Baha'is never speak of Him, except in the most
reverent tones. In fact, I think a humourless attitude towards the
Central Figures is the one thing most likely to turn enquirers away
with
the words 'lighten up!' burning in their brains.


We are out to change the world, aren't we?


How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?


<rhetorical question mode off> :)


Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly
disagree with what you said.


Allah-u-Abha
--
Paul Hammond ***@euro-pa.demon.co.uk


Baha'i .sig under construction ....

[All Bad]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/month/1996-04?_done=%2Fgroup%2Fsoc.religion.bahai%2Fbrowse_frm%2Fmonth%2F1996-04%3F&pli=1
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"

Note that subsequently, the rhetorical question mode was turned off. If
only your irony detector could be turned on?

- All Bad

Post by NUR
Also note the continual usage of the plural pronoun "we".
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Date: 1996/04/03
Subject: Re: Praying to Baha'u'llah
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

Allah-u-Abha Stephi: So we can talk about sexual exploits adults have
with children, the best way to inject heroin, how to rob a bank? The
point is I have seen discussions of Abdul Baha having only an average mind
and not being able to grasp the complexities of modern socity, I have
seen that Shoghi Effendi wrote to individuals so his writings do not
apply to the community,

I find it interesting that John puts discussion of Abdu'l-Baha and
Shoghi Effendi on a level with Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime.
We certainly must talk about Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime, for if
we do not fully understand a problem, how can we possibly hope to
solve it in the world ? Burying our heads in the sand and pretending
problems do not exist just will not do.
But leaving this to one side, I find the suggestion that Baha'is
should
not dare to even consider the possibility that Abdu'l-Baha was just
an
average man with an average mind, or that it would be off limits for
a
Baha'i to try to discover the context of Shoghi's words in order to
understand them better absolutely shocking!
To begin with, non-Baha'is have no idea who Abdu'l-Baha is. How can a
Baha'i communicate with a non-Baha'i if they are unwilling to remember
a time when they had not heard of the Master? How can they cope with
the argument that Abdu'l-Baha was an unremarkable man if they've never
been allowed to consider the possibility themselves, and therefore
worked out for themselves just WHAT it was about Abdu'l-Baha that was
so wonderful? We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one.
In my opinion, it is the actions and history of His life which
convince
one of the greatness of Abdu'l-Baha, and of Shoghi Effendi. These
actions and history are not increased one iota just because of the
fact
that thousands of Baha'is never speak of Him, except in the most
reverent tones. In fact, I think a humourless attitude towards the
Central Figures is the one thing most likely to turn enquirers away
with
the words 'lighten up!' burning in their brains.
We are out to change the world, aren't we?
How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly
disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
--
Baha'i .sig under construction ....

[p***@onetel.net.uk]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"

Note that subsequently, the rhetorical question mode was turned off.  If
only your irony detector could be turned on?
- All Bad

Well, this is the guy who thought that I was still guilty of murdering
Fred Glaysher, even weeks after he'd turned up here and spoken for
himself - so I wouldn't hold my breath, All Bad!

Irony is a foreign language with this one - along with joking and
English.

It's a lot of fun, however, how obsessed Nima is with how I was
thinking 12 years ago!

And he hasn't yet answered YOUR "are you now or have you ever been"
question has he?

Although we do all know the answers - you'll no doubt think this is a
shame, but Nima actually is a former member, whereas I, although going
through two periods where I was very close to signing up, never quite
managed to overcome my scruples about the existence of God, or the
idea that Abdu'l Baha might just be an ordinary man rather than a
supernaturally inspired infallible interpreter. (That seems to be
what I'm talking about here - my guess is, it's in the context of
discussions about how the history of the Baha'i Faith ought to be
written about by Baha'is - someone criticising Juan Cole for trying to
stick to objective academic standards or something of the sort)

[m***@gmail.com]

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"

Note that subsequently, the rhetorical question mode was turned off.  If
only your irony detector could be turned on?
- All Bad

Well, this is the guy who thought that I was still guilty of murdering
Fred Glaysher, even weeks after he'd turned up here and spoken for
himself - so I wouldn't hold my breath, All Bad!
Irony is a foreign language with this one - along with joking and
English.
It's a lot of fun, however, how obsessed Nima is with how I was
thinking 12 years ago!
And he hasn't yet answered YOUR "are you now or have you ever been"
question has he?
Although we do all know the answers - you'll no doubt think this is a
shame, but Nima actually is a former member, whereas I, although going
through two periods where I was very close to signing up, never quite
managed to overcome my scruples about the existence of God, or the
idea that Abdu'l Baha might just be an ordinary man rather than a
supernaturally inspired infallible interpreter.  (That seems to be
what I'm talking about here - my guess is, it's in the context of
discussions about how the history of the Baha'i Faith ought to be
written about by Baha'is - someone criticising Juan Cole for trying to
stick to objective academic standards or something of the sort)

Where exactly is the irony and humor here?

PH:"We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one."

One more time, with emphasis added in capitals:


PH:"WE cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that OUR view of the Central Figures of OUR Faith is the only correct
one."

SIgned off at the end:

PH: Allah-u-Abha
--
Paul Hammond

http://bahai-library.com/encyclopedia/prayer.html

b. Repetition of Allah-u-Abha The last remnant of the many daily
invocations ordained by the Bab is the requirement to perform
ablutions then sit facing the qiblih and repeat "Allah-u-Abha" ("God
is Most Glorious") ninety-five times every day. This is usually done
after the obligatory prayer, without any need for renewed ablutions.


By the way, Paul, what years were you at Keele university again?

[All Bad]

You don't have to be a Baha'i to say Allahu Abha! In fact, my experience
has been that Baha'is badly slur this into "Allow a Pa".

Allahu Akbar!
- All Bad

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"

Note that subsequently, the rhetorical question mode was turned off. If
only your irony detector could be turned on?
- All Bad

Well, this is the guy who thought that I was still guilty of murdering
Fred Glaysher, even weeks after he'd turned up here and spoken for
himself - so I wouldn't hold my breath, All Bad!
Irony is a foreign language with this one - along with joking and
English.
It's a lot of fun, however, how obsessed Nima is with how I was
thinking 12 years ago!
And he hasn't yet answered YOUR "are you now or have you ever been"
question has he?
Although we do all know the answers - you'll no doubt think this is a
shame, but Nima actually is a former member, whereas I, although going
through two periods where I was very close to signing up, never quite
managed to overcome my scruples about the existence of God, or the
idea that Abdu'l Baha might just be an ordinary man rather than a
supernaturally inspired infallible interpreter. (That seems to be
what I'm talking about here - my guess is, it's in the context of
discussions about how the history of the Baha'i Faith ought to be
written about by Baha'is - someone criticising Juan Cole for trying to
stick to objective academic standards or something of the sort)

Where exactly is the irony and humor here?

PH:"We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one."

One more time, with emphasis added in capitals:


PH:"WE cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that OUR view of the Central Figures of OUR Faith is the only correct
one."

SIgned off at the end:

PH: Allah-u-Abha
--
Paul Hammond

http://bahai-library.com/encyclopedia/prayer.html

b. Repetition of Allah-u-Abha The last remnant of the many daily
invocations ordained by the Bab is the requirement to perform
ablutions then sit facing the qiblih and repeat "Allah-u-Abha" ("God
is Most Glorious") ninety-five times every day. This is usually done
after the obligatory prayer, without any need for renewed ablutions.


By the way, Paul, what years were you at Keele university again?

[p***@onetel.net.uk]

Post by m***@gmail.com

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"

Note that subsequently, the rhetorical question mode was turned off.  If
only your irony detector could be turned on?
- All Bad

Well, this is the guy who thought that I was still guilty of murdering
Fred Glaysher, even weeks after he'd turned up here and spoken for
himself - so I wouldn't hold my breath, All Bad!
Irony is a foreign language with this one - along with joking and
English.
It's a lot of fun, however, how obsessed Nima is with how I was
thinking 12 years ago!
And he hasn't yet answered YOUR "are you now or have you ever been"
question has he?
Although we do all know the answers - you'll no doubt think this is a
shame, but Nima actually is a former member, whereas I, although going
through two periods where I was very close to signing up, never quite
managed to overcome my scruples about the existence of God, or the
idea that Abdu'l Baha might just be an ordinary man rather than a
supernaturally inspired infallible interpreter.  (That seems to be
what I'm talking about here - my guess is, it's in the context of
discussions about how the history of the Baha'i Faith ought to be
written about by Baha'is - someone criticising Juan Cole for trying to
stick to objective academic standards or something of the sort)

Where exactly is the irony and humor here?
PH:"We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one."
PH:"WE cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that OUR view of the Central Figures of OUR Faith is the only correct
one."
PH: Allah-u-Abha
--
Paul Hammond
http://bahai-library.com/encyclopedia/prayer.html
b. Repetition of Allah-u-Abha The last remnant of the many daily
invocations ordained by the Bab is the requirement to perform
ablutions then sit facing the qiblih and repeat "Allah-u-Abha" ("God
is Most Glorious") ninety-five times every day. This is usually done
after the obligatory prayer, without any need for renewed ablutions.
By the way, Paul, what years were you at Keele university again?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

May - you're comparing a devotional practice (b) above with a common
greeting here.

Muslims say "Allahu akbar", or "Asalaam alaikum" on a daily basis the
same way Australians say "G'day"

Sufi muslims also recite the names of god as part of their more
extreme religious practices (I think saying Allahu Abha 95 times is an
example of dhikr - the same thing)

But the fact that ordinary muslims will say Allahu akbar" does NOT
make all muslims into sufis.

Oh, and as a person who refuses to give out her name, or ANY personal
details about herself, or her relationship with nutty Nima, by what
right do you take it upon yourself to question me in this way?

Paul

[m***@gmail.com]

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk

Post by m***@gmail.com

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"

Note that subsequently, the rhetorical question mode was turned off.  If
only your irony detector could be turned on?
- All Bad

Well, this is the guy who thought that I was still guilty of murdering
Fred Glaysher, even weeks after he'd turned up here and spoken for
himself - so I wouldn't hold my breath, All Bad!
Irony is a foreign language with this one - along with joking and
English.
It's a lot of fun, however, how obsessed Nima is with how I was
thinking 12 years ago!
And he hasn't yet answered YOUR "are you now or have you ever been"
question has he?
Although we do all know the answers - you'll no doubt think this is a
shame, but Nima actually is a former member, whereas I, although going
through two periods where I was very close to signing up, never quite
managed to overcome my scruples about the existence of God, or the
idea that Abdu'l Baha might just be an ordinary man rather than a
supernaturally inspired infallible interpreter.  (That seems to be
what I'm talking about here - my guess is, it's in the context of
discussions about how the history of the Baha'i Faith ought to be
written about by Baha'is - someone criticising Juan Cole for trying to
stick to objective academic standards or something of the sort)

Where exactly is the irony and humor here?
PH:"We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one."
PH:"WE cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that OUR view of the Central Figures of OUR Faith is the only correct
one."
PH: Allah-u-Abha
--
Paul Hammond
http://bahai-library.com/encyclopedia/prayer.html
b. Repetition of Allah-u-Abha The last remnant of the many daily
invocations ordained by the Bab is the requirement to perform
ablutions then sit facing the qiblih and repeat "Allah-u-Abha" ("God
is Most Glorious") ninety-five times every day. This is usually done
after the obligatory prayer, without any need for renewed ablutions.
By the way, Paul, what years were you at Keele university again?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

May - you're comparing a devotional practice (b) above with a common
greeting here.
Muslims say "Allahu akbar", or "Asalaam alaikum" on a daily basis the
same way Australians say "G'day"
Sufi muslims also recite the names of god as part of their more
extreme religious practices (I think saying Allahu Abha 95 times is an
example of dhikr - the same thing)
But the fact that ordinary muslims will say Allahu akbar" does NOT
make all muslims into sufis.

A greeting that is commonly thought of as a Baha'i greeting.

http://childrensclasses.blogspot.com/2006/10/allahuabha-greetings.html

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2006
allah'u'abha: greetings
learning concepts

"Allah'u'abhá" means "God is most glorious". Bahá'ís use it as a way
of greeting each other.
Greeting each other helps each of us feel welcome.

(from comment section of blog)

"We didn't mention "Allah'u'abha" as a particular Baha'i greeting,
which is an important oversight. I think we probably all got panicked
because it had been a while since we had done the class, and we
weren't as prepared (spiritually? materially?) as we could have been."

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk
Oh, and as a person who refuses to give out her name, or ANY personal
details about herself, or her relationship with nutty Nima, by what
right do you take it upon yourself to question me in this way?
Paul

PH:"We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one."

One more time, with emphasis added in capitals:

PH:"WE cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that OUR view of the Central Figures of OUR Faith is the only correct
one."


PH: "How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is
said about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
Paul Hammond

[All Bad]

Okay, so you insist on not reading either.

BTW, Allahu Abha means God is superlatively splendorous rather than
glorious.

Allow a Pa!
- All Bad

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk

Post by m***@gmail.com

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk

Post by All Bad

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"

Note that subsequently, the rhetorical question mode was turned off.
If
only your irony detector could be turned on?
- All Bad

Well, this is the guy who thought that I was still guilty of murdering
Fred Glaysher, even weeks after he'd turned up here and spoken for
himself - so I wouldn't hold my breath, All Bad!
Irony is a foreign language with this one - along with joking and
English.
It's a lot of fun, however, how obsessed Nima is with how I was
thinking 12 years ago!
And he hasn't yet answered YOUR "are you now or have you ever been"
question has he?
Although we do all know the answers - you'll no doubt think this is a
shame, but Nima actually is a former member, whereas I, although going
through two periods where I was very close to signing up, never quite
managed to overcome my scruples about the existence of God, or the
idea that Abdu'l Baha might just be an ordinary man rather than a
supernaturally inspired infallible interpreter. (That seems to be
what I'm talking about here - my guess is, it's in the context of
discussions about how the history of the Baha'i Faith ought to be
written about by Baha'is - someone criticising Juan Cole for trying to
stick to objective academic standards or something of the sort)

Where exactly is the irony and humor here?
PH:"We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one."
PH:"WE cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that OUR view of the Central Figures of OUR Faith is the only correct
one."
PH: Allah-u-Abha
--
Paul Hammond
http://bahai-library.com/encyclopedia/prayer.html
b. Repetition of Allah-u-Abha The last remnant of the many daily
invocations ordained by the Bab is the requirement to perform
ablutions then sit facing the qiblih and repeat "Allah-u-Abha" ("God
is Most Glorious") ninety-five times every day. This is usually done
after the obligatory prayer, without any need for renewed ablutions.
By the way, Paul, what years were you at Keele university again?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

May - you're comparing a devotional practice (b) above with a common
greeting here.
Muslims say "Allahu akbar", or "Asalaam alaikum" on a daily basis the
same way Australians say "G'day"
Sufi muslims also recite the names of god as part of their more
extreme religious practices (I think saying Allahu Abha 95 times is an
example of dhikr - the same thing)
But the fact that ordinary muslims will say Allahu akbar" does NOT
make all muslims into sufis.

A greeting that is commonly thought of as a Baha'i greeting.

http://childrensclasses.blogspot.com/2006/10/allahuabha-greetings.html

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2006
allah'u'abha: greetings
learning concepts

"Allah'u'abhá" means "God is most glorious". Bahá'ís use it as a way
of greeting each other.
Greeting each other helps each of us feel welcome.

(from comment section of blog)

"We didn't mention "Allah'u'abha" as a particular Baha'i greeting,
which is an important oversight. I think we probably all got panicked
because it had been a while since we had done the class, and we
weren't as prepared (spiritually? materially?) as we could have been."

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk
Oh, and as a person who refuses to give out her name, or ANY personal
details about herself, or her relationship with nutty Nima, by what
right do you take it upon yourself to question me in this way?
Paul

PH:"We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one."

One more time, with emphasis added in capitals:

PH:"WE cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that OUR view of the Central Figures of OUR Faith is the only correct
one."


PH: "How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is
said about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
Paul Hammond

[NUR]

Post by All Bad
Okay, so you insist on not reading either.

Okay, so you want to play it that way.


PAT KOHLI LIES ABOUT HIS IDENTITY ON SOURCEWATCH
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=User:Owen


On February 14th, 2008, you state at the conclusion of message #8 of
this thread,
http://groups.google.com.au/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/t...
AB: Who is the "they" who are wanting to write crap about you? Are
referring to the thread I started as a data marshalling point for
your
SourceWatch web page? If so, the "they" would be "just me". What is
the crap they want to write about? I thought I was clear about
sticking to the facts.


This was your response to what I had earlier asserted on the same
thread, in message #6,


Also note that while I have put up factual and verifiable information
neutrally phrased on SW, the crap they keep wanting to write about me
is all pure libel. Funny though, as soon as I put up the OZ NSA's
November 1997 letter to the Gold Coast LSA about me and then also
cited their second instance at public defamation of yours truly in
the
December 2000 issue of the AUSTRALIAN BAHAI BULLETIN, that bahaim IT
committee (pseudo-)editor POQ-ed (pissed off quickly) right out of
there.


In message number #8 you state clearly and unequivocally for the
record "...the "they" would be "just me"..." The clear denotation of
this message is that All_Bad, being Pat Kohli, is Owen (i.e. who is
you) - the one who had started the libelous Wahid Azal article
earlier
which no longer stands here. I had originally accused a Baha'i IT
propaganda committee of having peddled that article here. This was
Pat
Kohli's response to my accusation and by admitting to being the alias
Owen, i.e. you, whom Pat Kohli has stated on TRB as being he.
Clearly,
the term smokescreen is very appropriate to your role here and what
you are up to now. --Wahid 23:11, 11 March 2009 (EDT)

PAT KOHLI ON SOURCEWATCH

http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pat_kohli
Pat Kohli, or Patrick Kohli, is a member of the Haifan Baha'i Faith[1]
who makes regular contributions to the USENET newsgroup
talk.religion.bahai[2]. He is a computer programmer who has worked on
software for various projects, including military systems.

Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Articles and Resources
2.1 Related SourceWatch Articles
2.2 References
2.3 External Articles

[edit]Background
He "is a computer scientist assigned to 4.5.3.3. He works for PMA-231
as the Open Architecture (OA) IPT lead, in the OA/FORCEnet IPT of the
Network Centric Warfare IPT. Prior to this he worked at Saint Inigoes
for 4.5 and developed a prototype next generation flight data
recorder, using COTS components, to meet incident reporting,
maintenance and FOQA needs. Pat also supported the old PMA-282 which
did weapon control systems for guided missiles. Pat has an MS in
computer Information Systems from Florida Tech." [3]

"Pat Kohli, NCW Open Architecture Lead, demonstrated how the E-2/C-2
program office (PMA-231) is continuously evaluating and implementing
software modernization to facilitate transition of the existing E-2
operational flight program to an environment using commercially
available systems. Venlet said, "The Naval Aviation Enterprise has
embraced open architecture as a fundamental building block of weapon
system development from its very inception. Our government/industry
teams continue to leverage these open system strategies and concepts
in achieving reduction in overall development cycle times and
delivering increased system capabilities to the Fleet faster and
cheaper. The advantages of integrating open architecture designs and
contracting strategies are measurable and pronounced as is
substantiated by our E-2D Advanced Hawkeye and P-8 Multi-Mission
Aircraft development programs. The key to continued success will be
maintaining the close partnership with industry experts, as we provide
the right capabilities, at the right time and right cost to the joint
warfighter."The E-2 Hawkeye team has been representing and directly
supporting Venlet's executive office - the aviation domain lead for
open architecture initiatives - since June 2004, because of its role
as a battle management command and control platform and a central
network communications node in aviation. E-2 Program Manager Capt.
Randy Mahrsaid, "Today's evolving E-2 open architecture model paves
the way for a more mature system to be used by the E-2D prior to it
taking its place in the fleet."[3]

Pat Kohli has maintained a consistent web presence since the late
1990s, particularly on USENET, addressing both external critics and
dissenters within the Haifan Baha'i Faith tradition to which he
belongs [5]. In 1998, he voted against the creation of the USENET
group, talk.religion.bahai, as an un-moderated discussion forum for
issues relating to the Baha'i faith [4]. Official discussion regarding
the creation of this group may also be found at: [6]. He posts under
the handles Mr All Bad and All_Bad [5]

[edit]Articles and Resources
[edit]Related SourceWatch Articles
PMA Group
[edit]References
↑ Letter from Assistant Secretary, Kishan Manocha, on Behalf of
National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United Kingdom [1],
dated October 8, 2002, Accessed 17 February, 2009.
↑ Discussion Archive of USENET group Talk.Religion.Baha'i, [2],
Accessed February 17, 2009
↑ 3.0 3.1 Drema Ballengee-Grunst, "Assistant SecNav visits NAVAIR T&E
laboratory", November 10, 2005.
↑ Record of votes cast regarding the creation of the USENET group,
talk.religion.bahai,[3], Accessed February 17, 2009.
↑ Excerpt from USENET group talk.religion.bahai,[4], Accessed February
17, 2009.
[edit]External Articles

Retrieved from "http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pat_Kohli"
Categories: United States | Religion | Military | War/peace

[PaulHammond]

Post by m***@gmail.com

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk

Post by m***@gmail.com

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"

Note that subsequently, the rhetorical question mode was turned off.  If
only your irony detector could be turned on?
- All Bad

Well, this is the guy who thought that I was still guilty of murdering
Fred Glaysher, even weeks after he'd turned up here and spoken for
himself - so I wouldn't hold my breath, All Bad!
Irony is a foreign language with this one - along with joking and
English.
It's a lot of fun, however, how obsessed Nima is with how I was
thinking 12 years ago!
And he hasn't yet answered YOUR "are you now or have you ever been"
question has he?
Although we do all know the answers - you'll no doubt think this is a
shame, but Nima actually is a former member, whereas I, although going
through two periods where I was very close to signing up, never quite
managed to overcome my scruples about the existence of God, or the
idea that Abdu'l Baha might just be an ordinary man rather than a
supernaturally inspired infallible interpreter.  (That seems to be
what I'm talking about here - my guess is, it's in the context of
discussions about how the history of the Baha'i Faith ought to be
written about by Baha'is - someone criticising Juan Cole for trying to
stick to objective academic standards or something of the sort)

Where exactly is the irony and humor here?
PH:"We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one."
PH:"WE cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that OUR view of the Central Figures of OUR Faith is the only correct
one."
PH: Allah-u-Abha
--
Paul Hammond
http://bahai-library.com/encyclopedia/prayer.html
b. Repetition of Allah-u-Abha The last remnant of the many daily
invocations ordained by the Bab is the requirement to perform
ablutions then sit facing the qiblih and repeat "Allah-u-Abha" ("God
is Most Glorious") ninety-five times every day. This is usually done
after the obligatory prayer, without any need for renewed ablutions.
By the way, Paul, what years were you at Keele university again?- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

May - you're comparing a devotional practice (b) above with a common
greeting here.
Muslims say "Allahu akbar", or "Asalaam alaikum" on a daily basis the
same way Australians say "G'day"
Sufi muslims also recite the names of god as part of their more
extreme religious practices (I think saying Allahu Abha 95 times is an
example of dhikr - the same thing)
But the fact that ordinary muslims will say Allahu akbar" does NOT
make all muslims into sufis.

A greeting that is commonly thought of as a Baha'i greeting.

Indeed. But you compared it with something different.

Wilfully, and with intent to decieve people, in my humble opinion.

Namaste, May

[m***@gmail.com]

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"

Note that subsequently, the rhetorical question mode was turned off.  If
only your irony detector could be turned on?
- All Bad

Well, this is the guy who thought that I was still guilty of murdering
Fred Glaysher, even weeks after he'd turned up here and spoken for
himself - so I wouldn't hold my breath, All Bad!
Irony is a foreign language with this one - along with joking and
English.
It's a lot of fun, however, how obsessed Nima is with how I was
thinking 12 years ago!
And he hasn't yet answered YOUR "are you now or have you ever been"
question has he?
Although we do all know the answers - you'll no doubt think this is a
shame, but Nima actually is a former member, whereas I, although going
through two periods where I was very close to signing up, never quite
managed to overcome my scruples about the existence of God, or the
idea that Abdu'l Baha might just be an ordinary man rather than a
supernaturally inspired infallible interpreter.  (That seems to be
what I'm talking about here - my guess is, it's in the context of
discussions about how the history of the Baha'i Faith ought to be
written about by Baha'is - someone criticising Juan Cole for trying to
stick to objective academic standards or something of the sort)

Just where is the joke here? Why would you get 'heated' if you were
joking?

PH: "How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is
said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
Paul Hammond

[All Bad]

Post by p***@onetel.net.uk

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"

Note that subsequently, the rhetorical question mode was turned off. If
only your irony detector could be turned on?
- All Bad

Well, this is the guy who thought that I was still guilty of murdering
Fred Glaysher, even weeks after he'd turned up here and spoken for
himself - so I wouldn't hold my breath, All Bad!
Irony is a foreign language with this one - along with joking and
English.
It's a lot of fun, however, how obsessed Nima is with how I was
thinking 12 years ago!
And he hasn't yet answered YOUR "are you now or have you ever been"
question has he?
Although we do all know the answers - you'll no doubt think this is a
shame, but Nima actually is a former member, whereas I, although going
through two periods where I was very close to signing up, never quite
managed to overcome my scruples about the existence of God, or the
idea that Abdu'l Baha might just be an ordinary man rather than a
supernaturally inspired infallible interpreter. (That seems to be
what I'm talking about here - my guess is, it's in the context of
discussions about how the history of the Baha'i Faith ought to be
written about by Baha'is - someone criticising Juan Cole for trying to
stick to objective academic standards or something of the sort)

MIA1: Just where is the joke here? Why would you get 'heated' if you were
joking?

AB: Good grief! There are limits to me reading this to you on usenet.
Maybe on the web I could draw you a picture, but maybe you trend away from
the subtle to slapstick?

- All Bad

PH: "How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is
said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
Paul Hammond

[NUR]

Post by All Bad
Note that subsequently, the rhetorical question mode was turned off. If
only your irony detector could be turned on?

Methinks the lying hack doth lie too much!

-
http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pat_kohli

Pat Kohli, or Patrick Kohli, is a member of the Haifan Baha'i Faith[1]
who makes regular contributions to the USENET newsgroup
talk.religion.bahai[2]. He is a computer programmer who has worked on
software for various projects, including military systems.

Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Articles and Resources
2.1 Related SourceWatch Articles
2.2 References
2.3 External Articles

[edit]Background
He "is a computer scientist assigned to 4.5.3.3. He works for PMA-231
as the Open Architecture (OA) IPT lead, in the OA/FORCEnet IPT of the
Network Centric Warfare IPT. Prior to this he worked at Saint Inigoes
for 4.5 and developed a prototype next generation flight data
recorder, using COTS components, to meet incident reporting,
maintenance and FOQA needs. Pat also supported the old PMA-282 which
did weapon control systems for guided missiles. Pat has an MS in
computer Information Systems from Florida Tech." [3]

"Pat Kohli, NCW Open Architecture Lead, demonstrated how the E-2/C-2
program office (PMA-231) is continuously evaluating and implementing
software modernization to facilitate transition of the existing E-2
operational flight program to an environment using commercially
available systems. Venlet said, "The Naval Aviation Enterprise has
embraced open architecture as a fundamental building block of weapon
system development from its very inception. Our government/industry
teams continue to leverage these open system strategies and concepts
in achieving reduction in overall development cycle times and
delivering increased system capabilities to the Fleet faster and
cheaper. The advantages of integrating open architecture designs and
contracting strategies are measurable and pronounced as is
substantiated by our E-2D Advanced Hawkeye and P-8 Multi-Mission
Aircraft development programs. The key to continued success will be
maintaining the close partnership with industry experts, as we provide
the right capabilities, at the right time and right cost to the joint
warfighter."The E-2 Hawkeye team has been representing and directly
supporting Venlet's executive office - the aviation domain lead for
open architecture initiatives - since June 2004, because of its role
as a battle management command and control platform and a central
network communications node in aviation. E-2 Program Manager Capt.
Randy Mahrsaid, "Today's evolving E-2 open architecture model paves
the way for a more mature system to be used by the E-2D prior to it
taking its place in the fleet."[3]

Pat Kohli has maintained a consistent web presence since the late
1990s, particularly on USENET, addressing both external critics and
dissenters within the Haifan Baha'i Faith tradition to which he
belongs [5]. In 1998, he voted against the creation of the USENET
group, talk.religion.bahai, as an un-moderated discussion forum for
issues relating to the Baha'i faith [4]. Official discussion regarding
the creation of this group may also be found at: [6]. He posts under
the handles Mr All Bad and All_Bad [5]

[edit]Articles and Resources
[edit]Related SourceWatch Articles
PMA Group
[edit]References
$B",(B Letter from Assistant Secretary, Kishan Manocha, on Behalf of
National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United Kingdom [1],
dated October 8, 2002, Accessed 17 February, 2009.
$B",(B Discussion Archive of USENET group Talk.Religion.Baha'i, [2],
Accessed February 17, 2009
$B",(B 3.0 3.1 Drema Ballengee-Grunst, "Assistant SecNav visits NAVAIR T&E
laboratory", November 10, 2005.
$B",(B Record of votes cast regarding the creation of the USENET group,
talk.religion.bahai,[3], Accessed February 17, 2009.
$B",(B Excerpt from USENET group talk.religion.bahai,[4], Accessed February
17, 2009.
[edit]External Articles

Retrieved from "http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pat_Kohli"
Categories: United States | Religion | Military | War/peace

[NUR]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"

Note that subsequently, the rhetorical question mode was turned off.  If
only your irony detector could be turned on?
- All Bad

Post by NUR
Also note the continual usage of the plural pronoun "we".
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Date: 1996/04/03
Subject: Re: Praying to Baha'u'llah
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

Allah-u-Abha Stephi: So we can talk about sexual exploits adults have
with children, the best way to inject heroin, how to rob a bank? The
point is I have seen discussions of Abdul Baha having only an average mind
and not being able to grasp the complexities of modern socity, I have
seen that Shoghi Effendi wrote to individuals so his writings do not
apply to the community,

I find it interesting that John puts discussion of Abdu'l-Baha and
Shoghi Effendi on a level with Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime.
We certainly must talk about Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime, for if
we do not fully understand a problem, how can we possibly hope to
solve it in the world ? Burying our heads in the sand and pretending
problems do not exist just will not do.
But leaving this to one side, I find the suggestion that Baha'is
should
not dare to even consider the possibility that Abdu'l-Baha was just
an
average man with an average mind, or that it would be off limits for
a
Baha'i to try to discover the context of Shoghi's words in order to
understand them better absolutely shocking!
To begin with, non-Baha'is have no idea who Abdu'l-Baha is. How can a
Baha'i communicate with a non-Baha'i if they are unwilling to remember
a time when they had not heard of the Master? How can they cope with
the argument that Abdu'l-Baha was an unremarkable man if they've never
been allowed to consider the possibility themselves, and therefore
worked out for themselves just WHAT it was about Abdu'l-Baha that was
so wonderful? We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one.
In my opinion, it is the actions and history of His life which
convince
one of the greatness of Abdu'l-Baha, and of Shoghi Effendi. These
actions and history are not increased one iota just because of the
fact
that thousands of Baha'is never speak of Him, except in the most
reverent tones. In fact, I think a humourless attitude towards the
Central Figures is the one thing most likely to turn enquirers away
with
the words 'lighten up!' burning in their brains.
We are out to change the world, aren't we?
How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly
disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
--
Baha'i .sig under construction ....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

[NUR]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"
Also note the continual usage of the plural pronoun "we".
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Date: 1996/04/03
Subject: Re: Praying to Baha'u'llah
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

Allah-u-Abha Stephi: So we can talk about sexual exploits adults have
with children, the best way to inject heroin, how to rob a bank? The
point is I have seen discussions of Abdul Baha having only an average mind
and not being able to grasp the complexities of modern socity, I have
seen that Shoghi Effendi wrote to individuals so his writings do not
apply to the community,

I find it interesting that John puts discussion of Abdu'l-Baha and
Shoghi Effendi on a level with Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime.
We certainly must talk about Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime, for if
we do not fully understand a problem, how can we possibly hope to
solve it in the world ? Burying our heads in the sand and pretending
problems do not exist just will not do.
But leaving this to one side, I find the suggestion that Baha'is
should
not dare to even consider the possibility that Abdu'l-Baha was just
an
average man with an average mind, or that it would be off limits for
a
Baha'i to try to discover the context of Shoghi's words in order to
understand them better absolutely shocking!
To begin with, non-Baha'is have no idea who Abdu'l-Baha is. How can a
Baha'i communicate with a non-Baha'i if they are unwilling to remember
a time when they had not heard of the Master? How can they cope with
the argument that Abdu'l-Baha was an unremarkable man if they've never
been allowed to consider the possibility themselves, and therefore
worked out for themselves just WHAT it was about Abdu'l-Baha that was
so wonderful? We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one.
In my opinion, it is the actions and history of His life which
convince
one of the greatness of Abdu'l-Baha, and of Shoghi Effendi. These
actions and history are not increased one iota just because of the
fact
that thousands of Baha'is never speak of Him, except in the most
reverent tones. In fact, I think a humourless attitude towards the
Central Figures is the one thing most likely to turn enquirers away
with
the words 'lighten up!' burning in their brains.
We are out to change the world, aren't we?
How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly
disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
--
Baha'i .sig under construction ....

[NUR]

From Unenrolled bahai

Quote
"I was still fasting myself in those days..."

Paul Hammond <***@...>
Date: Sun Apr 3, 2005 3:18 am
Subject: More on Shoghification (was Re: To Larry/Karen)
paulhammond2
Offline
Send Email

I recall hearing a serious conversation on whether it was breaking the
fast to swallow
a bit of toothpaste if you were cleaning your teeth after the sun came
up - that was
years ago when I used to read soc.religion.bahai, back when I'd first
discovered how
fascinating the internet was back in 1994. ***I was still fasting
myself in those days...***


Anyway - this links back into the conversation we were having about
Shoghi, because I think this micro-management goes back to his days.
It was back in his time that people used to write to him asking him to
pronounce on the "Baha'iness" of every little minor detail of their
lives - which I guess was when he started to get his secretaries to
write replies to all these people who wanted reassurance from the top
that Baha'u'llah thought everything they did was AOK.


Now, as to whether Shoghi really wanted to be spending his time
offering this kind of guidance or not is a moot point - but if he
didn't, he should have been much more clear about telling everyone
that these sort of minor things were "between the believer and God",
and he couldn't tell them much, except that God didn't particularly
care about these piddling little details. But he didn't do that, he
set people to pronouncing
about whether the tiny amount of alcohol in vanilla cake flavourings
broke the Baha'i non-drinking law or not.


So, the people at the top of the top-down faith today are really
following in the precedent set by Shoghi, and those believers that are
petitioning the UHJ to pronounce on the correct Baha'i angle of
adjustment to their TV screens just think that if Shoghi would tell
people about these things then so should the UHJ.


Paul

[NUR]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"
Also note the continual usage of the plural pronoun "we".
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Date: 1996/04/03
Subject: Re: Praying to Baha'u'llah
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

Allah-u-Abha Stephi: So we can talk about sexual exploits adults have
with children, the best way to inject heroin, how to rob a bank? The
point is I have seen discussions of Abdul Baha having only an average mind
and not being able to grasp the complexities of modern socity, I have
seen that Shoghi Effendi wrote to individuals so his writings do not
apply to the community,

I find it interesting that John puts discussion of Abdu'l-Baha and
Shoghi Effendi on a level with Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime.
We certainly must talk about Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime, for if
we do not fully understand a problem, how can we possibly hope to
solve it in the world ? Burying our heads in the sand and pretending
problems do not exist just will not do.
But leaving this to one side, I find the suggestion that Baha'is
should
not dare to even consider the possibility that Abdu'l-Baha was just
an
average man with an average mind, or that it would be off limits for
a
Baha'i to try to discover the context of Shoghi's words in order to
understand them better absolutely shocking!
To begin with, non-Baha'is have no idea who Abdu'l-Baha is. How can a
Baha'i communicate with a non-Baha'i if they are unwilling to remember
a time when they had not heard of the Master? How can they cope with
the argument that Abdu'l-Baha was an unremarkable man if they've never
been allowed to consider the possibility themselves, and therefore
worked out for themselves just WHAT it was about Abdu'l-Baha that was
so wonderful? We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one.
In my opinion, it is the actions and history of His life which
convince
one of the greatness of Abdu'l-Baha, and of Shoghi Effendi. These
actions and history are not increased one iota just because of the
fact
that thousands of Baha'is never speak of Him, except in the most
reverent tones. In fact, I think a humourless attitude towards the
Central Figures is the one thing most likely to turn enquirers away
with
the words 'lighten up!' burning in their brains.
We are out to change the world, aren't we?
How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly
disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
--
Baha'i .sig under construction ....

[NUR]

See also material at link,
http://groups.google.com.au/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/thread/74cae56bed1aacb4

[mash_ghasem]

See also material at link,http://groups.google.com.au/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/t...

I still don't understand why you are recycling and recycling to SCI?
Does anyone gives a rat's ass what Paul or Pat do. Get a life man.

[NUR]

If you didn't give a rat's ass, you wouldn't post that no one else
does, since this is a line by Pat Kohli as well. Obviously you do
because the charade around this guy's identity plays a big part in the
greater charade your Bahaim friends are attempting to get away with.

W

[mash_ghasem]

Post by NUR
If you didn't give a rat's ass, you wouldn't post that no one else
does, since this is a line by Pat Kohli as well. Obviously you do
because the charade around this guy's identity plays a big part in the
greater charade your Bahaim friends are attempting to get away with.
W

Nima Hazini is recycling:

This ad was approved by Bahai internet committee :-) Not really, but
Nima thinks so anyway :-)


.

[NUR]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"
Also note the continual usage of the plural pronoun "we".
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Date: 1996/04/03
Subject: Re: Praying to Baha'u'llah
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

Allah-u-Abha Stephi: So we can talk about sexual exploits adults have
with children, the best way to inject heroin, how to rob a bank? The
point is I have seen discussions of Abdul Baha having only an average mind
and not being able to grasp the complexities of modern socity, I have
seen that Shoghi Effendi wrote to individuals so his writings do not
apply to the community,

I find it interesting that John puts discussion of Abdu'l-Baha and
Shoghi Effendi on a level with Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime.
We certainly must talk about Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime, for if
we do not fully understand a problem, how can we possibly hope to
solve it in the world ? Burying our heads in the sand and pretending
problems do not exist just will not do.
But leaving this to one side, I find the suggestion that Baha'is
should
not dare to even consider the possibility that Abdu'l-Baha was just
an
average man with an average mind, or that it would be off limits for
a
Baha'i to try to discover the context of Shoghi's words in order to
understand them better absolutely shocking!
To begin with, non-Baha'is have no idea who Abdu'l-Baha is. How can a
Baha'i communicate with a non-Baha'i if they are unwilling to remember
a time when they had not heard of the Master? How can they cope with
the argument that Abdu'l-Baha was an unremarkable man if they've never
been allowed to consider the possibility themselves, and therefore
worked out for themselves just WHAT it was about Abdu'l-Baha that was
so wonderful? We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one.
In my opinion, it is the actions and history of His life which
convince
one of the greatness of Abdu'l-Baha, and of Shoghi Effendi. These
actions and history are not increased one iota just because of the
fact
that thousands of Baha'is never speak of Him, except in the most
reverent tones. In fact, I think a humourless attitude towards the
Central Figures is the one thing most likely to turn enquirers away
with
the words 'lighten up!' burning in their brains.
We are out to change the world, aren't we?
How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly
disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
--
Baha'i .sig under construction ....

[NUR]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"
Also note the continual usage of the plural pronoun "we".
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Date: 1996/04/03
Subject: Re: Praying to Baha'u'llah
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

Allah-u-Abha Stephi: So we can talk about sexual exploits adults have
with children, the best way to inject heroin, how to rob a bank? The
point is I have seen discussions of Abdul Baha having only an average mind
and not being able to grasp the complexities of modern socity, I have
seen that Shoghi Effendi wrote to individuals so his writings do not
apply to the community,

I find it interesting that John puts discussion of Abdu'l-Baha and
Shoghi Effendi on a level with Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime.
We certainly must talk about Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime, for if
we do not fully understand a problem, how can we possibly hope to
solve it in the world ? Burying our heads in the sand and pretending
problems do not exist just will not do.
But leaving this to one side, I find the suggestion that Baha'is
should
not dare to even consider the possibility that Abdu'l-Baha was just
an
average man with an average mind, or that it would be off limits for
a
Baha'i to try to discover the context of Shoghi's words in order to
understand them better absolutely shocking!
To begin with, non-Baha'is have no idea who Abdu'l-Baha is. How can a
Baha'i communicate with a non-Baha'i if they are unwilling to remember
a time when they had not heard of the Master? How can they cope with
the argument that Abdu'l-Baha was an unremarkable man if they've never
been allowed to consider the possibility themselves, and therefore
worked out for themselves just WHAT it was about Abdu'l-Baha that was
so wonderful? We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one.
In my opinion, it is the actions and history of His life which
convince
one of the greatness of Abdu'l-Baha, and of Shoghi Effendi. These
actions and history are not increased one iota just because of the
fact
that thousands of Baha'is never speak of Him, except in the most
reverent tones. In fact, I think a humourless attitude towards the
Central Figures is the one thing most likely to turn enquirers away
with
the words 'lighten up!' burning in their brains.
We are out to change the world, aren't we?
How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly
disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
--
Baha'i .sig under construction ....

[NUR]

Back to the drawing board for the HamHead on Sourcewatch, I see, the
law of unintended consequences and all.

W

[All Bad]

Post by NUR
Back to the drawing board for the HamHead on Sourcewatch, I see, the
law of unintended consequences and all.

Oh not all the way to the drawing board. Remember the Baha'i IT committee?
Kohli was libeling people on TRB?
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Talk:Pat_kohli When you found no
evidence of that, you substituted the Baha'i Internet Agency. You could do
the same thing with Paul Hammond, the old bait and switch. Here you go:

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Paul_Hammond

Sure, this has nothing to do with Paul Hammond on TRB, but why does
relevance and accuracy have to be sticking points for those w/ expanded
minds?

- All Bad

[PaulHammond]

Post by NUR
Back to the drawing board for the HamHead on Sourcewatch, I see, the
law of unintended consequences and all.
W

I'm sorry, Nima, what's this "drawing board" you are talking of, and
why must I go back to it?

I assume you HAVEN'T written a sourcewatch hack-job on me yet, because
you'd be favouring us with the spamming of that as often as you spam
your Pat Kholi one if you had.

So what on earth are you talking about, man. Make sense!

Paul

[All Bad]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the BF? It is a simple
"yes" or "no" question and you decline to answer. Had you noticed that?
Why should you answer? The answer is only relevant to you hounding people
about their affiliations. I know yours and I normally don't bother to make
a point of it, since there is really no point to be made.

- All Bad

Post by NUR
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"
Also note the continual usage of the plural pronoun "we".
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Date: 1996/04/03
Subject: Re: Praying to Baha'u'llah
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

Allah-u-Abha Stephi: So we can talk about sexual exploits adults have
with children, the best way to inject heroin, how to rob a bank? The
point is I have seen discussions of Abdul Baha having only an average mind
and not being able to grasp the complexities of modern socity, I have
seen that Shoghi Effendi wrote to individuals so his writings do not
apply to the community,

I find it interesting that John puts discussion of Abdu'l-Baha and
Shoghi Effendi on a level with Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime.
We certainly must talk about Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime, for if
we do not fully understand a problem, how can we possibly hope to
solve it in the world ? Burying our heads in the sand and pretending
problems do not exist just will not do.
But leaving this to one side, I find the suggestion that Baha'is
should
not dare to even consider the possibility that Abdu'l-Baha was just
an
average man with an average mind, or that it would be off limits for
a
Baha'i to try to discover the context of Shoghi's words in order to
understand them better absolutely shocking!
To begin with, non-Baha'is have no idea who Abdu'l-Baha is. How can a
Baha'i communicate with a non-Baha'i if they are unwilling to remember
a time when they had not heard of the Master? How can they cope with
the argument that Abdu'l-Baha was an unremarkable man if they've never
been allowed to consider the possibility themselves, and therefore
worked out for themselves just WHAT it was about Abdu'l-Baha that was
so wonderful? We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one.
In my opinion, it is the actions and history of His life which
convince
one of the greatness of Abdu'l-Baha, and of Shoghi Effendi. These
actions and history are not increased one iota just because of the
fact
that thousands of Baha'is never speak of Him, except in the most
reverent tones. In fact, I think a humourless attitude towards the
Central Figures is the one thing most likely to turn enquirers away
with
the words 'lighten up!' burning in their brains.
We are out to change the world, aren't we?
How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly
disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
--
Baha'i .sig under construction ....

[NUR]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the BF?  It is a simple
"yes" or "no" question and you decline to answer.

Yes, by family compulsion I was a member of the Haifan Baha'i
organization, officially until November 24th 1996; unofficially I was
no longer a Haifan Baha'i (or a Baha'i of any description) as of my
Sufi initiation in August 1993, and even longer. I categorically did
not wish to enroll as a Haifan Baha'i in 1987 in the first place when
I turned 15. But family circumstances, as with the circumstances of
99.9% of the Persian Bahaim sub-culture, forced and compelled a 15
year old, who already knew there was something wrong with Baha'ism, to
enroll. From 1993 to 1996, on the advice of my initiator, I actively
dissimulated my non-Baha'i loyalties and anti-Bahai views. When the
time arrived and I was sufficiently convinced that my immediate family
had had their eyes opened regarding the corrupt, fascistic nature of
the Haifan Baha'i organization - particularly given the blow-up
following talisman9 and especially after a final trip they themselves
made to the bWC, which disgusted them -I no longer felt the need to
dissimulate.

Be that as it may, Abraham's (as) entire family were corrupt idol
worshipping pagans, as were those of Muhammad (sws). I walk in good
company...

W

[NUR]

Post by NUR
Yes, by family compulsion I was a member of the Haifan Baha'i
organization, officially until November 24th 1996; unofficially I was
no longer a Haifan Baha'i (or a Baha'i of any description) as of my
Sufi initiation in August 1993, and even longer. I categorically did
not wish to enroll as a Haifan Baha'i in 1987 in the first place when
I turned 15. But family circumstances, as with the circumstances of
99.9% of the Persian Bahaim sub-culture, forced and compelled a 15
year old, who already knew there was something wrong with Baha'ism, to
enroll. From 1993 to 1996, on the advice of my initiator, I actively
dissimulated my non-Baha'i loyalties and anti-Bahai views. When the
time arrived and I was sufficiently convinced that my immediate family
had had their eyes opened regarding the corrupt, fascistic nature of
the Haifan Baha'i organization - particularly given the blow-up
following talisman9 and especially after a final trip they themselves
made to the bWC, which disgusted them -I no longer felt the need to
dissimulate.
Be that as it may, Abraham's (as) entire family were corrupt idol
worshipping pagans, as were those of Muhammad (sws). I walk in good
company...
W

[All Bad]

Post by NUR
Yes, by family compulsion I was a member of the Haifan Baha'i
organization, officially until November 24th 1996; unofficially I was
no longer a Haifan Baha'i (or a Baha'i of any description) as of my
Sufi initiation in August 1993, and even longer. I categorically did
not wish to enroll as a Haifan Baha'i in 1987 in the first place when
I turned 15. But family circumstances, as with the circumstances of
99.9% of the Persian Bahaim sub-culture, forced and compelled a 15
year old, who already knew there was something wrong with Baha'ism, to
enroll. From 1993 to 1996, on the advice of my initiator, I actively
dissimulated my non-Baha'i loyalties and anti-Bahai views. When the
time arrived and I was sufficiently convinced that my immediate family
had had their eyes opened regarding the corrupt, fascistic nature of
the Haifan Baha'i organization - particularly given the blow-up
following talisman9 and especially after a final trip they themselves
made to the bWC, which disgusted them -I no longer felt the need to
dissimulate.

I asked a simple "Yes" or "no" question and you've run on for a paragraph.
Of course you are dissimulating. Having reached the age of reason, did you,
or did you not sign a card affirming that Baha'u'llah was the manifestation
of god for this day and that you would strive to follow his guidance? Leave
your photographic analysis and family out of it.

"Yes", or No"?

Post by NUR
Be that as it may, Abraham's (as) entire family were corrupt idol
worshipping pagans, as were those of Muhammad (sws). I walk in good
company...

It was never the point, nimrod.

The point is, there is no basis for me to assume you really are a Baha'i and
lacking any evidence to that effect, I can argue you are by daring you to
answer the simple question, much like the one you ask Paul.

You really have no sense of decency.

- All Bad

[All Bad]

http://youtu.be/PTwDUpbQHJg

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

Are you now, or have you ever been, a member of the BF? It is a simple
"yes" or "no" question and you decline to answer.

WA: Yes, by family compulsion I was a member of the Haifan Baha'i
organization, officially until November 24th 1996; unofficially I was
no longer a Haifan Baha'i (or a Baha'i of any description) as of my
Sufi initiation in August 1993, and even longer. I categorically did
not wish to enroll as a Haifan Baha'i in 1987 in the first place when
I turned 15. But family circumstances, as with the circumstances of
99.9% of the Persian Bahaim sub-culture, forced and compelled a 15
year old, who already knew there was something wrong with Baha'ism, to
enroll. From 1993 to 1996, on the advice of my initiator, I actively
dissimulated my non-Baha'i loyalties and anti-Bahai views. When the
time arrived and I was sufficiently convinced that my immediate family
had had their eyes opened regarding the corrupt, fascistic nature of
the Haifan Baha'i organization - particularly given the blow-up
following talisman9 and especially after a final trip they themselves
made to the bWC, which disgusted them -I no longer felt the need to
dissimulate.

AB: I asked a simple "Yes" or "no" question and you've run on for a
paragraph.
Of course you are dissimulating. Having reached the age of reason, did you,
or did you not sign a card affirming that Baha'u'llah was the manifestation
of god for this day and that you would strive to follow his guidance? Leave
your photographic analysis and family out of it.

AB: "Yes", or No"?

WA: Be that as it may, Abraham's (as) entire family were corrupt idol
worshipping pagans, as were those of Muhammad (sws). I walk in good
company...

AB: It was never the point, Nimrod.

AB: The point is, there is no basis for me to assume you really are a Baha'i
and
lacking any evidence to that effect, I can argue you are by daring you to
answer the simple question, much like the one you ask Paul.

AB: You really have no sense of decency.

- All Bad

[NUR]

Post by All Bad
AB: I asked a simple "Yes" or "no" question

And you go it, and then some more.

Post by All Bad
AB: You really have no sense of decency.

You don't know what decency even means, cultist demon. Here is an
example.

PAT KOHLI LIES ABOUT HIS IDENTITY ON SOURCEWATCH
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=User:Owen

W

[All Bad]

Post by All Bad
AB: I asked a simple "Yes" or "no" question

WA: And you go it, and then some more.

Post by All Bad
AB: You really have no sense of decency.

WA: You don't know what decency even means, cultist demon. Here is an
example.

WA: PAT KOHLI LIES ABOUT HIS IDENTITY ON SOURCEWATCH
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=User:Owen

AB: So, to prove me right, you want to lie about Pat Kohli? Thanks!

- All Bad

[NUR]

See also, Pat Kohli lies about his identity

http://sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Pat_Kohli
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=User:Owen


Pat Kohli, or Patrick Kohli, is a member of the Haifan Baha'i Faith[1]
who makes regular contributions to the USENET newsgroup
talk.religion.bahai[2]. He is a computer programmer who has worked on
software for various projects, including military systems.

Contents [hide]
1 Background
2 Articles and Resources
2.1 Related SourceWatch Articles
2.2 References
2.3 External Articles

[edit]Background
He "is a computer scientist assigned to 4.5.3.3. He works for PMA-231
as the Open Architecture (OA) IPT lead, in the OA/FORCEnet IPT of the
Network Centric Warfare IPT. Prior to this he worked at Saint Inigoes
for 4.5 and developed a prototype next generation flight data
recorder, using COTS components, to meet incident reporting,
maintenance and FOQA needs. Pat also supported the old PMA-282 which
did weapon control systems for guided missiles. Pat has an MS in
computer Information Systems from Florida Tech." [3]

"Pat Kohli, NCW Open Architecture Lead, demonstrated how the E-2/C-2
program office (PMA-231) is continuously evaluating and implementing
software modernization to facilitate transition of the existing E-2
operational flight program to an environment using commercially
available systems. Venlet said, "The Naval Aviation Enterprise has
embraced open architecture as a fundamental building block of weapon
system development from its very inception. Our government/industry
teams continue to leverage these open system strategies and concepts
in achieving reduction in overall development cycle times and
delivering increased system capabilities to the Fleet faster and
cheaper. The advantages of integrating open architecture designs and
contracting strategies are measurable and pronounced as is
substantiated by our E-2D Advanced Hawkeye and P-8 Multi-Mission
Aircraft development programs. The key to continued success will be
maintaining the close partnership with industry experts, as we provide
the right capabilities, at the right time and right cost to the joint
warfighter."The E-2 Hawkeye team has been representing and directly
supporting Venlet's executive office - the aviation domain lead for
open architecture initiatives - since June 2004, because of its role
as a battle management command and control platform and a central
network communications node in aviation. E-2 Program Manager Capt.
Randy Mahrsaid, "Today's evolving E-2 open architecture model paves
the way for a more mature system to be used by the E-2D prior to it
taking its place in the fleet."[3]

Pat Kohli has maintained a consistent web presence since the late
1990s, particularly on USENET, addressing both external critics and
dissenters within the Haifan Baha'i Faith tradition to which he
belongs [5]. In 1998, he voted against the creation of the USENET
group, talk.religion.bahai, as an un-moderated discussion forum for
issues relating to the Baha'i faith [4]. Official discussion regarding
the creation of this group may also be found at: [6]. He posts under
the handles Mr All Bad and All_Bad [5]

[edit]Articles and Resources
[edit]Related SourceWatch Articles
PMA Group
[edit]References
$B",(B Letter from Assistant Secretary, Kishan Manocha, on Behalf of
National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of the United Kingdom [1],
dated October 8, 2002, Accessed 17 February, 2009.
$B",(B Discussion Archive of USENET group Talk.Religion.Baha'i, [2],
Accessed February 17, 2009
$B",(B 3.0 3.1 Drema Ballengee-Grunst, "Assistant SecNav visits NAVAIR T&E
laboratory", November 10, 2005.
$B",(B Record of votes cast regarding the creation of the USENET group,
talk.religion.bahai,[3], Accessed February 17, 2009.
$B",(B Excerpt from USENET group talk.religion.bahai,[4], Accessed February
17, 2009.
[edit]External Articles

[PaulHammond]

Post by NUR

Post by All Bad
AB: I asked a simple "Yes" or "no" question

And you go it, and then some more.

Post by All Bad
AB: You really have no sense of decency.

You don't know what decency even means, cultist demon. Here is an
example.

All Bad, Finnegans wake, Sekhmet, Eric Stetson, Brid (who I found some
old emails from tother day) - in fact, a fair number of the people
I've met posting around here have a sense of decency.

You, George Fleming, May Be I am A Manipulative Liar - and basically
most of your friends don't.

Simple as, really.

[NUR]

First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them - Eric Stetson, September, 2003

Post by PaulHammond
All Bad, Finnegans wake, Sekhmet, Eric Stetson, Brid (who I found some
old emails from tother day) - in fact, a fair number of the people
I've met posting around here have a sense of decency.

None of those names have any sense of decency, as proven by themselves
again and again, and neither do you.


Now answer the question: are you now or have you ever served, material
assisted or in any manner aided the Baha'i Internet Agency.


W

[PaulHammond]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them - Eric Stetson, September, 2003

Post by PaulHammond
All Bad, Finnegans wake, Sekhmet, Eric Stetson, Brid (who I found some
old emails from tother day) - in fact, a fair number of the people
I've met posting around here have a sense of decency.

None of those names have any sense of decency, as proven by themselves
again and again, and neither do you.

Of course, it's beyond your wit to understand the concept.

Eric Stetson has no sense of decency? Why? Because he retracted the
opinion you like to decorate most of your posts with because you've
got nothing coherent to say yourself?

[NUR]

On May 10, 10:18 am, PaulHammond <***@onetel.net.uk> wrote:

First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."

-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

Post by PaulHammond
Of course, it's beyond your wit to understand the concept.

It isn't beyond my wit to understand that even those whose decency you
claim here in a one-up-manship contest have their expressed doubts
about yours. See above!

Post by PaulHammond
Eric Stetson has no sense of decency?  Why?  Because he retracted the
opinion you like to decorate most of your posts with because you've
got nothing coherent to say yourself?

When did he retract his POV about you? Never. He sent an apology to
Baha'is. You claim you're not a Baha'i so how is that quote remotely
relevent to you. That opinion expressed by Stetson still stands and he
has yet to retract it.

W

[PaulHammond]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

Post by PaulHammond
Of course, it's beyond your wit to understand the concept.

It isn't beyond my wit to understand that even those whose decency you
claim here in a one-up-manship contest have their expressed doubts
about yours. See above!

Post by PaulHammond
Eric Stetson has no sense of decency?  Why?  Because he retracted the
opinion you like to decorate most of your posts with because you've
got nothing coherent to say yourself?

When did he retract his POV about you? Never. He sent an apology to
Baha'is. You claim you're not a Baha'i so how is that quote remotely
relevent to you. That opinion expressed by Stetson still stands and he
has yet to retract it.
W

That shows how much YOU know about it!

What was the date on that email again? September 2003? He retracted
that opinion probably around about October 2003. You weren't the only
person he was in private email communication with.

We were taking our fights here over into his mailgroup, ex-baha'i, and
he wanted to control that situation. He wasn't ONLY talking to you
off line, you know.

Anyway - you were the one who specifically included Eric Stetson in
your accusations of indecency just now! If you want to quote him all
the time, don't YOU need to justify why it's okay to quote someone you
distrust?

Paul

[NUR]

See also, the used underwear sniffing PAUL ANDREW HAMMOND,
http://groups.google.com.au/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/thread/ee21dc9d7c525378

On May 14, 2:55 pm, PaulHammond <***@onetel.net.uk> wrote:

First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."

-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

What was the date on that email again?  September 2003?  He retracted
that opinion probably around about October 2003.

Prove it.

First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."


-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003


Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
From: Paul Hammond <***@euro-pa.demon.co.uk>
Date: 1996/04/03
Subject: Re: Praying to Baha'u'llah

Allah-u-Abha Stephi: So we can talk about sexual exploits adults have
with children, the best way to inject heroin, how to rob a bank? The
point is I have seen discussions of Abdul Baha having only an average mind
and not being able to grasp the complexities of modern socity, I have
seen that Shoghi Effendi wrote to individuals so his writings do not
apply to the community,

I find it interesting that John puts discussion of Abdu'l-Baha and
Shoghi Effendi on a level with Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime.

We certainly must talk about Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime, for
if
we do not fully understand a problem, how can we possibly hope to
solve
it in the world ? Burying our heads in the sand and pretending
problems
do not exist just will not do.


But leaving this to one side, I find the suggestion that Baha'is
should
not dare to even consider the possibility that Abdu'l-Baha was just
an
average man with an average mind, or that it would be off limits for
a
Baha'i to try to discover the context of Shoghi's words in order to
understand them better absolutely shocking!


To begin with, non-Baha'is have no idea who Abdu'l-Baha is. How can a
Baha'i communicate with a non-Baha'i if they are unwilling to
remember
a
time when they had not heard of the Master? How can they cope with
the
argument that Abdu'l-Baha was an unremarkable man if they've never
been
allowed to consider the possibility themselves, and therefore worked
out
for themselves just WHAT it was about Abdu'l-Baha that was so
wonderful?
We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted that our
view
of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct one.


In my opinion, it is the actions and history of His life which
convince
one of the greatness of Abdu'l-Baha, and of Shoghi Effendi. These
actions and history are not increased one iota just because of the
fact
that thousands of Baha'is never speak of Him, except in the most
reverent tones. In fact, I think a humourless attitude towards the
Central Figures is the one thing most likely to turn enquirers away
with
the words 'lighten up!' burning in their brains.


We are out to change the world, aren't we?


How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?


<rhetorical question mode off> :)


Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly
disagree with what you said.


Allah-u-Abha
--
Paul Hammond ***@euro-pa.demon.co.uk

[PaulHammond]

Post by NUR
See also, the used underwear sniffing PAUL ANDREW HAMMOND,
http://groups.google.com.au/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/thread/ee21dc9d7c525378
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

Post by PaulHammond
What was the date on that email again? September 2003? He retracted
that opinion probably around about October 2003.

Prove it.

He retracted it. SUck it up.

Unlike you, I'm not about to put private communications up in the
public domain.

[NUR]

First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."

-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

Post by NUR

What was the date on that email again?  September 2003?  He retracted
that opinion probably around about October 2003.

Prove it.

He retracted it.  SUck it up.

Prove it. You got f-all that he retracted this specific statement
about you. Nothing. And even if he did, it still tabulates this
statement for the record in perpetuity.

Unlike you, I'm not about to put private communications up in the
public domain

Then don't email unsolicited garbage about WT Pole to people's private
email accounts either.

W

[PaulHammond]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

Post by PaulHammond

Post by NUR

Post by PaulHammond
What was the date on that email again? September 2003? He retracted
that opinion probably around about October 2003.

Prove it.

He retracted it. SUck it up.

Prove it.

Well, you can always go to Eric's website, which contains his contact
details, and ask him for his opinion yourself - as can any reader of
this site.

The link's referenced at the top of his recent statement to the
Baha'is

"The following is published online at http://www.bahai-faith.com/apology.html
and is intended for mass circulation. Please publicize this in any
way you think would be appropriate and to anyone you think would be
interested."

Post by NUR

Post by PaulHammond
Unlike you, I'm not about to put private communications up in the
public domain

Then don't email unsolicited garbage about WT Pole to people's private
email accounts either.
W

Oh dear, did that go to you? I thought there was some kind of glitch
yesterday, when the "reply" option said "reply to author" - but on the
input page it still listed all the groups.

Sorry about that - but AIR, it was a post of the whole text of the
Wikipedia article on Wellseley Tudor Pole, which was originally YOUR
post that started that thread off.

I'm still not clear about your argument there - but lets keep that one
to that thread.

Paul

[NUR]

Post by PaulHammond
I'm still not clear

Stop smelling the gaseous fumes of other people's used underwear and
maybe you will gain clarity.

Post by PaulHammond
it was a post of the whole text of the
Wikipedia article on Wellseley Tudor Pole, which was originally YOUR
post that started that thread off

So is this, which properly contextualizes the Pole in your faggot
limey ass:

http://bahaisandbritannia.googlepages.com/home


1. (Top Secret) British Government Foreign Countries Report (no.56)
16th November 1921


2. APPRECIATION OF THE ATTACHED EASTERN REPORT NO. LXX (May 1918)


Then see,


HOSTAGE TO KHOMEINI by Robert Dreyfuss (New Benjamin Franklin House:
New York, 1980) pp.117-118 (Pdf pages 73-74)


http://www.wlym.com/pdf/iclc/hostage.pdf


&


http://www.archive.org/details/HostageToKhomeini


...Today the Bahai cult is hated in Iran, and is considered correctly
to be an arm of the British Crown. During the destabilization of the
Shah in 1978, it was widely reported that in several instances the
Bahai cult secretly funded the Khomeini Shi’ite movement. In part,
the
money would have flowed through the cult’s links to the same
international ‘human rights’ organizations, such as Amnesty
International, that originally sponsored the anti-Shah movement in
Iran. These movements also derive from the “one world” currents
associated with the Bahais since the early 1900s. (If any Iranians
have been misled on the question of the Bahais by the supposed
antipathy of Khomeini’s clique to the Bahais, it should be noted that
the Bahai cultists often deliberately encouraged anti-Bahai
activities
as camouflage)...


Also see pp. 115-116 (Pdf page 72)


Note as well,
http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=RvttAAAAMAAJ&dq=%22The+Handboo...


Quote


"...Sir 'Abbas Effendi 'Abdu'l Baha had travelled extensively in
Europe and America to expound his doctrines, and on the 4th December,
1919, ___****was created by King George V. a K.B.E. for valuable
services rendered to the British Government in the early days of the
Occupation***_____....."


Reference :
PALESTINE


EDITED BY : HARRY CHARLES LUKE, B.Lr1r., M.A.


ASSISTANT GOVERNOR OF JERUSALEM AND
EDWARD KEITH-ROACH ASSISTANT CHIEF SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
PALESTINE


WITH AN INTRODUCTION BY
The Right Hon. SIR HERBERT SAMUEL, P.C., G.B.E.
HIGH COMMISSIONER FOR PALESTINE


Issued under the Authority of the Government of Palestine


MACMILLAN AND CO., LIMITED
ST. MARTIN'S STREET, LONDON
1922

[NUR]

First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he

Post by PaulHammond
don't YOU need to justify why it's okay to quote someone you
distrust?

No, I don't need to justify anything to you for the same reason that
you insist that you don't need to justify yourself even though it is
patently transparent you are a Baha'i as well as a longstanding member
of the Baha'i Internet Agency.


W

[PaulHammond]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he

Post by PaulHammond
don't YOU need to justify why it's okay to quote someone you
distrust?

No, I don't need to justify anything to you for the same reason that
you insist that you don't need to justify yourself even though it is
patently transparent you are a Baha'i as well as a longstanding member
of the Baha'i Internet Agency.
W

Err - the dact that you say something doesn't make it true.

Basically, I rest my case! YOu haven't a clue about decent behavior.
It comes from admiring idiotic bastards like Tad and gibbering idiots
like Steve Blomberg.

[NUR]

On May 8, 5:32 pm, PaulHammond <***@onetel.net.uk> wrote:

First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."

-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

Post by PaulHammond
All Bad, Finnegans wake, Sekhmet, Eric Stetson, Brid (who I found some
old emails from tother day) - in fact, a fair number of the people
I've met posting around here have a sense of decency.

Brid actually hates you Baha'i liberals with a passion and expressed
it on Stetson's ex-bahai list in 2005 in an exchange with Brendan
Crook who flamed her. Yes, she has a sense of decency alright! Dermod
Ryder, Sick_Mut and KKKholi couldn't pronounce decency -- let alone
possess it. Eric Stetson is mentally ill and flake bar none, but, yes,
I'll give you that, he has a sense of decency. And he has it because
of,

First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."

-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

Post by PaulHammond
You, George Fleming, May Be I am A Manipulative

Your forgot Henry Tad in there and a few other people. And how about
Nosrat Bahremand who called you the "pawn of the uhj". These people
have more integrity in a single carbon cell of their fingernail than
all of your 'fwends' combined squared and cubed.

Post by PaulHammond
- and basically
most of your friends don't.

Says who? Says the herd mentality of your cult and your Baha'i
Internet Agency? They don't count. And it is as simple as that!

W

[NUR]

First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."


-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003


BTW how about that bloody nose you were given on Sourcewatch, eh?

W

[PaulHammond]

Post by NUR

Post by PaulHammond
All Bad, Finnegans wake, Sekhmet, Eric Stetson, Brid (who I found some
old emails from tother day) - in fact, a fair number of the people
I've met posting around here have a sense of decency.

Brid actually hates you Baha'i liberals with a passion and expressed
it on Stetson's ex-bahai list in 2005 in an exchange with Brendan
Crook who flamed her.

She doesn't hate me. But then, I'm not a Baha'i liberal.

She also doesn't do "black and white category thinking" like you do.
So she and Brendan had a spat in 2005. I'm sure they've kissed and
made up since then. What she wrote in one post in 2005 doesn't
determine her viewpoint for ever.

Yes, she has a sense of decency alright! Dermod

Post by NUR
Ryder, Sick_Mut and KKKholi couldn't pronounce decency -- let alone
possess it. Eric Stetson is mentally ill and flake bar none, but, yes,
I'll give you that, he has a sense of decency. And he has it because
of,
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

Post by PaulHammond
You, George Fleming, May Be I am A Manipulative

Your forgot Henry Tad in there and a few other people. And how about
Nosrat Bahremand who called you the "pawn of the uhj". These people
have more integrity in a single carbon cell of their fingernail than
all of your 'fwends' combined squared and cubed.

I certainly did not forget Tad or Nosrat. Both crappy bastards of the
highest order.

Cal Rollins, on the other hand, does know decency.

Post by NUR

Post by PaulHammond
- and basically
most of your friends don't.

Says who? Says the herd mentality of your cult and your Baha'i
Internet Agency? They don't count. And it is as simple as that!

Err - says ME, speaking for MYSELF.

My opinion.

You're a twat, Henry's a bastard, Oh and that Steve Blomberg is a
piece of work too - and stupid like you wouldn't believe!

[NUR]

On May 14, 3:01 pm, PaulHammond <***@onetel.net.uk> wrote:

First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."

-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003

Post by PaulHammond
My opinion.

Your opinion counts for zero, O underwear sniffer:
http://groups.google.com.au/group/talk.religion.bahai/browse_thread/thread/ee21dc9d7c525378

[NUR]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"
Also note the continual usage of the plural pronoun "we".
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Date: 1996/04/03
Subject: Re: Praying to Baha'u'llah
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

Allah-u-Abha Stephi: So we can talk about sexual exploits adults have
with children, the best way to inject heroin, how to rob a bank? The
point is I have seen discussions of Abdul Baha having only an average mind
and not being able to grasp the complexities of modern socity, I have
seen that Shoghi Effendi wrote to individuals so his writings do not
apply to the community,

I find it interesting that John puts discussion of Abdu'l-Baha and
Shoghi Effendi on a level with Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime.
We certainly must talk about Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime, for if
we do not fully understand a problem, how can we possibly hope to
solve it in the world ? Burying our heads in the sand and pretending
problems do not exist just will not do.
But leaving this to one side, I find the suggestion that Baha'is
should
not dare to even consider the possibility that Abdu'l-Baha was just
an
average man with an average mind, or that it would be off limits for
a
Baha'i to try to discover the context of Shoghi's words in order to
understand them better absolutely shocking!
To begin with, non-Baha'is have no idea who Abdu'l-Baha is. How can a
Baha'i communicate with a non-Baha'i if they are unwilling to remember
a time when they had not heard of the Master? How can they cope with
the argument that Abdu'l-Baha was an unremarkable man if they've never
been allowed to consider the possibility themselves, and therefore
worked out for themselves just WHAT it was about Abdu'l-Baha that was
so wonderful? We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one.
In my opinion, it is the actions and history of His life which
convince
one of the greatness of Abdu'l-Baha, and of Shoghi Effendi. These
actions and history are not increased one iota just because of the
fact
that thousands of Baha'is never speak of Him, except in the most
reverent tones. In fact, I think a humourless attitude towards the
Central Figures is the one thing most likely to turn enquirers away
with
the words 'lighten up!' burning in their brains.
We are out to change the world, aren't we?
How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly
disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
--
Baha'i .sig under construction ....

[NUR]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"
Also note the continual usage of the plural pronoun "we".
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Date: 1996/04/03
Subject: Re: Praying to Baha'u'llah
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

Allah-u-Abha Stephi: So we can talk about sexual exploits adults have
with children, the best way to inject heroin, how to rob a bank? The
point is I have seen discussions of Abdul Baha having only an average mind
and not being able to grasp the complexities of modern socity, I have
seen that Shoghi Effendi wrote to individuals so his writings do not
apply to the community,

I find it interesting that John puts discussion of Abdu'l-Baha and
Shoghi Effendi on a level with Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime.
We certainly must talk about Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime, for if
we do not fully understand a problem, how can we possibly hope to
solve it in the world ? Burying our heads in the sand and pretending
problems do not exist just will not do.
But leaving this to one side, I find the suggestion that Baha'is
should
not dare to even consider the possibility that Abdu'l-Baha was just
an
average man with an average mind, or that it would be off limits for
a
Baha'i to try to discover the context of Shoghi's words in order to
understand them better absolutely shocking!
To begin with, non-Baha'is have no idea who Abdu'l-Baha is. How can a
Baha'i communicate with a non-Baha'i if they are unwilling to remember
a time when they had not heard of the Master? How can they cope with
the argument that Abdu'l-Baha was an unremarkable man if they've never
been allowed to consider the possibility themselves, and therefore
worked out for themselves just WHAT it was about Abdu'l-Baha that was
so wonderful? We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one.
In my opinion, it is the actions and history of His life which
convince
one of the greatness of Abdu'l-Baha, and of Shoghi Effendi. These
actions and history are not increased one iota just because of the
fact
that thousands of Baha'is never speak of Him, except in the most
reverent tones. In fact, I think a humourless attitude towards the
Central Figures is the one thing most likely to turn enquirers away
with
the words 'lighten up!' burning in their brains.
We are out to change the world, aren't we?
How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly
disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
--
Baha'i .sig under construction ....

[NUR]

Post by NUR
First, I do believe, based on Hammond's refusal to say why he is
interested in the Baha'i Faith and his frequent defense of the AO,
that he is probably working for them."
-- Eric Stetson, September 16, 2003
http://groups.google.com/group/soc.religion.bahai/tree/browse_frm/mon...
Quote
"We are out to change the world, aren't we?"
Also note the continual usage of the plural pronoun "we".
Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai
Date: 1996/04/03
Subject: Re: Praying to Baha'u'llah
Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show original
| Report this message | Find messages by this author

Allah-u-Abha Stephi: So we can talk about sexual exploits adults have
with children, the best way to inject heroin, how to rob a bank? The
point is I have seen discussions of Abdul Baha having only an average mind
and not being able to grasp the complexities of modern socity, I have
seen that Shoghi Effendi wrote to individuals so his writings do not
apply to the community,

I find it interesting that John puts discussion of Abdu'l-Baha and
Shoghi Effendi on a level with Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime.
We certainly must talk about Child Abuse, Drug Abuse and Crime, for if
we do not fully understand a problem, how can we possibly hope to
solve it in the world ? Burying our heads in the sand and pretending
problems do not exist just will not do.
But leaving this to one side, I find the suggestion that Baha'is
should
not dare to even consider the possibility that Abdu'l-Baha was just
an
average man with an average mind, or that it would be off limits for
a
Baha'i to try to discover the context of Shoghi's words in order to
understand them better absolutely shocking!
To begin with, non-Baha'is have no idea who Abdu'l-Baha is. How can a
Baha'i communicate with a non-Baha'i if they are unwilling to remember
a time when they had not heard of the Master? How can they cope with
the argument that Abdu'l-Baha was an unremarkable man if they've never
been allowed to consider the possibility themselves, and therefore
worked out for themselves just WHAT it was about Abdu'l-Baha that was
so wonderful? We cannot expect non-Baha'is to just take it for granted
that our view of the Central Figures of our Faith is the only correct
one.
In my opinion, it is the actions and history of His life which
convince
one of the greatness of Abdu'l-Baha, and of Shoghi Effendi. These
actions and history are not increased one iota just because of the
fact
that thousands of Baha'is never speak of Him, except in the most
reverent tones. In fact, I think a humourless attitude towards the
Central Figures is the one thing most likely to turn enquirers away
with
the words 'lighten up!' burning in their brains.
We are out to change the world, aren't we?
How are we going to do that if we jump every time a bad word is said
about Abdu'l-Baha ?
<rhetorical question mode off> :)
Sorry to get so heated John, don't take it personally! I just
strongly
disagree with what you said.
Allah-u-Abha
--
Baha'i .sig under construction ....